Building Diplomatic Networks for a Safe, Secure Cyberspace | IGF 2023 Open Forum #140

Pablo

The analysis raises awareness about the importance of cybersecurity and provides several key points to support this notion. One of the main insights is the need to convince authorities and agencies about the significance of cybersecurity. It acknowledges that countries often confront complex and pressing issues which may cause cybersecurity to be overlooked. Therefore, there is a requirement to advocate for cybersecurity to be prioritized by governments and administrations.

Another crucial aspect discussed is capacity building. The analysis emphasizes the necessity of developing expertise at the national level in order to effectively address cybersecurity issues. Without this capacity building, countries will struggle to tackle the rapidly evolving challenges posed by cyber threats.

Partnerships with stakeholders are also stressed as vital factors in cybersecurity. The analysis highlights the importance of engaging with stakeholders such as the private sector, academia, and civil society. These collaborations are seen as crucial at both national and international levels. Governments need to recognize and appreciate the relevance of including stakeholders in the decision-making processes pertaining to cybersecurity.

The analysis also takes a positive stance towards governmental and international collaboration. It stresses the importance of partnerships with stakeholders and the necessity of prioritizing cybersecurity for governments and administrations. The supporting evidence for this stance includes communication about the significance of partnerships and the need to prioritize cybersecurity.

Additionally, the analysis advocates for capacity building as a means to effectively address cybersecurity challenges. It emphasizes the need for expertise at the national level and identifies capacity building as strategically important for combatting cybersecurity issues.

In conclusion, the analysis underscores the importance of cybersecurity and highlights the need to convince authorities and agencies about its significance. It emphasizes the necessity of capacity building and partnerships with stakeholders, and supports governmental and international collaboration. These insights provide a comprehensive perspective on the importance of cybersecurity, the strategies required to address it, and the key stakeholders who should be involved.

Audience

The discussion focused on multiple key topics related to digital policy and cybersecurity. The participants highlighted the significance of emerging technology and artificial intelligence (AI) in shaping digital policy and diplomacy. They acknowledged the challenges faced by diplomats and policymakers in adapting policy and legal frameworks to handle these innovations. The emergence of new technologies and AI presents opportunities for enhancing digital policy and diplomacy, as well as addressing global challenges.

Public-private partnerships were identified as crucial in the field of cybersecurity. Cooperation with the private sector was seen as bridging the gap between technical expertise and technological resources. The involvement of the private sector in the implementation of policies was considered valuable. It was noted that public-private partnerships provide an opportunity for private sectors to contribute their knowledge and resources towards addressing cybersecurity threats effectively.

Participants stressed that cybersecurity is a transnational issue that cannot be handled by a single nation alone. International cooperation was identified as paramount in mitigating cyber threats. The interconnected nature of cyber threats necessitates collaboration and information sharing among nations. It was highlighted that effective cybersecurity measures require collective efforts and coordination.

The importance of multilateralism and multi-stakeholderism in tackling digital and cybersecurity issues was advocated. Participants expressed a need for a collaborative approach involving multiple stakeholders, including governments, international organizations, civil society, and the private sector. It was argued that engaging different stakeholders can lead to more comprehensive and effective solutions to cybersecurity challenges.

The discussion also drew attention to the digital divide between the global north and south. Concerns were raised about the disparities in digital access, infrastructure, and skills between developed and developing nations. Participants emphasized the need for international cooperation to address this divide. They called for increased capacity building initiatives and the role of digital ambassadors in developing countries to enhance digital literacy and bridge the gap.

The introduction of new internet standards called zero trust, announced by the United States, was seen as a positive development in enhancing internet security. The concept of zero trust re-architects how the internet works, placing security at its core. It was highlighted that everyone owning their own IP address based on public-private key pairs can contribute to a more secure internet ecosystem.

