Introduction

Cyber warfare is a complex issue that raises various ethical concerns. Israel and Iran have been fighting a cyberwar recently, with each country conducting numerous cyberattacks against the other. First, Israeli media reported a cyberattack on several water and sewage treatment facilities around the country. According to Dr. Amer (2021), Israel attacked Iran’s nuclear program with malware, causing equipment failure, which led to a fire. Iran retaliated with cyberattacks that targeted various Israeli companies. Both adversaries targeted civilian infrastructure. Though cyberweapons are not overtly violent and thus do not fit the standard definition of interstate conflict, they have the potential to inflict serious harm and to threaten society (Kello, 2013). In the Global Risks Report, the World Economic Forum ranked cyberattacks among the top 10 risks in terms of likelihood and impact (2020). When viewed through a virtue ethics lens, it becomes apparent that actions taken in the cyber realm have substantial implications for the character of individuals and society. In this case analysis, I will argue that the virtue ethics tool for moral reasoning shows us that the cyber war between Israel and Iran is not ethical because the actions of both countries go entirely against the ethical standards of virtuous behavior, which mandate not exclusively acting in the interest of one’s own country but also considering the well-being of other countries and their citizens. In addition, as with most cyberattacks, the harm caused by this cyber-warfare is substantial and extensive, affecting not just military targets but also innocent civilians and infrastructure within their society.

Boylan

In his book “Basic Ethics,” Boylan argues several concepts, including consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics. Consequentialism grounds its belief that whether an act is morally right or wrong depends solely on its consequences. Deontology asserts that specific actions are inherently right or wrong, regardless of their resulting consequences. Virtue ethics, on the other hand, focuses on the individual’s character and emphasizes the development of virtues such as courage, honesty, and kindness.

Virtue ethics emphasizes cultivating virtues such as honesty, fairness, and respect for others in pursuit of a good life. In cyber warfare, the virtues of honesty and fairness are exceptionally pertinent. Cyber-attacks often involve deception and data manipulation, which violate the virtue of honesty. Also, cyber-attacks can unintentionally negatively impact innocent people and organizations, violating the virtue of fairness.

Furthermore, cyber warfare has the potential to completely shift the ethical virtues in society. A nation that engages in cyber warfare can unintentionally foster a culture of skepticism at the expense of trustworthiness. Because it is usually hard to identify the origin of a cyber-attack, cyber wars also lead to a lack of accountability, undermining the virtue of responsibility and integrity. Israel and Iran have mutually and willfully engaged in cyberattacks against each other that have directly endangered innocent civilians, demonstrating a complete disregard for humankind.

From a virtue ethics perspective, the actions of both sides in this cyber war are unacceptable. While there may be political and strategic justifications for such attacks, using cyberattacks to harm civilians and disrupt essential infrastructures violates virtues such as rectitude, compassion, and respect for human life. Accordingly, it is necessary to assess each side’s actions and the virtues that each side demonstrates or lacks.

Regarding virtues, Israel has often justified its cyberattacks against Iran behind the guise of protecting national security and preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. However, the haphazardly broad nature of these attacks, which have targeted civilian gas stations, indicates a lack of respect for the virtues of fairness and empathy. While it is no doubt essential to protect national security, it is also paramount to consider the well-being of harmless civilians affected by these attacks.

For example, Israel allegedly launched a substantial cyberattack on an Iranian port that caused transport chaos for days after crashing the facility’s computer system. There were mile-long traffic jams of vehicles outside the port and vessels stuck in the harbor. This calamity occurred around the same time Iran attacked various water distribution networks in Israel. Attacks from both sides have shown a complete disregard for essential virtues such as justice, kindness, and respect for human life. A suitable resolution to this war requires an emphasis on fostering virtues such as integrity, mutual respect, and forgiveness and working towards a peaceful solution that values the well-being and dignity of all people affected.

Taddeo

In “Ethics of Cybersecurity,” Taddeo explores a myriad of ethical dilemmas centered around cybersecurity. One central concept in her book is “cybersecurity as a public good.” Taddeo states that cybersecurity must be treated as a public good because it is essential for the public interest and ensuring that individuals are protected in the digital age. She also dives into cyber sovereignty, which involves respecting one another’s rights to govern their own cyberspace. Cyber warfare, while sometimes justified under the principles of cyber sovereignty, can still have a detrimental impact on societies. 

