The vulnerability of modern societies to deepened dependence on electronic devices was showcased by the explosions of handheld communication gadgets in Lebanon on 17 and 18 September. Members of Hezbollah were the target and the explosions occurred during the ongoing exchange of firepower with Israel that commenced after the 7 October 2023 attack by Hamas.
The explosions and the scale of casualties have understandably drawn global political attention. There is no clarity yet on the method of detonation. Understandably, security specialists and strategic analysts would be trying to find answers to the security implications of such attacks. Surely, India would be no exception.
These attacks highlight the weaponisation of daily-use communication devices such as pagers and walkie-talkie radio sets. The explosions were simultaneously initiated through a particular model of devices procured by Hezbollah from foreign vendors that were apparently front companies for Israel. The United Nations Human Rights chief Volker Türk has said such attacks violate international Law. That Israel has carried out the attacks is obvious, but plausible deniability is built into the methodology.
Also Read: China benefits from US involvement in Ukraine & Gaza. India must tread carefully
A challenge for India
The feasibility of utilising electronic devices for explosions has been known for several decades. Israel, in particular, has used ‘explosive-spiked’ mobile phones to kill individuals. The story of one such killing in 1996 has been recounted by Samuel Katz in his book The Hunt for the Engineer: How Israeli Agents Tracked the Hamas Master Bomber.
In the Lebanon attacks, one remarkable feature is the scale— numerous individuals were targeted simultaneously. Combined with the element of deniability, such a mode of attack is likely to trigger efforts to secure the supply chain of communication devices and even other electronic goods.
In India’s case, progress toward atmanirbharta (self-reliance) can be expected to provide tailwinds. But considering the sheer diversity and quantum of electronic components in worldwide networks and the complexity of global supply chains, achieving atmanirbharta in electronic components would be an immense challenge. Finding a balance between national security and development is never easy, and in this case, it could pose dilemmas for policy formulation.
In India, the body responsible for formulating national policies for information security and information warfare is the National Information Board (NIB), under the National Security Council.
The National Security Advisor (NSA) is the chairperson and members include the Cabinet Secretary; Chief of Defence Staff; chiefs of the armed forces; secretaries of Home, Defence, External Affairs, Finance, MEITY (Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology), DOT (Department of Telecommunications), Space, and R&AW; chairpersons of the Department of Atomic Energy and National Technical Research Organisation; the Director-General of the Defence Intelligence Agency; the scientific advisor (SA) to the Defence Minister; and Director of the Intelligence Bureau. The Deputy NSA (Technical) in the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) is the member-secretary of the NIB.
Also Read: Hindu Right is catching India’s military leaders young. It will politicise Armed forces
Policy for a new threat landscape
The entire electromagnetic spectrum, including radio frequencies and the internet, poses potential security risks for India’s defence, scientific, and economic systems, especially supply chains and external trade relations.
Therefore, the heavy lifting for policy formulation should be undertaken by a group of multi-disciplinary experts assembled for the purpose. The complexity of the exercise means it cannot be assigned to officials who are already managing other critical operations. They would, however, be available for consultations to the expert group.
One of the key mechanisms under the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS), directly under the NSA, is the National Security Advisory Board (NSAB), created in 1998 and headed by a convenor.
The NSAB is conceptualised as a multidisciplinary body consisting of experts who are retired officials or not part of the government, specialising in fields such as foreign affairs, defence, economics, science and technology, strategic analysis, and internal security, among others.
The NSA should consider tasking the NSAB convenor with studying the national security issues emanating from the vulnerability of electronic devices/components—whether through weaponisation for inflicting destruction or for surveillance.
For this special task, the NSAB convenor will probably have to include experts who are not members of the NSAB. The cyber-security coordinator of the NSCS could be the member-secretary. It is necessary for the expert group to be anchored in the NSCS as consultations with various ministries and the private sector would be easier to facilitate. There would also be a requirement to examine ongoing cooperative efforts with India’s strategic partners in the cyber domain.
For sure, the human capital in terms of expertise exists in India and should be sourced for such a task. Consultations shouldn’t be bound by considerations such as age and experience, as some of the expertise needed for these issues may be available with younger individuals who are familiar with navigating the ‘dark web’—the underground of the internet.
India’s vulnerability to attacks through electronic devices cannot be dealt with by defensive measures alone. Considering that the likely sources of these attacks are operatives working under the cover of governments, there is a definite case for bolstering our offensive capabilities in the cyber domain. Those same nations are likely to also be dependent on the security of their cyberspace for their own progress and development.
A cautionary note is warranted while formulating policy on this issue. The sheer diversity of threats involving electronic items must be comprehensively examined, and knee jerk reactions, like blanket bans on innovative electronic systems, should be avoided.
Lt Gen (Dr) Prakash Menon (retd) is Director, Strategic Studies Programme, Takshashila Institution; former military adviser, National Security Council Secretariat. He tweets @prakashmenon51. Views are personal.
(Edited by Asavari Singh)