NATO summit communiqué compares repeat cyberattacks to armed attacks – and stops short of saying 'one-in, all-in' rule will always apply

A communiqué issued at the conclusion of the NATO summit has called for China to observe the laws of cyberspace, and set out new standards by which members of the alliance will consider cyberattacks. The new standard refers to Article 5 of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty, as it declares that an attack on a single NATO member is …

[Pascal Monett]

This is starting to look like playground scuffles

"Stop that you two !"

"But he started it !"

"No, you started it !" <cue more scuffling>.

I was going to say that we need to approach this matter as adults, but then I remembered that we just got out of OHSG's presidency, and we still have The Boris on our side.

So playground scuffles it is.

[NoneSuch]

NATO Has One Job

If China keeps playing silly bugger, let the NATO boffins take down the Great Firewall of China and keep it down. Let their citizens see the world that the Chinese Communists want to deny them.

Block Communist Chinese goods, avoid Communist Chinese services and support democracy movements with multi-frequency satellite uplinks and the toughest VPN security available. Free the South China Sea / Tibet, support the persecuted minorities, block their propaganda and disinformation.

Show them the power of the truth and how effective it is as fighting oppression and lies.

[doublelayer]

Re: NATO Has One Job

I like the spirit, but find me a way to take down the firewall without taking down the entire network. China runs the whole thing on all their domestic networks. You can't easily just cut the firewall rules while keeping all the network routing functions working.

[Shalghar]

Re: NATO Has One Job

I am unsure how much bitterness, sarcasm or irony are tainting this post, interpret as you see fit but please do not believe i like how the world has turned out to be.

The "power of truth" is irrelevant, the power of those enforcing what has to be considered "truth" is all that counts. Much more so in times of increasing efforts to censor and manipulate everything.

Blocking "chinese" goods might be a bit hard to do, apart from "american" iphones, FoxConn also is a major player in other things not so fashionable but effectively needed, so human rights are irrelevant again and unpaid child labour just keep prices down. Siemens would loose a lot of the potential to manufacture PLC components, every car factory would have issues to get the parts for manufacturing, Murr and Weidmüller both could no longer deliver industrial power supplies, etc.......

Thats the problem with those dirty commies, they were so deceptively cheap that "we" (the good ones (tm)) drove our workforce into unemployment and let china have not only the key to the kingdom but the doors, the stables and quite a lot more for short time profits.

Other "non china resident chinese goods" would then be robotics from formerly german manufacturer KuKa ?

The good ones (tm) have sold out everyone and his dog to china, and since those pesky commies also have nukes and even aircraft carriers that actually work for more than one type of aircraft, the usual approach of "freedom and democracy" simply is not viable anymore.

[Potemkine!]

Imagine

I know I'm a dreamer, but what about beginning to put factories back in the West to be able to counter China without risking an economic blackmail. Ok, the beancounters and shareholders won't be happy, because it will be a little bit more expensive to exploit western wage slaves than Chinese ones, but in the long term it will be beneficial in term of GDP, taxes, and international security.

[noboard]

Re: Imagine

Hello

Thank you for your thoughtful response. It was reviewed by our AI system and due to the absence of "Rich people will get richer", your proposal has been denied.

[Sandtitz]

Re: Imagine

"I know I'm a dreamer, but what about beginning to put factories back in the West to be able to counter China without risking an economic blackmail."

Because not all global companies will do it at the same time. Those that remain in China can offer cheaper wares and most consumers will always pick the cheaper product no matter what. Look how people are ordering stuff from Alibaba, Amazon and Wish to buy their cheap crap.

"Well, the (totally legit) Disney branded T-shirt crumbled into tiny threads and fell apart after a week, but it did cost only 2 buckazoids so I don't mind; I can't afford to buy the locally made T-shirt since the T-shirt factory laid me off. Their $10 price for the same thing is a total rip-off!"

[Shalghar]

Re: Imagine

Too bad we dont have anything like a penalty fee for chinese goods or any goods made in slave factories, sweatshops or other industries ignoring human rights to make them equally expensive to native products.

We could call it toll or tariff. Maybe we would need to let the WTO adapt to that formerly unheard of idea....

And yes, that was pure verbal vitriol, called bitter sarcasm.

If anyone does not like slave labour or crippling dependancy from enemy countries, well too bad, you probably applauded it under its other name, "globalisation".

[wolfetone]

Imagine a full blown war, thousands of people dying, just because someone clicked on the "Hot Single Ladies Are In Your Area" advert on a dodgy website during work hours.

Imagine it.

