| Summary/Abstract |
The stability in the cyber domain is rapidly deteriorating on several fronts marked by increasing sophistication of cyberattacks, declining consensus on global internet governance and intensifying great power competition. These challenges were critical turning points among nation-states to recalibrate prevailing cyber diplomatic engagements. This article investigates the increasing prominence of deterrence in the practice of cyber diplomacy in the Asia Pacific. Using Japan and Australia as case studies, it argues that both states continue to adhere to the conceptual tenets of cyber diplomacy, however, in practice, there is a growing integration of deterrence—cyber capabilities and public attribution/naming and shaming—in the equation at varying degrees and intensities. The article endeavours to make two important contributions: First, revitalize the existing cyber diplomacy framework by challenging the extant literature’s view of deterrence’s limited application—underpinned by cold war analogies—and the implausibility of conducting attribution of cyberattacks. Secondly, evaluate Japan and Australia’s cyber diplomacy based on empirical evidence. Key findings suggest that deterrence reinforces/complements the fundamental elements present in the cyber diplomacy playbook. While slight variation exists, there is a strong acquiescence between Japan and Australia to expand existing cyber cooperation to tackle critical and emerging technologies, supply chain, and data governance.
|