Using examples, analyse how disruptive technologies can threaten the
security of states.
As the world continues to globalise, humanity’s access to continually adapting technologies is
easier than ever before. This therefore leads to disruptive technological innovations, which can
be defined by a technology that transforms an existing market or creates a new one, by
displacing established market-leading competitors and often making this technology more
accessible to the general public. With this accessibility comes the unregulated distribution and
utilization of these technologies, which provides the opportunity for individuals to use these
devices in threatening and hazardous ways. For example, the ability for the public to purchase
and use drones, originally used for military surveillance, allows people to discreetly monitor
other’s activity and disrupt day to day life, as seen in Russian military bases and Gatwick Airport
in England. The distribution of 3D printers has also been used in malicious and threatening
ways, with consumers given the ability to 3D print items such as guns and other weapons as
seen in the attack at Halle Synagogue in Germany using a 3D printed pistol. Finally, one of the
most revolutionary disruptive technologies of the modern world includes social media, where
anyone with access to the internet can organise protests, crime and spread propaganda as
done by ISIS and during the Arab Spring.
The increasing accessibility to drones can be threatening to the security of states in terms of
surveillance, terrorism, and disruption of daily procedures. Originally designed in 1935 for
military purposes, the drone was first made available for public purchasing in 1990, with 1.78
million registered drones in the United States alone, with 27% registered under commercial use.
This provides individuals the capacity to fly and operate drones where they desire, leading to
security threats, firstly as seen in Russia's Khmeimem AirBase and Tartus Naval Facility in
Latakia Governorate in 2018. On January 9th, 13 drones attacked the air base and naval facility
by dropping ten munitions per drone on the sites. Later, ‘the Free Alawites’ of a Syrian sector of
Islam claimed responsibility for the attack. Russia had also made accusations of several other
countries for contributing to the attack, including the United States, Ukraine and Turkey.
However, as is the nature of drones, no direct evidence was found. This demonstrates the
unique danger posed by drones, as their ability to be regulated from an entirely different location
to the drone itself, provides an element of confidentiality behind one’s actions. This can also be
seen at Gatwick Airport in 2018, where the airport in England was closed entirely for 36 hours
due to drones flying over the runways with over 120 000 passengers affected. Although the
drones posed no attacking threat, they prevented any aircraft from departing or landing on the
runways with the potential to fatally damage the planes. Similarly, there was never any culprit
found or charged for the incident that threatened security not just within England, but also for
international arrivals. Therefore, the discrete nature of drones makes them an accessible
weapon that can be used on a range of scales to threaten security.
Another form of disruptive technology that has proven to be threatening to the security of states
is the distribution of the 3D printer. First invented in the 1980s, the intention of the 3D printer
was initially designed for artistic and designer reasons, typically as a children's toy. Since then,
the complexity of the technology has escalated dramatically with the capabilities to print larger
,and more detailed items, with the largest 3D printed item to date being a fully functioning boat
weighing over two tonnes. Combined with the increasing accessibility of this technology and the
cheapest machinery standing at approximately $250 AUD, this has provided the freedom for the
population to design and produce items without regulation. Specifically, the rise of 3D printed
pistols and other firearms. This has led to various fatal incidents, including the Halle Synagogue
Shooting in east Germany. In October of 2019, attacker Stephan Balliet attempted to enter the
Halle Synagogue armed with a 3D printed pistol, while livestreaming the event. Balliet shot dead
two victims, with a gun that investigators believe cost the attacker around $50 USD to generate
in only a few hours. Hence, demonstrating this technology to pose a physical risk to a state.
However, the 3D printer has the capabilities to threaten a state in various ways. In recent years,
there have been multiple incidents of 3D printed ATM skimming devices, forged documents,
automobile keys, fraudulent payment devices and masks that are designed to overcome facial
recognition technology. Therefore, the endless possibilities of these devices may pose an
immeasurable threat to the security of individuals and governments, predominantly due to their
accessibility and lack of regulation.
The use of social media may be the most influential disruptive technology in today’s globalised
world, with the users given the abilities to hack and organise events such as terrorism. In 2021,
there are 3.78 billion social media users, therefore equalling around 48% of the world’s
population. As a result, the global community have access to unfathomable quantities of data
that can effortlessly avoid monitoring by governments. This has seen the rise of premeditated
crime, terrorism, and pro as seen by ISIS. As of 2018, an estimated 40 000 foreign nationals
from 110 countries were recorded to officially join the group, commonly in the Middle East and
African countries as two of the most rapidly increasing locations for internet usage. Additionally,
a report by the United Nations in 2018 found evidence of ISIS utilizing social media platforms
including Twitter, Telegram, and online magazines to recruit members and plan attacks in Africa.
Social media has also seen to be threatening in the case of the Arab Spring where over a dozen
countries in the Middle East protested their governments from 2010 to 2011. The role of social
media was crucial to the beginning of the revolution as a video was shared of a fruit cart vendor
lighting himself on fire as an act of defiance against his government. This sparked revolutions
across the Middle east and support worldwide as the video went viral. As the demonstrations
occurred across multiple countries, social media also played a major role in the organisation of
protests and events. Although the government remained in place, the death toll of the events of
the Arab Spring reached over 61 000 people. This demonstrates how social media allows the
rapid spread of communication and organisation, however, can have fatal impacts for the
population and political security of a state.
