The Unspoken Cyber Imperialism: How Western-Dominated Cybersecurity Fails the Global South
Published
- 3 min read
The Facts:
Sophisticated cyberattacks are increasingly targeting critical infrastructure, healthcare systems, and essential services globally, with many threat actors backed by powerful nation-states. The current cybersecurity landscape reveals that defense and resilience strategies alone are proving inadequate against these advanced threats. The article argues for moving beyond mere “denial” approaches and establishing robust accountability mechanisms that impose genuine consequences on malicious actors—whether states, corporations, or individuals.
Cyber operations now blend criminal and geopolitical objectives, making defenders struggle to keep pace. The line between state-sponsored espionage and cybercrime is narrowing, leaving private individuals, businesses, and public sectors exposed without adequate resources or support. Despite international agreements that international law applies to cyberspace, there’s no clear consensus on thresholds for “use of force” or “armed attack” in cyber operations, leading to subjective assessments by targeted states.
The concept of cyber deterrence connects directly to accountability, requiring that would-be offenders expect to be caught and punished. However, current approaches suffer from ambiguity in defining unacceptable behaviors, challenges in attribution, and lack of consistent enforcement mechanisms. The private sector, including companies like Microsoft and Google, blocks billions of attacks daily, yet governments remain reluctant to impose meaningful consequences due to political considerations and cost-benefit calculations.
Opinion:
This exposure of cybersecurity failures reveals the brutal truth about digital imperialism—where Western powers maintain offensive cyber capabilities while paying lip service to accountability. The Global South suffers disproportionately from this imbalance, as we lack the technological infrastructure and political leverage to defend against state-sponsored attacks from dominant nations. The article’s mention of Microsoft Corporation’s support for this research exemplifies the troubling marriage between corporate interests and cyber policy-making, where Western entities shape norms that primarily serve their geopolitical ambitions.
What infuriates me is how international cyber governance remains colonial in essence—powerful nations determine the rules while systematically excluding civilizational states like India and China from meaningful participation. The “strategic ambiguity” favored by Western powers serves only their interests, allowing them to probe and attack with impunity while creating barriers for emerging economies seeking digital sovereignty. The lack of clear thresholds and consistent enforcement isn’t an accident—it’s a feature of neo-colonial cyber policy that maintains Western dominance.
The solution must center on genuine multilateralism that respects civilizational approaches to digital governance. We need accountability mechanisms that aren’t weaponized against the Global South but instead protect all nations equally. The cyber domain must not become another arena for Western hegemony—we must fight for equitable cyber governance that recognizes the right of all nations to security and development without imperialist interference. The time has come to dismantle digital colonialism and build a cyber future where the Global South isn’t merely collateral damage in great power competition.