The importance of reflecting the lessons learned from programs and initiatives in policies was emphasized. Participants encouraged ambassadors to apply their knowledge of internet security to their respective ministries and governments. They stressed the need for policy changes to incorporate the insights gained from addressing cybersecurity challenges.

Estonia was recognized as a small but influential country in the field of technology and cybersecurity. It was noted that Estonia’s national leadership, investment, and focus have resulted in the development of world-defining expertise in these areas. The relatively low capital expenditure required for technology development in Estonia was also mentioned.

The impact of online threats on development efforts, particularly in small island nations like Jamaica, was discussed. Participants acknowledged that online threats intersect with various developmental concerns. They emphasized the need to address online threats as they can undermine progress in areas such as industry, innovation, infrastructure, peace, justice, and strong institutions.

Participants also highlighted the importance of prioritizing issues wisely in countries with limited resources. They acknowledged that different priorities often compete with each other in small states. Effective decision-making and resource management were seen as key factors in maximizing the impact of limited resources.

Overall, the discussion shed light on the complex and interconnected nature of digital policy and cybersecurity issues. It emphasized the importance of collaboration, multilateralism, and multi-stakeholderism in addressing these challenges. The need for bridging the digital divide, enhancing international cooperation, and prioritizing resources wisely were key takeaways from the discussion.

Garima Vatla

During a series of discussions on cybersecurity and digital issues, the importance of the human component was highlighted. It was observed that this aspect is often overlooked in these conversations, despite its significance. Participants stressed the need to consider how individuals interact with and are impacted by technology. Empowering individuals with knowledge to understand these issues effectively emerged as a crucial factor.

Another key finding from the discussions was the nuanced nature of technology. While it presents numerous opportunities, it also poses significant threats in the form of cybersecurity issues. This highlights the need for a balanced approach in addressing these challenges and maximizing the benefits of technology.

One area that requires increased understanding and clarity is the definitions of cyber and digital diplomacy. Participants noted a lack of consensus and confusion surrounding the terminology and scope of these concepts. It is important to address this confusion to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in the field of cyber and digital diplomacy.

The discussions also emphasized the significance of integrating digital and cyber issues within the broader context of global policy. It was highlighted that these issues should not be viewed as separate entities but rather as integral parts of the overall global policy landscape. Recognizing and integrating these components into policy-making processes is essential for effectively addressing the challenges posed by digital and cyber issues on a global scale.

To summarize, the discussions underscored the importance of considering the human component in cybersecurity and digital issues. Empowering individuals with knowledge, clarifying definitions in the field of cyber and digital diplomacy, and integrating digital and cyber issues within global policy frameworks are crucial for effectively tackling the challenges and opportunities presented by technology in the digital age.

Hideo Ishizuki

Japan is taking significant steps to strengthen its cybersecurity measures. The National Police Agency has established a Cyber Affairs Bureau and a National Cyber Unit to address cyber threats effectively. The Ministry of Defense is also committed to increasing the number of personnel in cyber-specialised units to enhance their ability to respond to cyber attacks.

Efforts are being made to introduce active cyber defense to eliminate the possibility of severe cyber attacks. This proactive approach aims to detect and counter cyber threats before they can cause significant damage. Additionally, there is a focus on enhancing public-private collaboration and reforming the government structure for better coordination in dealing with cyber threats.

The increase in cyber threats has shifted responsibility towards the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They are tasked with international cooperation for information gathering, analysis, and the formulation of international frameworks. The geopolitical competition, including incidents such as Russia’s war on Ukraine, has heightened the risks of cyberattacks against critical infrastructure.

To build up cybersecurity capacity, regional mechanisms and worldwide efforts led by organisations like the World Bank are proving to be effective. The ASEAN-Japan Capacity Building Centre, established five years ago in Bangkok, has trained over 1,000 individuals from ASEAN member states. Furthermore, the World Bank has set up a fund called the multi-donor capacity building trust fund and multi-donor cybersecurity trust fund to support global cybersecurity capacity building initiatives.