The exponential growth of technology around the world can have countless benefits for
individuals, countries and the globe, however these disruptive innovations can also pose a
threat to society. This can come in the form of surveillance and air attacks by drones seen in
Russian military bases and Gatwick airport in England. The use of 3D printing is also seen to
become increasingly concerning, as individuals have the unmonitored ability to print weapons
and other illegal items as seen in the Halle Synagogue Attack in Germany. Finally, the
consequences of social media are also seen to allow for the spread of propaganda and the
organisation of deadly events, as seen from ISIS and the Arab Spring. Therefore, the threats of
,these disruptive technologies may only increase with time, and it is imperative that society
develops means to monitor and prevent the devastating results of the dangerous use of these
technologies.
12/12
I would struggle to take any marks off this essay. It’s excellent. Well chosen, highly detailed
examples were used. I like how you have linked the Arab Spring, ISIS and the use of social
media to the topic
Using examples, explain how either government or militia control the
ability of a population to participate in global interactions.
Across the globe, each country uses its government and militia to maintain their own unique
legislations that attempt to control the behaviour and actions of the population. In many
countries, extensive regulations have been implemented to control the population’s ability to
participate in global interactions and often are an attempt to increase nationalism, protectionism
and overall obedience of citizens. One of the most common methods of management includes
the regulation of internet access, such as the Great Firewall in China. Limitations of global
interactions also come in the form of tariffs and the monitoring of global trade, which is
especially common in the United States, with constantly evolving tariffs on products. Finally,
populations can also be controlled in terms of movement domestically and internationally, as this
is one of the many forms of constraints seen in North Korea.
As the use of the internet and social media continues to rise, internet censorship is now one of
the most common methods used to control a population’s participation in global interactions.
One of the most famous and heavily censored internet sites is China’s, where over 96% of
online traffic is monitored. First implemented in 1997, the Great Firewall of China was created
by the Chinese Communist Party in an attempt to limit freedom of speech that could hinder the
power of the government within its society. There were also concerns around exposure of
information regarding the practises of the Chinese government, extensive western influence, as
well as the intention to support local internet companies that could be easily controlled and
would support the Chinese economy. Overtime, the firewall has continued to restrict and monitor
internet access in China, with social media including Snapchat, Google, YouTube, Instagram,
Facebook, and Twitter all blocked for citizens. The firewall has also blocked other forms of
media, including the banning of children’s networks “Peppa Pig'' and “Winnie the Pooh” both in
2018, with concern around the promotion of gang activity, inappropriate clothing choices and
promoting variation in sexuality. As a result of the firewall, China has been able to maintain a
more traditional culture by limiting the impacts of westernization through media. There is also
the success of billionaire Chinese internet companies including Alibaba/Taobao and Weibo, as
well as Tencent and Baidu of which are ranked in the top 10 used internet sites globally.
Therefore, internet censorship can be highly restrictive for a population, however can benefit the
political and cultural stability of a country while benefiting the economy.
, Governments also have the ability to regulate global interactions through the use of tariffs and
monitoring of trade. In the United States, 45th President Donald Trump commonly implemented
tariffs of several products and countries around the world. Trump’s reasoning behind these
tariffs varied, including political tensions or as an act of retaliation, but ultimately Trump claims
the intention of the tariffs was to promote supply and demand from companies within the United
States with the slogan “America First”. Beginning in 2018, examples of Trump’s tariffs between
Europe and China included 30-50% on solar panels and washing machines, and 10-25% on
steel and aluminium. Although these tariffs do not entirely prevent trade between other nations,
Trump believed the severe tax on these goods would increase the population purchasing
domestic goods and products. There were minor successes with this tactic, with a total of $80
billion USD collected in tariffs predominantly coming from China, and an increase of
approximately 300 000 factory jobs in the United States. However, the limitations of these tariffs
were the increase in consumer goods in the United States and the retaliation of China who
imposed similar tariffs against the country. Although this trade war continues as of the current
day, research by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Columbia University claims that
U.S companies lost a minimum of $1.7 trillion in the price of their stocks as a result of this trade
war. Therefore, this demonstrates how the United States population was controlled in terms of
their financial access to international goods, which ultimately damaged the United States
economy.
Finally, governments with stricter policies in place have the ability to entirely restrict the
movement of its population and therefore limit international relations. As the only country that
remains entirely communist, North Korea’s laws are some of the most restrictive worldwide. One
of these policies includes the restriction of movement, with citizens prohibited to leave the
country without approval, that may come as a result of work or study. This restriction of
movement is controlled through limited access to vehicles, fuel sources
and plane tickets. The reason for these policies that are set in place by Dictator Kim Jong-un,
are an attempt to maintain the loyalty of citizens, as the government fears that the severe laws
and legislations in the country would prevent the population from returning if they were given the
ability to leave. To control this, the few who are permitted to travel abroad must verify their
immediate family members to the government with the understanding that they may be taken
hostage or executed upon the traveller defecting to North Korea. Similarly, those who are caught
attempting to leave illegally are assigned public rental homes or labour camps, often with
violations of their human rights including the infliction of violence and insufficient food, water and
hygiene. North Korea also utilizes various other laws that restrict the population’s interaction
with the globe, including only having access to 28 websites, three television channels and
prohibition of international phone calls. Hence, the tight restrictions used in North Korea
demonstrate the capacity for a government to use fear as a tactic to keep citizens loyal to their
own country and limit international relations.
The ability for governments to restrict the interactions between it’s population and the rest of the
world vary significantly in terms of severity, reasoning, and effectiveness. It can be seen in
China with the use of the internet firewall as the restriction of online access to global websites
can come at little cost for the population, and major success for the country’s economy.
