Good afternoon.

大家午安

If you have followed

如果各位有在關注

diplomatic news in the past weeks,

過去幾週的國際外交新聞的話，

you may have heard of a kind of crisis

可能會注意到關於

between China and the U.S.

中美之間

regarding cyberattacks

網路攻擊事件的新聞

against the American company Google.

遭受攻擊的對象是美國科技公司谷歌

Many things have been said about this.

外界對於這次的攻擊事件眾說紛紜

Some people have called a cyberwar

有人把它視為中美兩國間網路開戰

what may actually be

其實這事件比較有可能是

just a spy operation --

一個間諜行動 --

and obviously, a quite mishandled one.

而且很顯然是個相當失敗的行動。

However, this episode reveals

這則小插曲也顯露出

the growing anxiety in the Western world

西方國家對

regarding these emerging cyber weapons.

數位武器問題的關切日益升高。

It so happens that these weapons are dangerous.

這個問題則肇因於數位武器所具有的危險性。

They're of a new nature:

數位武器

they could lead the world

足以導致全球

into a digital conflict

陷入數位化的戰爭

that could turn into an armed struggle.

最終甚至演變爲真實世界的軍事衝突

These virtual weapons can also destroy the physical world.

這些虛擬武器亦具備足以摧毀我們實體世界的力量。

In 1982, in the middle of the Cold War

在1982年，冷戰期間

in Soviet Siberia,

西伯利亞承載量高達三千噸

a pipeline exploded with a burst of 3 kilotons,

的輸油管線發生爆炸

the equivalent of a fourth of the Hiroshima bomb.

釋放的能量相當於四分之一廣島核彈的威力

Now we know today -- this was revealed

這個事件，

by Thomas Reed,

乃是由雷根總統任內的前美國空軍部長

Ronald Reagan's former U.S. Air Force Secretary --

湯馬士．里得所披露出來的 --

this explosion was actually the result

這次爆炸實際上是

of a CIA sabotage operation,

由於美國中央情報局的突襲行動所導致，

in which they had managed

美軍在該行動中入侵蘇聯的

to infiltrate the IT management systems

輸油管線的資訊管理系統

of that pipeline.

進行破壞。

More recently, the U.S. government revealed

此外，最近美國政府才揭露

that in September 2008, more than 3 million people

2008年九月，在巴西的聖埃斯皮里圖州

in the state of Espirito Santo in Brazil

超過三百萬人口所經歷的

were plunged into darkness,

大規模停電事件

victims of a blackmail operation from cyber pirates.

也是網路駭客的傑作。

Even more worrying for the Americans,

更令美國擔憂的是

in December 2008 the holiest of holies,

在2008年十二月

the IT systems of CENTCOM,

中央司令部IT管理系統

the central command

負責阿富汗和伊拉克地區

managing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,

的控制中心

may have been infiltrated by hackers

很有可能已經被駭客滲透

who used these:

他們透過

plain but infected USB keys.

已經內置病毒的USB設備

And with these keys, they may have been able

以這些特殊USB駭客設備

to get inside CENTCOM's systems,

入侵中央司令部的內部系統

to see and hear everything,

駭客可以一窺內部一切機密信息

and maybe even infect some of them.

甚至動手改變它們

As a result, the Americans take the threat very seriously.

正因如此，美國很嚴肅的看待這件事

I'll quote General James Cartwright,

我在這裡引述參謀長聯席會議副主席

Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,

詹姆士 · 卡特萊上校的一段話

who says in a report to Congress

副主席在上呈議會的報告書中提到

that cyberattacks could be as powerful as

網路攻擊的威力之強大就如

weapons of mass destruction.

大規模毀滅性武器一樣

Moreover, the Americans have decided

美國已經決定

to spend over 30 billion dollars

在未來的五年

in the next five years

投入超過三百億美元

to build up their cyberwar capabilities.

來儲備網絡武器實力

And across the world today, we see

甚至將其觸角佈局全球

a sort of cyber arms race,

我們看到像這樣的網路軍備競賽

with cyberwar units

建構如北韓或伊朗

built up by countries like North Korea

一樣的網絡民兵

or even Iran.

及作戰中心

Yet, what you'll never hear

雖然你不曾聽到

from spokespeople

美國五角大廈或法國國防部

from the Pentagon or the French Department of Defence

的發言人發表過相關聲明

is that the question isn't really

問題其實不在

who's the enemy, but actually

我們將網路武器的矛頭指向誰

the very nature of cyber weapons.

而是電子武器的本質

And to understand why, we must look at how,

我們必須瞭解開發網路軍備是如何

through the ages, military technologies

種下了歐戰可能的種子

have maintained or destroyed

軍事科技

world peace.

絕對有能力影響這個世界的秩序

For example,

維護或是破壞世界的和平

if we'd had TEDxParis

如果在350年前

350 years ago,

我們就有TEDx巴黎

we would have talked about the military innovation of the day --

當我們討論軍備科技時

the massive Vauban-style fortifications --

很有可能講得是傳統沃邦式防禦堡壘

and we could have predicted

聽到這裡我們已可得知

a period of stability in the world or in Europe.

歐洲的政局穩固了一陣子沒有征戰

which was indeed the case in Europe

沒錯 歐洲在1650年到1750年

between 1650 and 1750.

這一百年顯得相當寧靜

Similarly, if we'd had this talk

再者，我們將TEDx巴黎時空

30 or 40 years ago, we would have seen

轉換到三四十年前

how the rise of nuclear weapons,

我們便會發現新興核武正在世界展露頭角

and the threat of mutually assured destruction they imply,

而蘇美兩大勢力正彼此

prevents a direct fight between the two superpowers.

以核武作為威脅

However, if we'd had this talk 60 years ago,

我們再將時空拉到六十年前

we would have seen how the emergence

已經可見新型戰鬥機

of new aircraft and tank technologies,

和坦克車的出現

which give the advantage to the attacker,

這對陸軍在歐洲大陸

make the Blitzkrieg doctrine very credible

採取閃電戰的攻擊方式

and thus create the possibility of war in Europe.

提供很大的優勢

So military technologies

軍備科技的發展與

can influence the course of the world,

世界秩序息息相關

can make or break world peace --

它有能力搗毀或建立起世界的秩序

and there lies the issue with cyber weapons.

但網路武器的發展也引起幾個議題

The first issue:

第一個隱憂

Imagine a potential enemy announcing

假設敵國向你宣稱

they're building a cyberwar unit,

他們正在建構電子戰組織

but only for their country's defense.

但目的僅是為了抵禦他國的攻擊

Okay, but what distinguishes it

好 我們該怎麼劃分

from an offensive unit?

防衛性及攻擊性的電子軍備？

It gets even more complicated

更棘手的是

when the doctrines of use become ambiguous.

沒有明文規範這些模糊地帶

Just 3 years ago, both the U.S. and France

就在三年前，美法兩國都

were saying they were investing militarily in cyberspace,

聲稱他們正在開發電子軍備

strictly to defend their IT systems.

僅用於保護他們的IT訊息系統

But today both countries say

但如今美法兩國改變說法

the best defense is to attack.

聲稱主動出擊就是抵禦駭客的最佳辦法

And so, they're joining China,

於是他們沿用中國的說法

whose doctrine of use for 15 years has been

中國遵循十五年

both defensive and offensive.

攻防兼備的原則

The second issue:

第二個問題

Your country could be under cyberattack

每個國家都有可能因為遭受電子攻擊

with entire regions plunged into total darkness,

而區域性斷電陷入黑暗

and you may not even know

但你不會知道

who's attacking you.

攻擊者是誰

Cyber weapons have this peculiar feature:

網路武器有幾項危險的特徵

they can be used

他們不留痕跡的

without leaving traces.

進行破壞

This gives a tremendous advantage to the attacker,

這無疑對攻擊者而言是很大的優勢

because the defender

因為受害者

doesn't know who to fight back against.

甚至不知道該對誰回擊

And if the defender retaliates against the wrong adversary,

受害者若胡亂回敬敵人的虛擬砲火

they risk making one more enemy

只會增加樹立更多敵人的風險

and ending up diplomatically isolated.

下場便是外交孤立

This issue isn't just theoretical.

這並不是假想的情況

In May 2007, Estonia was the victim of cyberattacks,

2007年五月 愛沙尼亞遭受駭客攻擊

that damaged its communication

癱瘓通訊系統

and banking systems.

和金融系統

Estonia accused Russia.

愛沙尼亞指控俄羅斯

But NATO, though it defends Estonia,

北大西洋公約組織雖然為愛沙尼亞辯護

reacted very prudently. Why?

反應卻甚為保守 為什麼呢？

Because NATO couldn't be 100% sure

北大西洋公約組織沒有證據也無法百分之百確定

that the Kremlin was indeed behind these attacks.

俄羅斯涉入這次的攻擊事件

So to sum up, on the one hand,

簡言之

when a possible enemy announces

當你在懷疑敵國

they're building a cyberwar unit,

建構一支電子攻擊部隊

you don't know whether it's for attack

你無從得知他是為了防禦

or defense.

抑或是攻擊

On the other hand,

另一方面

we know that these weapons give an advantage to attacking.

我們知道這些武器可具備攻擊的優勢

In a major article published in 1978,

紐約哥倫比亞大學的羅伯．杰維斯教授

Professor Robert Jervis of Columbia University in New York

在1978年發表的一篇重要文章中

described a model to understand

曾提出一個模式

how conflicts could arise.