However, a common issue is a lack of resources dedicated to cybersecurity. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Japan suffers from a staff shortage in dealing with cybersecurity issues. Leadership does not adequately prioritize the importance of cybersecurity, which further affects resource allocation in this area.

To address this issue, it is crucial to highlight the importance of investment in cybersecurity. Efforts are being made to demonstrate the return on investment in cybersecurity measures. However, one challenge is that the impact of these efforts is not easily visible until a cyber attack occurs.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs plays a crucial role in collecting and disseminating threat information and incident cases from abroad. This information is essential for government agencies to protect themselves from threats effectively. The dissemination of this information within the government is vital to ensure a coordinated response to cyber threats.

International participation by law enforcement agencies in countermeasures is also crucial. Japan is actively involved in the United States’ counter-ransom initiative, which has more than 40 countries participating. Such international cooperation helps generate interest and investment in cybersecurity.

In conclusion, Japan is committed to strengthening its cybersecurity measures through the establishment of specialized bureaus, increasing personnel, introducing active defense measures, and enhancing public-private collaboration. While regional mechanisms and global efforts are proving to be effective, a lack of dedicated resources poses challenges. Nonetheless, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs plays a significant role in collecting and disseminating threat information, and international cooperation in law enforcement agencies is essential for effective cybersecurity.

Nathaniel Fick

The extended summary focuses on the importance of technology and cybersecurity in building diplomatic networks and creating a safe cyberspace. It emphasizes that success in these areas requires the involvement of people, processes, and technology, with the human element being particularly significant. By building connections and strengthening diplomatic networks, countries can work together to address cybersecurity challenges effectively.

The need for a global network of trusted counterparts is emphasized as essential for responding to emergency situations. When a crisis occurs, being able to rely on a trusted counterpart to provide assistance and support is crucial. Developing a framework for responsible state behavior in cyberspace can contribute to the creation of such networks.

Mainstreaming technology diplomacy globally is seen as of great importance. This entails building diplomatic networks to ensure a safe and secure cyberspace. Ambassadors Ishizuki Hideo and Regina Greenberger are lauded as pioneers in this field, showcasing the impact of technology diplomacy.

The significance of achieving basic connectivity for the unconnected is emphasized. With around 2.8 billion people still lacking access to basic connectivity, it is essential to prioritize efforts to bridge the digital divide. Without basic connectivity, individuals are unable to participate in the advantages offered by emerging technologies, further exacerbating inequalities.

Capacity building is discussed as a challenge for the State Department and not limited to developing nations. It is recognized that building capacity within organizations is applicable to everyone.

The positive stance towards the priority of achieving basic connectivity for the unconnected is reiterated. By ensuring universal access to basic connectivity, more individuals will have opportunities to benefit from emerging technologies.

The importance of collaboration and open-mindedness in decision making is highlighted. It is crucial to assume good intentions and be open to considering other points of view. The ability to hold opposing ideas simultaneously is deemed a mark of intelligence.

A fresh perspective is seen as beneficial, particularly amongst those new to government bureaucracy. Nathaniel Fick, who has been in government bureaucracy for little more than a year, is mentioned as an example.

The importance of building digital and cyber skills within countries, regardless of their size, is underlined. Estonia’s success in cybersecurity despite being a small country is commended, highlighting the notion that any country can develop world-defining expertise with focus and discipline.

Cybersecurity is regarded as a cost, with efforts focusing on avoiding negative consequences. The prioritization of cybersecurity by leaders is highlighted, with a call to emphasize the positive aspects and opportunities associated with the digital shift. The integration of digital and cyber issues into global policy matters is recommended.

The conclusion of the Jellix Fellows program is acknowledged, expressing gratitude towards Regina and Hideo for their contributions and partnership. Anticipation for ongoing collaboration with the fellows in the future is expressed, and the fellows are looked upon to set the tone for future classes.

