Cyber Security & The US Presidential Race
The second presidential debate in St Louis on Sunday night was even more aggressive than the first.
Both candidates launched so many scathing attacks on each other that there was little time to actually discuss the policies the candidates would put in place should they win the race to the White House. Mediator Anderson Cooper was visibly frustrated.
That said, there is a pattern emerging in Mrs Clinton’s ideology on foreign policy. Namely, the threat of Russian intrusions into American cybersecurity.
The democratic nominee clearly takes issue with what she sees as a deliberate ploy by the Kremlin to destabilise her campaign and, should she win, her presidency.
“We have never, in the history of this country been in a situation where an adversary can influence our election.” She claimed before referring to Wikileaks, who originally published her classified and highly controversial private emails.
“There are children suffering in this war, I believe largely because of Russian aggression”
“The Kremlin, and by that I mean Putin, are directing the attacks on American accounts to influence our election and Wikileaks is part of that system where Russians hack information”
This follows on from comments made about Vladimir Putin in the first debate, where she alluded to an allegations by the FBI that Russian agents the hacking of data from the Democratic National Convention (DNC), which she clearly took personally.
“We are increasingly seeing cyber attacks coming from the organs of states. The most recent and troubling of those has been Russia There is no doubt now that Russia has used cyber attacks on all kinds of organisations throughout our country.”
She continued “We’ve learned recently that this is one of their ways of wreaking havoc and collecting information.”
What then, would a Clinton presidency do for Russian-American relations?
The two countries have had an uneasy but functional relationship since communism collapsed and the Berlin wall fell, but Clinton clearly does not have much interest in pursuing further diplomatic ties.Given that, out of necessity, she has to appear diplomatic during these debates to court undecided voters it is not beyond the realms of possibility that, once in the Oval Office, she will go on the warpath against what she perceives as “the adversary.”
“I’ve stood up to Russia, I’ve stood up to Putin and I would do that as president (…) I do support pursuing [The Russians] for war crimes and hold them accountable.” She said when mocking Donald Trump’s perceived admiration of the Russian president.
Cyber security could yet be a determining factor in this election but, further than that, Clinton’s decision to place it as a key aspect of her foreign policy could lead to a return to the dark days of the two countries aching to attack each other in any way possible through subterfuge.
The Kremlin, perhaps because the debates have been devoid of any attempt at forming coherent arguments, has not responded to these claims. Even the state-sponsored news agency Russia Today chose not to talk about her comments in any detail, focusing more on comments made by Trump.
What happens on November 8th remains to be seen, but should Clinton win, there are sure to be questions that she would want her Russian counterpart to answer and that could be dangerous.
JM-H
