The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) has introduced the IISS Cyber Power Matrix, highlighting how states use cyberspace to achieve strategic objectives and exert global influence. Released in beta ahead of its full launch in 2025, the Matrix analyses how governments and their allies have shaped cyberspace over the past two decades and offers insights into its impact on global geopolitical stability.
In an interview with Asian Voice, Virpratap Vikram Singh, a Research Fellow at the Cyber Power and Future Conflict Programme, delves into the motivations behind developing the IISS Cyber Power Matrix, the evolving future of cyber power and more.
Could you explain the motivation behind developing the IISS Cyber Power Matrix and how it differs from other frameworks used to assess state power in cyberspace?
The IISS Cyber Power Matrix began as an in-house effort to collect information on state activities across the three layers of cyberspace. Over time, we realised that by creating an interactive platform which allowed researchers to look at information across the physical, logical and virtual layer, we could significantly advance our understanding of competition and conflict in cyberspace. The IISS defined cyber power as "the ability of a state to project power in cyberspace, to achieve strategic objectives and exert influence globally" this work builds on that definition by creating a live platform where we can continue to track state efforts to influence cyberspace. As a live platform, this will be regularly updated with new information and analysis, which is all the more important, as capabilities, policies and strategies evolve to deal with a changing geopolitical landscape.
The Matrix draws from data since 2001. What trends have you observed in how states project cyber power over the past two decades?
Much of our analysis is still forthcoming, and I wouldn't want to get ahead of myself when there's more work to be done. However, three general trends that can be observed: By virtue of the activities conducted, we are seeing more states looking to exert influence in cyberspace, we are seeing increased reporting of incidents - either voluntarily or through a changed regulatory environment - in both western states and its allies, and we are seeing a shift in the political decision-making among states around attributing state cyber activities which is increasingly a mechanism for alliance building for western states and other regional partners.
The physical disruption of submarine cables is highlighted as an example of vulnerability in cyberspace. How significant is this vulnerability, and how do states leverage control over such critical infrastructure to project power?
Contrary to popular conception, the Internet is incredibly physical and relies on a series of cables and wires that are spread across the world with submarine cables comprising the bulk of international connectivity. The connectivity provided by submarine cables create a vulnerability both in their disruption, as well as their supply. The average repair time for submarine cables is estimated to be around 40 days, which can have incredible ramifications in the event of natural disasters or man-made conflict. Smaller states, such as those island states in the Pacific Ocean, depend on economic agreements with larger states to establish new submarine cables and in doing so, enter new arenas of geopolitical influence - examples of this can be seen with how China engaged with the Solomon Islands, and how Fiji rebuked China to strengthen its connections with the United States. For states like Taiwan, submarine cables create clear points of vulnerability, in February 2022 the Matsu Islands were cut off from the Internet when its two cables were severed by Chinese vessels coincidentally within days of each other. So the vulnerability is especially significant for smaller states, especially those that may find themselves at odds with larger powers.
What role do you think cyber power will play in shaping future global conflicts or geopolitical tensions, particularly as technological advancements continue to accelerate?
Cyber power remains a critical tool in how states seek to engage each other on issues and this is only likely to continue should more geopolitical tensions appear. Technology continues to advance at a frightening pace, and innovation continues to outweigh security concerns. I anticipate there being increased focus on supply chains as we've already seen with semiconductors, but also the ownership of data as competition around AI continues to increase.