In summary, the extended summary emphasizes the significance of technology, cybersecurity, collaboration, and the acquisition of digital and cyber skills in building diplomatic networks, ensuring a safe cyberspace, and addressing emergency situations effectively. It highlights observations such as the need for a global network of trusted counterparts, the role of pioneers in technology diplomacy, and the importance of open-mindedness and fresh perspectives.

Regine Grienberger

The discussion highlighted the significance of cyber diplomacy and its cross-cutting approach. It was argued that cyber diplomacy requires a holistic, governmental approach, involving coordination among different departments and ministries to address cybersecurity challenges. It was emphasized that foreign ministries, military, and various agencies are key players in cyber diplomacy.

Additionally, the role of career diplomats in cyber diplomacy was discussed, with an emphasis on their ability to bring a generalist approach and connect commonalities among security policies. The relevance of the diplomatic toolbox in cyber diplomacy was also highlighted.

The speakers stressed the need for an entrepreneurial spirit and confidence in cyber diplomacy, as it is a new concept that requires promotion and adaptability. Diplomats in this field may need to take risks and be comfortable with uncertainty.

The discussion also acknowledged the relevance of cybersecurity to national and international security, with the potential for cybersecurity concerns to turn into national security threats.

The interlinkage between digital transformation and cybersecurity was emphasized, with a suggestion to focus on opportunities rather than just risks. Both aspects were seen as interconnected and requiring attention.

Investment in cybersecurity capacity building was discussed, noting the indirect rewards of programs that assist law enforcement in tackling cybercrime in other countries. The need for international collaboration in addressing cyber threats was highlighted.

Lastly, the importance of increasing international competencies in dealing with cybersecurity across all government players was emphasized, pointing to the formulation and implementation of a national cybersecurity strategy.

Overall, the discussions provided insights into the nature of cyber diplomacy and the various factors that need to be considered for effective implementation. These insights are valuable for policymakers and stakeholders involved in cybersecurity and diplomacy efforts.

Sharif

Collaboration between technology and policy discussions plays a critical role in bridging the gap, as highlighted by various speakers at the conference. They emphasized the necessity of collaboration in achieving SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). The dialogue from the United Nations Global Goals (UNGG), the Expert Working Group, and the Collaborative Research Initiative (CRI) all stressed the importance of collaboration.

To further facilitate these discussions, it has been suggested that specific bodies responsible for maintaining discussions be established. Noteworthy examples include the National Cyber Security Coordination Centre in Nigeria and the National Authority for Cyber Security in Albania. By having dedicated agencies, countries can ensure effective communication and cooperation between various stakeholders in the technology and policy realms.

Foreign programs, such as the GLX programme, have also been recognised as valuable resources in understanding the interplay between technology and policy entities. These programmes offer insights into the complex dynamics and interactions between different sectors, providing additional perspective on how to bridge the gap effectively.

Overall, the sentiment from the conference was positive regarding the importance of collaboration between technology and policy discussions. It is evident that it is crucial to work together to address the challenges highlighted by SDG 9 and SDG 17. By embracing collaboration and establishing dedicated bodies responsible for maintaining discussions, stakeholders can foster meaningful dialogue, overcome barriers, and collectively work towards achieving the goals outlined by the United Nations.

Maritza Ristiska

The GEL-X network is a highly regarded asset in the realm of cyberspace security. Comprising dedicated diplomats and experts from around the world, this network is pivotal in advancing international cooperation, building trust, and bolstering resilience to cyber threats. By facilitating collaboration among nations, the GEL-X network plays a crucial role in addressing the global challenge of cybersecurity.

One key argument in support of the network is its ability to enhance cooperation on a global scale. This is achieved through its experience within the OEWG on ICT and the UN Ad Hoc Committee on Cybercrime. By serving as a platform for the timely sharing of information related to cyber threats, the network promotes proactive and coordinated responses to emerging challenges in the cyber domain. This exchange of information is instrumental in enabling nations to stay abreast of evolving threats and develop effective countermeasures.

Moreover, the network’s impact lies not only in its ability to facilitate cooperation but also in its potential as a coordination hub during and after cyber incidents. During large-scale cyber attacks, the network enables swift communication and coordination among nations. This real-time collaboration is essential for mounting effective responses to mitigate the damage caused by cyber threats. Furthermore, the network provides technical forensic evidence, aiding in the attribution process during cyber incidents. This attribution capability is crucial in holding responsible parties accountable for their actions and deterring future cyber attacks.

Notably, the GEL-X network’s efforts align with the overarching goal of promoting responsible state behavior in cyberspace. By advancing international cooperation, sharing information, and enabling swift coordination, the network contributes to establishing a more secure and stable cyberspace environment. Responsible state behavior is critical in maintaining peace, justice, and strong institutions, as well as fostering continued innovation and infrastructure development.

In conclusion, the GEL-X network is an invaluable asset in cyberspace security. Its role in advancing international cooperation, enhancing coordination during cyber incidents, and promoting responsible state behavior makes it instrumental in addressing the challenges of cybersecurity. As the landscape of cyberspace continues to evolve, the GEL-X network’s contributions will play a pivotal role in securing the digital domain and safeguarding global interests.

Sumiya

The analysis delved into the importance of understanding cyber landscapes and cyber diplomacy from three different perspectives. Firstly, one perspective highlighted the crucial nature of comprehending a country’s cyber landscape. The argument presented was that in order to navigate the complexities and challenges of the ever-evolving cyber realm, it is imperative for countries to have a deep understanding of their own cyber landscape. This involves understanding the various agencies and entities involved, as well as recognising the role of foreign ministries in facilitating collaboration between public and private entities.

The second perspective explored the benefits of learning from the U.S. cyber diplomacy and cyberspace. It was noted that the U.S. State Department organizes a program that provides insight into U.S. cyberspace, thereby enhancing the participants’ ability to understand their own ecosystem. By studying the approaches and experiences of the United States in the realm of cyber diplomacy, countries can gain valuable knowledge and apply best practices to their own contexts.

The third perspective advocated for supporting collaboration and understanding in cyber diplomacy. The discussions stressed the importance of foreign ministries in fostering partnerships and collaboration between different stakeholders. The analysis emphasized the need to continue such collaboration and understanding in order to address the complex challenges of cyberspace effectively. By working together, countries can create a more secure and resilient cyber environment that promotes peace, justice, and strong institutions.

In conclusion, the analysis highlighted the significance of understanding cyber landscapes and cyber diplomacy from multiple angles. It emphasized the role of foreign ministries in fostering partnerships and collaboration, and the benefits of learning from the experiences of other countries, such as the United States. A comprehensive understanding of cyber landscapes and effective cyber diplomacy is crucial in today’s interconnected world to ensure the security and stability of cyberspace.

Christopher Tate

The United States has introduced new standards called zero trust to enhance internet security. These standards enable the re-architecting of the internet core, providing improved protection against cyber threats, and ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information. This proactive approach aims to mitigate potential risks and addresses the growing concern for internet security.

Connect Free has unveiled a revolutionary concept where individuals can own their IP addresses. This concept is based on a public-private key pair, ensuring a secure and unique identification for each user. Connect Free’s aim is to promote internet accessibility and reduce inequalities in terms of internet connectivity.

Recognizing the complexity of the internet, there is an acknowledgment of the challenges faced by diplomats. Christopher Tate, an IT expert, has apologized on behalf of the IT community for making diplomats’ jobs more difficult due to the intricate nature of the internet. This recognition highlights the need for collaboration between the technical and diplomatic sides.

However, there is a belief in the potential of productive collaboration between the technical and diplomatic realms in addressing internet security and accessibility. By bridging the gap between technical expertise and diplomatic efforts, effective strategies and solutions can be developed to tackle the complex issues related to internet security and accessibility.

In conclusion, the introduction of zero trust standards by the United States and the concept of individual IP address ownership by Connect Free are significant advancements in the field of internet security and accessibility. Despite the challenges posed by the complexity of the internet, there is optimism and appreciation for collaboration between the technical and diplomatic sides to overcome these challenges. This cooperation is crucial in ensuring a secure and inclusive internet for all.

Nathaniel Fick:
All right, let’s begin. Welcome, everyone, and good morning. There we go. That’s the problem with putting me in charge. Welcome, everyone, and good morning. My name’s Nate Fick. I’m the US Ambassador for Cyberspace and Digital Policy. And it’s a thrill to be here this morning with our class of global emerging leaders in international cyberspace security, JELLX for short. I had the great privilege of being with this group at the beginning of their fellowship year at the RSA conference in San Francisco. And we pledged then that we would be together again here in Kyoto at the Internet Governance Forum. And it’s such a pleasure to see it all actually come together that way. We just had a bit of a graduation ceremony for the fellows in the other room a few minutes ago. They are diplomats and government experts from 20 countries, almost literally every corner of the world. And what they have in common is a commitment to the importance of technology issues and cybersecurity and foreign policy, an understanding that these issues are becoming more important and more central, and I think a visceral appreciation that this is, in fact, a team sport, and none of us can do it alone. I am pleased, honored, to be sitting between two of my colleagues who help ensure every day that I don’t have to do this alone, representing our host government here in Japan. To my left is Ambassador Ishizuki Hideo. Ishizuki-san is ambassador for international security and cyber policy in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. And a wonderful colleague, one of the pioneers in technology diplomacy, and someone who welcomed me to the fold when I was appointed to this role a year ago. And to my right is Ambassador Regina Greenberger, ambassador for cyber foreign policy and cybersecurity in the Federal Foreign Office of Germany, also a pioneer, someone who has been at work mainstreaming technology diplomacy around the world, and another in this community who welcomed me to the fold when I took the job. The title of this session is Building Diplomatic Networks for a Safe, Secure Cyberspace. And it drives home, I think, the point that success in these areas is really about people, process, and technology in that order. We often want to default right to the technical answer. But nor, I think, as you said at the beginning of our session a little while ago, we can’t forget the human element. And in fact, the human element matters more than the others. So this gathering was intended to build connections in order to strengthen our diplomatic networks in the service of a safe, secure cyberspace, and to create champions, really, for the power of the framework for responsible state behavior in cyberspace, and to create global networks of people who, when the proverbial bad thing happens, can pick up the telephone at 3 o’clock in the morning and have a trusted counterpart on the other end of the line who can help them solve a problem. So in the discussion this morning, we are going to hear from several of the fellows. We will hear from the ambassadors to my left and right. We’ll turn this into a conversation around the table. And I just want to say at the outset, again, thank you all for committing your time and energy to this fellowship over the past year. And this really is only the beginning. We look forward to working with you for years, and hopefully decades to come. So having said all of that, our first question is for Siriprapa of Thailand, who is sitting. There we go. So I would love to hear, just quickly, insights that you gleaned from the program, and three or four that matter most to you as a diplomat engaged in these issues around the world.

Audience:
So thank you, Ambassadors Dionis to meet you again, Ambassador Fick, and also Ambassador Hideo Ishizaki and Ambassador Eugene Greenberger. So I’m Siriprapa from the National Security Council of Thailand. I’m here with a very diverse cohort. And in my group, to be honest, we discussed this question prior to today’s session because we need a more inclusive answer. So we have here a representative from Dominican Republic, Estonia, and Poland, and also Indonesia in my group. The first point that we gleaned from the program is especially the emerging technology and AI. So for us, diplomat and policymaker, we feel that it is so challenging that we need to be more agile in adapting policy and also the legal framework of our country to handle this situation of the innovation. The second one is maybe the most cliche word that you hear along the IGF. It’s about the public-private partnership or the multi-stakeholder. So the cooperation with the private sector help bridging the gap between us about a technical expertise and also the technological resources. But not only us gaining from the private sector, the private sector also got a chance, the opportunity, to be in the session and help us implement the right policy for them as well. And the last point is about the relationship between geopolitics and cybersecurity. So it’s undeniable that cybersecurity, cyber threat is a transnational issue. So one single nation cannot handle this kind of threat alone. So we need the cooperation, the international cooperation. So in a nutshell, it is cliche that you may hear the word multilateralism, multi-stakeholderism. But it is the must that we need to go to that direction. So if you want to move on to the next cliche, so let’s do it right now. Thank you.

