“Delegates from 75 countries were in Grozny without looking” – Kommersant

This week in Grozny hosted an international meeting of high representatives supervising security issues. One of the key topics was cooperation in the field of information and communication technologies (ICT). On why Russia seeks early development of rules of conduct in cyberspace and manages whether to agree with the US a common approach to the subject, told “Kommersant” by Pavel Tarasenko told the special representative of Russian President for international cooperation in the field of information security, the Ambassador of the Russian Foreign Ministry for Special Assignments ANDREW Krutskikh presented at Grozny conference Moscow’s proposals

-. Are you satisfied with the way the meeting was held

– To say that pleased – this is to say nothing. First, the record was beaten to such meetings under the auspices of the Russian Security Council: representatives of 75 countries arrived in Grozny. Secondly, in my subject – Information Security – get serious, lively discussion. Presentations were made by representatives of nine countries. The main thing is that the logic and the philosophy of the Russian approach to solving the problems of information security is gaining in popularity

-. In what way

– We have managed to prove that the rules of conduct in the information space needed. In the debate on this issue with the US and several other Western partners took years. But now the need for such rules is taken as a given. Our partners say: “How we used did not think about»

– Why Russia is so important

– interest in the problems caused sharp political confrontation, which takes place in the world with the use of ICT. Lost in this confrontation of Russia as a great power, of course, afford just can not. Information technology, like nuclear in due time, determine the national security and sovereignty of the country.

In this case, if we talk in general about the situation in the global information space, it tends to worsen and in light of the known regional events – even to the aggravation. I think that

geopolitical state of the modern world due to the specifics of the revolution in information and communication technologies and methods of their use can be called the “war in peace.” – And is there a victim

-? The war is not virtual. It does real damage. It is perfectly combined with the maintenance of diplomatic relations. In particular, the exponentially growing number of cyber attacks. Last year, the number of malicious actions on Russian state Internet resources has exceeded 70 million. Approximately the same amount kiberkonfrontatsiya occurs, for example, between China and the United States. Repeatedly exposed sensitive attacks South Korea. While in Seoul, I witnessed one of these attacks: it affected the work of important government agencies, the media, the banking system, the University of Seoul. No one is immune from this kind of cyber

-. With other countries have managed to come to a common understanding of what kind of rules you need to install

– General philosophical things specified, there is a consensus on them. Now we need a legal move. It is necessary to define what is possible and what is not. What is good and what is bad. The international community is now very Statement asks this question. Moreover, it insisted that the rules, regulations, principles of conduct have been drawn up as quickly as possible within the framework of the UN Group of Governmental Experts on international information security. Now representation in it a record high – 25 countries

-. How and where it will eventually be fixed principles of conduct

– This will be the resolution of the UN General Assembly. This is the so-called soft law (that is, the rules will have an advisory harakter.- “b” ). But if the resolution would be adopted by consensus (and there is every reason to hope for it), then very few people dare to go against the rest

-. Do approaches to the problem are truly one

– There is a general interest in that in the process of developing rules of responsible behavior of states in the global information space, all countries have been included. After all, if even one country falls to the general regime, all the hackers will get through this global regime of “safe haven”. This is an important position that Russia always advocated and which has already been fixed (albeit not in the legal form) in 2015

report of the Group of Governmental Experts. – what specific rules and regulations to accept offers Russia

-? Firstly, ICT should be used exclusively for peaceful purposes. Second, the digital must act such universally recognized principles as non-use of force or threat of force, respect for sovereignty, non-interference in the internal affairs of States. At the same time, taking into account the unique characteristics of ICT can be developed further legal norms. Thirdly, it should be recorded that the state has sovereignty over the information and communications infrastructure on its territory. Fourthly, we can not indiscriminately accuse someone of cyber attacks, it is necessary to provide evidence. That is, it is necessary to exclude the possibility that the unsubstantiated allegations of the attack was used as a pretext for the bombing – as a test tube of Colin Powell with regard to Iraq (US Secretary of State at the 2003 meeting of the UN Security Council showed the tube with a certain powder in order to prove that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass porazheniya.- “b” ).

In addition, the state should not use intermediaries to carry out cyber attacks or prevent to their territory to be used for this purpose. Each country is responsible for what is happening in cyberspace on its territory and from its territory. If the UN General Assembly resolution, it will be recorded, so we were able to agree on the principle, which will prevent attack by one state on another.