[hammarbtyp]

<Cough>Stuxnet<Cough>

[MiguelC]

Well, that was not an attack against a NATO country, was it? No foul, then....

[hammarbtyp]

Its a bit like dropping a few bombs on another country, and then complaining when they retaliate in kind.

You can argue till the cows come home about whether Stuxnet was justified, but you cannot pretend that somehow the west is not an aggressor in this cyber war and in many ways indicated to China, Russia et al that cyber war could not be considered the same as normal warfare in terms of retaliation, so its a bit rich to be trying to change the rules now

[batfink]

We believe in an International Rules-Based Order

...providing they're our rules, and they only apply to you.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear China,

Do be aware of the reasons there are anti-China elements in the West. persecuting your minorities, laying claim to the territories of neighbouring free peoples and threatening military occupation, and suppressing democracy and free speech, are all reasons why so many of us take a negative attitude towards you and why NATO so distrusts your words. In the West, the wise judge a tree by the fruit it bears. You cannot hide every satellite image, all the smartphone footage. You have brazenly lied too often, you have no face left in the West any more, your pompous and mealy-mouthed self-righteousness makes you a laughing-stock in the same class as Donald Trump. If you want your face back, you have to earn it back.

Remember too, we love you enough to eat your food, collect your art, build trade and share technology with you, educate many of your citizens and give homes to a great many more. Yours is a wonderful and historic people, the greatest and longest-established nation on our planet and, in principle, equal in every way to the West. The vast majority of we Westerners would far prefer to share our planet with you than fight you for it. Your people deserve better than your shameful, aggressive, lying ways.

[Danny 2]

Re: Dear China,

Why China censors banned Winnie the Pooh

Winnie The Pooh, Winnie The Pooh

Chubby little cubby all stuffed with fluff

He's Winnie The Pooh, Winnie The Pooh

Willy, nilly, silly old bear

Eff them, Winnie is a monster, admit it. Tech deployed to torpedo any dissent. Anyone else notice Hisense are sponsoring Euro2020?

[batfink]

Re: Dear China,

Correct, China does all those things, and we would all like to see them stop.

It's a good thing that none of the countries on "our side" also do those things, is it? Therefore we can criticise you with a straight face. (Quick look at the Middle East) Oops - sorry!

[Sandtitz]

Re: Dear China,

"It's a good thing that none of the countries on "our side" also do those things, is it? Therefore we can criticise you with a straight face. (Quick look at the Middle East) Oops - sorry!"

I'm certainly not ok with e.g. US troops committing war crimes without punishment. Very few are.

Your argument can justify practically anything including genocide since most countries have skeletons in their closets (unwanted minorities, retarded, etc.) if you go far enough in history. There's no justification whatsoever for what the Chinese government is doing for the Uyghurs, their own citizens.

[batfink]

Re: Dear China,

I'm not "justifying" at all - I'm very clear that the Chinese treatment of the Uighurs is appalling and should be challenged and penalised. Likewise their approach to pervasive surveillance, social control etc.

What I am doing is pointing out that there's plenty of instances on "our" side that also need challenging and penalising, and we seem to prefer not to look at those.

[steelpillow]

Re: Dear China,

"we seem to prefer not to look at those."

Oh, but we do, we do. Can you imagine an "I can't breathe" campaign in China? can you imagine the Chinese authorities responding positively to it?

Nope, nor I.

[doublelayer]

Re: Dear China,

The countries which have democratic governments don't do most of those things, and where injustices do occur, they can be changed. A lot of them have done those things, and I have repeatedly argued that past injustices do require present atonement, but it's not the same thing. When antidemocratic actions as described occur in those countries, you see activism, protest, and eventually change. That is why your comparison is invalid. Democracies don't have to be perfect in order to have the moral high ground. They just have to be better. They are.

[Shalghar]

Re: Dear China,

Wait until china realises that its much cheaper to allow seemingly free speech while punishing the ones speaking out behind the curtain, financially, through loss of jobs, outcasting via media, etc. than actually building any more prisons. Protests are irrelevant if nothing changes. Elections likewise, much more in "representative democracies" where your puny little vote can only "choose" whats put on the ballot from others. The swiss are a tad more democratic there.

Democracies or whats calling itself so only have a higher ground when they live up to their own morale and official standards and actually do what the citizens vote for. So apart from switzerland and norway, who else comes to mind ?

Just because china is a lot worse does not mean whats currentlly called "democracy" does not have alarming deficits and is in many aspects not far from a factual dictatorship. Many of chinas shortcomings - including manipulation and censorship - are already a de facto standard in "western democracies"so before getting on the high horse, better clean the own footway first.