Western nations face a glaring punishment problem in the cyber domain. Repeatedly, other nations assail their political and economic interests. Repeatedly, Western leaders warn about the gravity of such actions. And yet repeatedly, the victims failed to punish to deter the offenders. This article examines why and how this situation arose and what to do about it. The Western approach to cyber conflict prevention emphasizes the centrality of existing international law and norms. The legal and normative framework is not adequate for this purpose, however, because it does not provide sufficient grounds to credibly respond to actions falling short of war. Consequently, the Western approach has failed spectacularly. It fails to grasp a central truth about contemporary security affairs: much of modern interstate rivalry fits neither the destructive criteria of war nor the acceptable boundaries of peaceful rivalry. Rather, it is unpeace, or mid-spectrum rivalry that is more damaging than traditional peacetime activity, but not physically violent like war. Nations use cyberspace to achieve some of the political and strategic objectives of war without firing a single gun. The lack of an effective Western response betrays not tolerance of aggression but a failure to devise a response strategy commensurate with the legal and doctrinal ambiguities of unpeace. Existing law and norms are a source of the problem, not its solution. An interim solution must be found instead in the development of new doctrine—in a consequentialist strategy that affects adversaries’ material interests to deter actions which international law and security strategy do not ordinarily recognize as deserving a strong response.

中文翻译：

---

网络法律主义：为什么会失败以及如何应对

西方国家在网络领域面临着明显的惩罚问题。其他国家一再侵犯其政治和经济利益。西方领导人一再警告此类行动的严重性。然而，受害者屡次未能通过惩罚来震慑犯罪者。本文探讨了这种情况出现的原因和方式以及如何应对。西方预防网络冲突的方法强调现有国际法和规范的中心地位。然而，法律和规范框架不足以实现这一目的，因为它没有提供足够的理由来可信地应对未达到战争的行动。因此，西方的方法以惊人的失败告终。它未能掌握当代安全事务的一个核心真理：许多现代国家间的竞争既不符合战争的破坏性标准，也不符合和平竞争的可接受界限。相反，与传统的和平时期活动相比，不和平或中等范围的竞争更具破坏性，但不像战争那样具有身体暴力。各国使用网络空间来实现战争的一些政治和战略目标，而无需开火。缺乏有效的西方反应不是对侵略的容忍，而是未能制定与不和平的法律和理论模糊性相称的反应战略。现有的法律和规范是问题的根源，而不是解决方案。