Finally, the national authorities must not put pressure on the company so that they inserted a hidden malicious function or vulnerabilities in their commercial products

-. And if the Geneva Convention of the XXI century needs – rules of conduct during the conflict

-? Now there are proposals to adopt certain “rules for peacetime” and individually – for the military, which will probably work in some cases and not in others. But this approach is eroded key sense of goal-setting decision rules – the prevention of cyber conflict, guaranteeing peaceful and stable development of the global information space

Adjust the military conflicts in the information space -. It is not a top priority for us . Because if a war starts, it will be up to the bitter end, and there will no longer be up to the rules. The main (and it’s participants in Grozny accepted almost with applause) – to prevent conflicts. This requires confidence-building measures, mechanisms to monitor the situation, the rapid exchange of information.

Russia in 1998 for the first time raised this topic at a meeting of the UN General Assembly. Then they were all in disbelief and thought that we are talking about some kind of whim, futurology. But now it turned out that we guessed right with the theme. This new dimension of human existence, and it is necessary to advance podstelit straw. That during these years Russia did. This “straw” is now appreciated

-. But still there are differences

– Golf hardest diplomatic and political struggle remains, because not all the methodological and substantive aspects, we agreed – primarily from the United States. Of course, in the political process all – we and they – will try to pull the rope to their side. But the overall goal marked. As in the case of nuclear weapons, for example, there is awareness of the need to negotiate. And do it as quickly as possible, until the entire process is to somehow control and manage

-. However, it was not in Grozny Americans. Yes, and senior representatives of NATO, in fact, too

-. They decide for themselves the question of participation or non-participation. Invitations were sent to all. And representatives of many countries, which was able to talk, and expressed regret that they had to under the general policy of not contact us and refrain from participating in the meeting in Grozny. They have lost much. But that is their problem.

In addition, there is a blessing in disguise. Delegates from 75 countries were in Grozny without looking. And so they were liberated and could say what they wanted – without regard to any bloc solidarity. After all, a number of NATO countries at the meeting still was presented – it Romania, and Germany, and Hungary, and Slovakia. There were other US allies – such as South Korea. Each of the participants expressed their national stance. What is encouraging, these positions coincide with the philosophy professed by Russia. Again, it is, first of all, on the prevention of conflicts in the information space, prevent its militarization, non-interference in the internal affairs and sovereignty of the countries under the new ICT infrastructure that this country belongs to.

– In addition to cyber security at the conference there was much talk about terrorism. These topics are, in your opinion, are interlinked

-? Of course. After all, for example, cyber-terrorism – one of the most terrible events, while it is quite new. For example, the “Islamic State” (banned in the Russian terrorist gruppirovka.- “b” ) has climbed into the information space, and is engaged in cyberterrorism. Plus a huge damage to the planet does cybercrime. The annual volume of the damage, according to various estimates, up from $ 500 billion to $ 2.3 trillion. information security theme unites all triad threats – military and political use of the content, terrorism and cybercrime. Someone from countries nearer the first aspect, someone a second or third. But in general, these topics are covered in the complex

-. Going back to the relationship with the Americans. At the end of April in Geneva held a bilateral meeting on cybersecurity, which participants called it a success. Continued planned?

– As for the Russian side, we have long been in favor of the regularity of these meetings. For the fact that they become routine. And we are talking about the meetings at all levels – and high political (as in Geneva), and the expert, and on the level of individual departments. In addition, you need to talk war with the military.

But I think that in terms of intensification of the presidential election campaign, the Americans will have no meetings with anyone. They occur because the decisive stage. Probably, contacts between us will remain at the level of experts in the three existing confidence-building agreements, which were signed by Presidents Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin in 2013. For experts in any case, will not rust. But something more ambitious, I think we can talk after the election

-. What we discuss in a bilateral format

?

– at a meeting in Geneva, we said that now in addition to the confidence-building measures and would like to discuss the topic of preventing incidents between the two countries. Exactly how this will be implemented, the second question. But the topic is of interest, and the Americans, and we have. This is for the benefit of both businesses and private citizens. Because it is one thing to inform and warn each other, and the other – almost immediately to work for the prevention of accidents

.