In October 2023, Access Now joined more than 680 other civil society organizations in calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. More than a year later, this call has gone unheeded. Israel’s relentless and brutal assault on Gaza has now killed more than 43,700 people, 70 percent of whom are women and children, with another 732 Palestinians killed in the West Bank. In recent months, Israel’s campaign of indiscriminate violence has expanded into Syria and Lebanon, killing and injuring thousands and displacing millions more civilians.
The current war on Gaza has also seen an unprecedented barrage of online violence, attacks against digital spaces and infrastructure, and the extreme weaponization of digital technology; from multiple internet shutdowns and waves of digital censorship, to the use of AI to target airstrikes. However, the reality of digital harms in conflict is still not acknowledged within normative and policy frameworks intended to rein in the atrocities and abuses of war. It’s time for governments, international institutions, tech companies, and other stakeholders to recognize the life-and-death relevance of warfare’s digital dimension and embrace the concept of “digital ceasefire.”
Digital rights in times of war
Since we began monitoring the state of digital rights in 2009, we’ve documented how states, parties to conflicts, and their proxies and allies are committing an increasing number of digital rights violations against people in situations of conflict and fragility around the world. These are the very same people who often depend on internet access for safety and survival.
For instance, in 2023, conflict emerged as the leading trigger for internet shutdowns for the first time ever, with warring parties imposing at least 74 shutdowns in nine countries, including Azerbaijan, Ethiopia, India, Myanmar, Palestine, Sudan, and Ukraine. Deliberately attacking civilian telecommunications infrastructure as a form of collective punishment or retaliatory action has become all too common in armed conflicts, leading to repeated and prolonged blackouts, and further jeopardizing the safety of civilians caught in the crossfire. These disruptions can extend conflicts, hamper the provision of humanitarian aid, and obstruct attempts to gather evidence of atrocities and hold perpetrators accountable, as seen in the ongoing war in Sudan.
People are also harmed when warring parties weaponize the information ecosystem. State-sponsored or coordinated disinformation campaigns, war propaganda, and targeted ads are used either to justify atrocities and war crimes, or to target protected actors such as journalists, doctors, and humanitarian organizations. For instance, the concerted campaign to demonize the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) — the “backbone of humanitarian operations” in Gaza — led to its funding being suspended, threatening its ability to provide life-saving aid. Meanwhile, the proliferation of incitement to genocide, hate speech, and harassment online fans the flames of violence and atrocities in conflict-torn areas.
After the guns fall silent, digital harms continue
The far-reaching and long-lasting impact of digital harms in conflict demands a collective reflection that goes beyond discussions of “digital warfare,” to focus instead on the concept of “digital ceasefire.” To achieve lasting peace in our digital era, it is no longer sufficient to simply get the shooting to stop — digital and cyber attacks continue during and after breaks in physical hostilities, as shown by the plethora of Russian cyberattacks on Ukraine spanning the period between its annexation of Crimea in 2014 and its full-scale invasion of the country in 2022. The good news is, we are not alone in thinking this way, as shown by the growing calls for an updated approach to building and protecting peace processes.
Researchers and practitioners working on ceasefire mediation have identified three main forms of ceasefire: “cessation of hostilities,” “preliminary ceasefires,” and “definitive ceasefires,” depending on the nature and objectives of each negotiation process. But in keeping with our rights-based approach, our analysis centers instead on the needs and perspectives of affected communities, to arrive at a broader definition of “ceasefire” encompassing the three forms above, regardless of any expectations about their outcomes. As a starting point in this reflection, we focus on Article 36 of the 1907 Hague Convention, which defines ceasefire as a suspension of hostilities between belligerent parties during armed conflict.
If achieving a traditional ceasefire is already a complex and fragile endeavor, fully implementing a digital or cyber ceasefire presents even bigger challenges. This is why we are bringing together human rights and humanitarian experts to discuss how to update the traditional concept of ceasefire with a solid and realistic cyber dimension, to make it an effective peacebuilding and peacemaking tool in the digital age.
Toward a digital ceasefire: our roadmap
To ensure the harms of digital attacks are better reflected, opposed, and ultimately stopped in ceasefire negotiations, we aim to reach a shared understanding of what a digital ceasefire entails across the legal, technical, and harm-related dimensions of this phenomenon.
To this end, in November 2024, a group of experts from a dozen global and local organizations operating in conflicts, met at the GEODE Center, on the sidelines of the Paris Peace Forum, to discuss the requirements, conditions, and methodology for our shared engagement. What soon became clear was the need to flesh out clear parameters for the definition and scope of digital ceasefire, as well as the digital harms it can cover. As a next step, together with our partners, we aim to keep developing these early concepts ahead of a planned satellite event at RightsCon 2025.
We recognize that this is not an easy undertaking, and that ultimately, only governments and warring parties can determine how and when hostilities cease. However, we believe that civil society and communities must have a say on how the protection of people and their human rights from online harm is placed at the core of current and future peace efforts, and we are committed to supporting this process.
If you and your organization are active in this field and want to contribute, we’d love to hear from you; please reach out at [email protected].