來說明衝突是如何產生的。

In this context,

在這篇文章中 杰維斯寫道

when you don't know if the potential enemy

當你懷疑卻又無從得知你的敵人

is preparing for defense or attack,

是在防禦或是準備進攻

and if the weapons give an advantage to attacking,

而以電子武器攻擊又是如此不著痕跡

then this environment is

這樣的情形

most likely to spark a conflict.

反而更容易產生衝突

This is the environment that's being created

我們現存的世界像個戰場無處不充斥著電子武器

by cyber weapons today,

戰場已從一次世界大戰的歐洲大陸

and historically it was the environment in Europe

變成今日的虛擬戰場

at the onset of World War I.

電子武器的本質

So cyber weapons

就是非常不穩定且危險的

are dangerous by nature,

相較從前，電子武器

but in addition, they're emerging

正在一個快速劇變的環境中進化

in a much more unstable environment.

過去在冷戰時期的戰爭

If you remember the Cold War,

是非常艱苦殘酷的

it was a very hard game,

但至少情勢和角色是明確穩定的

but a stable one played only by two players,

美國和蘇聯兩股強大的力量在政治和外交上較勁

which allowed for some coordination between the two superpowers.

我們的世界正朝著多極化發展

Today we're moving to a multipolar world

其中錯綜複雜的平衡關係

in which coordination is much more complicated,

如我們在哥本哈根所見

as we have seen at Copenhagen.

這樣相互牽制的微妙關係

And this coordination may become even trickier

在電子戰揭開序曲後更難平衡

with the introduction of cyber weapons.

為什麼？因為沒有一個國家

Why? Because no nation

可以確定它的鄰國

knows for sure whether its neighbor

不會突然發動電子攻擊

is about to attack.

所以每個國家都活在這片陰影下

So nations may live under the threat

諾貝爾獎得主湯馬士 · 斯契林

of what Nobel Prize winner Thomas Schelling

稱之為 “面對突襲的交互恐懼”

called the "reciprocal fear of surprise attack,"

雙方都因恐懼鄰國下ㄧ秒的突襲

as I don't know if my neighbor

不論對方是否真的會發動攻擊

is about to attack me or not --

雖無法預測

I may never know --

但以不成為受害者為前提

so I might take the upper hand

我應該主動出擊

and attack first.

就在上個星期

Just last week,

2010年一月26日一篇刊登在紐約的文章寫到

in a New York Times article dated January 26, 2010,

美國國家安全局高層

it was revealed for the first time that

首度對外承認

officials at the National Security Agency

曾經考慮過先發制人發佈電子攻擊

were considering the possibility of preemptive attacks

因為憂慮美國會遭受

in cases where the U.S. was about

駭客攻擊

to be cyberattacked.

這些先發制人的攻擊

And these preemptive attacks

可能不僅僅限於

might not just remain

網絡的虛擬世界

in cyberspace.

在2009年五月

In May 2009, General Kevin Chilton,

美國核武部隊指揮官

commander of the U.S. nuclear forces,

凱文．齊爾頓上將

stated that in the event of cyberattacks against the U.S.,

表示所有針對美國的網絡攻擊事件

all options would be on the table.

籌碼都清楚呈現

Cyber weapons do not replace

數位武器無法取代

conventional or nuclear weapons --

常規武器或是核武

they just add a new layer to the existing system of terror.

電子戰只是增加了戰爭一個面向

But in doing so, they also add their own risk

但無論誰這麼做 都等同增加自己

of triggering a conflict --

與他國產生摩擦的風險

as we've just seen, a very important risk --

我們已預見危機在前

and a risk we may have to confront

但我們必須共同承擔面對

with a collective security solution

集合智囊團並提出權宜之計

which includes all of us:

所有的人包括 我們的歐洲盟友

European allies, NATO members,

北大西洋公約組織的成員們

our American friends and allies,

美國及其盟國

our other Western allies,

其它西方國家盟友

and maybe, by forcing their hand a little,

或許我們應該團結起來

our Russian and Chinese partners.

與俄羅斯和中國的夥伴

The information technologies

法國學者喬．德．侯斯奈

Joël de Rosnay was talking about,

所談到的那些資訊科技

which were historically born from military research,

追本溯源乃是由軍事研究產生而來，

are today on the verge of developing

到今日已發展成

an offensive capability of destruction,

具有毀滅性的攻擊力量，

which could tomorrow, if we're not careful,

如果我們不正視這個問題，

completely destroy world peace.

明日它或許就會將和平世界摧毀殆盡。

Thank you.

謝謝各位。

(Applause)

（掌聲）