The paradox of power in cyberconflict: Why authoritarian states have the advantage

Research on interstate cyberconflict recognizes that many online confrontations are asymmetric, pitting powerful democracies against authoritarian challengers. Yet there is no consensus on whether relative strength or weakness provides an offensive advantage in cyberspace. Drawing on the “paradox of power” literature, I offer a theory of asymmetric cyberconflict that explains why authoritarian regimes benefit more from cyberconflict than advanced democracies. First, by restricting their high-tech sectors, regimes limit their development and reduce the number of assets vulnerable to retaliation. Second, this underdevelopment increases their incentives to steal from advanced rivals. However, authoritarian regimes differ in their levels of restriction and technological development and, thus, in their offensive cyber strategies. Low-tech regimes prioritize cybertheft for financial gain and cyber sabotage for intimidation purposes; high-tech regimes focus on stealing intellectual property to bolster their capabilities and on spreading disinformation to destabilize democracies. In both cases, democratic states cannot respond in kind.