A Study Of Network Sovereignty In The Tallinn Manual 2.0

The rapid development of internet high and new technologies has made cyberspace the main place for human interaction.A large amount of data is generated in cyberspace as well as available resources.Countries are also paying more attention to regulating cyber sovereignty from the perspective of domestic law.However,normative documents on the unification of cyberspace have been absent.At the call of the international community,Cooperative Cyber Defence Center of Excellence convened 20 Western legal scholars to compile the “Tallinn Manual On The International Law Applicable To Cyber Warfare”(hereinafter referred to as the“Tallinn Manual 1.0”)in 2013.The compilation of the manual was assisted by the International Committee of the Red Cross and the United States Cyber Warfare Command.It was then revised in 2017 to publish the “Tallinn Manual 2.0 On The International Law Applicable To Cyber Operations”(hereinafter referred to as the Tallinn Manual 2.0).The handbook is the result of the joint efforts of international law scholars from different countries,which provides a more detailed discussion of cyber sovereignty and other relevant rules in cyberspace,with a wide range of positive implications.In particular,the content on cyber sovereignty reflects to some extent the attitudes and views of a considerable number of countries on this issue.At the same time,as the basis for other rules of conduct in cyberspace,the issue of sovereignty is particularly noteworthy.Therefore,China should focus on the content of network sovereignty in the Tallinn Manual 2.0.This article starts from the perspective of both the whole and the part,and first evaluates the “Tallinn Manual 2.0” as a whole,pointing out its progress and shortcomings.Although the Tallinn Manual 2.0 is clearer in terms of content system,it still lacks attention to state practice,and essentially reflects the interests of Western network technology powers.Secondly,through the systematic review of the provisions on network sovereignty in the Tallinn Manual 2.0,the causes of the foreign data jurisdiction,cyber espionage and low-intensity network actions that are still divergent among the expert groups are analyzed.Finally,in view of the shortcomings of the Tallinn Manual 2.0,some insights are put forward from the three perspectives of expanding openness,focusing on international practices and new developments in network technology.At the same time,from the perspective of China’s interests,some suggestions have been put forward for China to deal with network sovereignty disputes with other countries: First of all,the security governance capabilities of data should be improved in the jurisdiction of foreign data,and the long-arm jurisdiction of cyber hegemonic countries should be blocked from legislation;Second,in the response to cyber espionage,it will lead the establishment of new international norms for cyber espionage and actively respond to the accusations of “economic espionage”by other countries against China;Finally,in view of the low-intensity network operations that have not yet produced harmful results,we should strengthen China’s cyberspace defense forces internally to resist frequent cyber attacks.Our country should actively promote the discussion of low-intensity network actions in various countries to deal with the blank provisions in the Tallinn Manual 2.0.