Fuelling Instability in the Ukraine War The Questionable Loyalty of Non-State Actors in Cyberspace

A paradoxical stability reigned during the Cold War-era. While the nuclear threat could destroy the planet several times over, there was geopolitical stability in the bipolar system: the mutually assured destruction averted all-out-war – but did not prevent minor conflicts or war through proxies. This is what is known as the Stability/Instability paradox. The end of the Cold War-era heralded the end of the strategic parity and increased instability, conflict, and violence which in turn queried the relevance of the Stability/Instability paradox. However, with the inception of cyberspace, a new domain of strategic competition and rivalry emerged. As with nuclear weapons, generating large scale cyber-capacities to engage in competition or conflict appeared to be the prerogative of powers with global reach, including the US, China, and Russia. Though the attributes of cyber-capacities differ from nuclear weapons, the concept of the Stability/Instability paradox seemed similarly applicable to cyberspace since there was stability in great-power competition without discounting the instability due to cyber-related subversive activities by their proxies. The analogy was contested not least since the influx of non-aligned non-state actors, including commercial entrepreneurs, raises concerns about their status as belligerent parties but moreover on their loyalty. The authors argue that with the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent war, the Stability/Instability paradox is no longer applicable. Since assertive non-state actors, operating in cyberspace, are often not affiliated to or under control of the great powers, their presence in cyberspace will serve as a catalyst to increase political division and instability as it can no longer be balanced off with the stability we see on the level of great powers.
Keywords: