![Opinion | The American digital umbrella or universalism in cyber version Opinion | The American digital umbrella or universalism in cyber version](https://media.lesechos.com/api/v1/images/view/66672503fbf78904fc5d52dc/1280x720/01101783669881-web-tete.jpg)
In the United States, business and diplomacy often go hand in hand. The American Department of State thus took advantage of the RSA Conference to present its international strategy for cyberspace.
In the name of the “ digital solidarity “, it offers its allies and partners a true digital umbrella in which the three characteristics of American universalism are found: the export of values, interventionism and exceptionalism.
The American triptych
In the field of values, the United States unsurprisingly stands as guardian of a free, open, prosperous, secure, sustainable, inclusive and interoperable digital cyberspace.
Armed arm of this universalism, interventionism takes different forms: “ capacity building » thanks to USAID, financing of infrastructure, promotion of open technological standards and assistance in the event of an attack. In this regard, the very effective assistance provided to Ukraine even before the Russian attack was extended to many countries.
General Timothy Haugh, head of ComCyber and boss of the NSA, also revealed before the American Senate that his teams had carried out in 2023 no fewer than 22 “ hunt forward ” (literally ” hunting in advance ) in 17 foreign countries to detect malware and strengthen their defense. Sometimes at the cost of their sovereignty. General Bonnemaison, Commander of French Cyber Defense, highlighted at the beginning of 2023 the fact that these operations “ relatively aggressive » exposed the countries « to a form of entryism “.
The third pillar of this American universalism, exceptionalism, is based on the conviction that the United States has a manifest destiny linked to the domination exercised by ” big tech “, particularly in the area of public cloud computing.
Rivalry with its partners
As a result, the aspirations of certain close partners in terms of digital sovereignty are perceived as potentially undermining the “ key security and development objectives of the digital economy “.
The State Department thus takes a position “ against data localization, network usage charges, digital services taxes and any other market access barriers “. A certain concern even appears about European desires in terms of the cloud: “ Cloud services and data centers are also a source of tension with our close business partners. Some have threatened to exclude US cloud providers from their market over concerns over data access and control, despite the Cloud Act “.
Facing the “axis of evil”
Finally, the finger is pointed at the rise in power of cloud providers from authoritarian states who “ are often more adaptable to local short-term economic objectives, and provide packages including financial grants, local cloud infrastructure and training”.
The axis of evil is thus clearly designated: China is “ the largest, most active and persistent cyber threat to government and private sector networks in the United States », followed by Russia, North Korea and Iran. This is not the least merit of this coherent and effective strategy.
However, this strategy is not without criticism. It cheerfully mixes promotion of economic interests and “ digital solidarity ». Finally, it challenges the legitimate aspirations of the European Union for a certain strategic autonomy, which proves that the actions already undertaken have a real impact.
This should therefore lead us to strengthen them and not abandon the digital field internationally. The rescue of Atos is essential from this point of view. There is no doubt that American strategy benefits greatly from our weaknesses, our divisions and, sometimes, our absences.
Guillaume Tissier is director of the InCyber Europe Forum.