Both countries are engaging in cyberattacks that have far-reaching consequences for their citizens and the broader international community. These attacks can disrupt individuals’ ability to live safely and securely, especially after incidents like the gas stations targeted in Iran. They almost undoubtedly lead to financial loss, potential identity thefts, and the list goes on. When it comes to cyber warfare, it is crucial to consider the potential consequences for civilians carefully. While cyber-attacks may not result in physical harm, they can still have a significant impact on people’s lives and engaging in such activity without any regard for the impacts of innocent people violates virtue ethics. 

By looking at cybersecurity as a public good, both Israel and Iran are responsible for protecting their citizens and the broader international community from the harmful effects of cyberattacks, which would fall under virtues such as integrity, temperance, and compassion. 

Virtue ethics emphasizes the value of cultivating virtuous character traits, such as honesty, courage, and compassion. Looking at the actions from both sides of the cyber war, it is clear that they do not reflect these desired virtues and instead contribute to the languishing of individuals and society as a whole. Furthermore, both countries still need to cultivate the virtues necessary for ethical behavior in the digital age. Rather than working to protect their citizens and the public interest, they have engaged in a tit-for-tat cycle of cyberattacks that only serves to escalate tensions and cause harm.

To act virtuously in this case, Israel and Iran must work to keep cyberattacks from causing harm to civilians. They must also strive to de-escalate tensions and engage in diplomatic efforts to fix their differences peacefully. Ultimately, the righteous path prioritizes the public good and seeks to promote the well-being of all individuals, regardless of their nationality or political affiliation.

Using these virtues as a guide, it is evident that the cyber war between Israel and Iran is unjust. Both countries have violated non-maleficence as a virtue by conducting a slew of cyberattacks that have harmed innocent civilians in both countries. Moreover, this cyber war violates the principle of proportionality because the harm caused by both ends’ cyberattacks outweighs any potential benefits. The virtue of prudence, or the practical wisdom to make good decisions, especially applies to the concept of proportionality in just war theory. A just solution would be for both countries to stop the cyberwar and engage in diplomatic negotiations to resolve their differences peacefully. In doing so, Iran and Israel can avoid causing any additional unnecessary harm.

Objections to this stance might assert that cyber warfare is necessary for national security and a legitimate part of defending against cyber threats. Nonetheless, the principles of cyber sovereignty and cyber espionage suggest that these actions are not justifiable, as they violate other nations’ rights to govern their own cyberspace; Cyber-attacks also often include stealing confidential information, which frequently causes the most harm to civilians than anyone else and as such is not a justifiable means of guarding against cyber threats. Ideally, the virtue ethics tool suggests that peaceful coexistence and diplomatic solutions are the best approaches to resolving conflicts in cyberspace. 

Conclusion 

Overall, the ethical implications of cyber warfare are significant and should be considered through a virtue ethics lens. The virtue ethics tool shows that the actions taken in the cyberwar between Israel and Iran do not align with the virtues of justice, courage, and wisdom. Cultivating virtues such as honesty, fairness, trustworthiness, and responsibility is essential to ensure that technology is aligned with ethical values and advances the common good. 

The central concepts of Taddeo’s work, particularly the concepts of cyber sovereignty, espionage, and cyber warfare are central to the moral implications of this case. As such, in this cyber war, their actions are not justified according to the principles of cyber sovereignty, which suggest that nations should respect each other’s rights to govern their cyberspace. Furthermore, cyber warfare, especially in an ongoing conflict, can have devastating consequences for civilian populations.

Instead of resorting to cyberattacks, nations should work towards peace talks to find solutions to their conflicts rather than inflicting harm on civilians. Such peace talks require a commitment to justice, and that includes having empathy for others, treating   others fairly and respectfully while aiming for peaceful coexistence. Moreover, by respecting each other’s digital sovereignty, nations can help to limit the risks of cyber warfare and impacts on the community. By working together to establish common standards and best practices for cybersecurity, nations will be better equipped to defend against cyber-attacks and protect their citizens from harm. 

References

Abu Amer, A. (2021, November 8). The cyberwar between Israel and Iran is heating up. Middle East Monitor. Retrieved from https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20211108-the-cyberwar-between-israel-and-iran-is-heating-up/

Da Silva, C., Collier, K., & Reuters. (2021, October 26). Iran says sweeping cyberattack took down gas stations across country. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/iran-says-sweeping-cyberattack-took-down-gas-stations-across-country-n1283967

Kello, L. (2013, October). The Meaning of the Cyber Revolution: Perils to Theory and Statecraft. Retrieved April 23, 2018, from https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/meaning-cyber-revolution-perils-theory-and-statecraft

World Economic Forum. (2020). The Global Risks Report 2020 (15th ed.). Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.