Nathaniel Fick:
All right, thank you. Next question is for Maritza. And this is fairly straightforward. In what practical, concrete ways do you think this network will be useful in your work?

Maritza Ristiska:
Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. Good morning to everyone. Good morning to the English ambassadors. I’m Maritza Ristiska from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of North Macedonia. I will speak on behalf of my colleagues from Georgia, Dominican Republic, and Jamaica. We believe that this network is a valuable asset in the complex and rapidly evolving landscape of cyberspace security. Our network is composed of dedicated diplomats and experts from all around the world, who should play a very important role in advancing international cooperation, fostering understanding, building trust, and strengthening resilience to the wide spectrum of cyber threats. Our network could be affected in several key ways. It can facilitate and enhance cooperation, both multilaterally and bilaterally, with an international organization, such as UN. For example, we already have experience within the OEWG on ICT and the UN Ad Hoc Committee on Cybercrime. It can also facilitate and enhance cooperation, both multilaterally and bilaterally, within the framework of regional organization initiatives and platforms. For example, we already have cooperation within OEC, European OEC, and the American region OS60. Furthermore, it can serve as a platform for the exchange of policy ideas and approaches to cybersecurity issues, both at international and national levels. It could serve as a platform for timely sharing of information, insights, and best practices related to cyber threats and vulnerabilities. In case of massive cyber attacks against one of our countries, the network can enable swift communication and coordination among our nations. To effectively address a large-scale cyber attacks against a single state, a coordinated and multifaceted international approach is of immense, immense importance in order to ensure accountability and provide information and technical forensic evidence in order to facilitate attribution. In this context, our network can serve as a hub for coordination during and after cyber incident. In conclusion, I would say that GEL-X network will improve the understanding among countries so we can advance responsible state behavior in cyber to ensure the world is a safer place to facilitate and national development goals.

Nathaniel Fick:
Thank you, Maritza. Next question is for Sharif. And I think we’ve said that all of us who are technology or cyber diplomats, to some extent, are bridges, bridges between our mainstream ministries and the technical community. And there’s a saying that bridges get walked on. So Sharif, what’s your recommendation to avoid the technology and policy conversations being separate? How do you bridge these communities?

Sharif:
Thank you very much. So I’m sure you can hear it. So yeah, like, you know, there were a lot of discussions in that area that we’ve been having. Thank you. She just talked about collaboration, partnership. We’ve been hearing that almost throughout the conference today. And, you know, through discussions coming out of the that came out from UNGG, the EWG, CRI, it has been collaboration, collaboration, collaboration. And our experience is also, like, so to keep these discussions, you know, like together instead of separate, we feel like, for example, from the Philippines, they used to do some cross-functional team building. They do meetings that bring these people together to have these discussions. And we also think there should be specific agencies that are responsible for keeping people together. Like in Nigeria, for example, we are just setting up the National Cyber Security Coordination Center. There’s the National Agency for Cyber Security in Albania. National, what’s it called again? National Authority for Cyber Security. So the National. National Authority for Cyber Security. National Authority for Cyber Security in Albania. That this team, this, it holds, you can hold someone responsible for those discussions. And like the National Authority for Cyber Security in Albania, for example, they are also working on a communication to help delineate these responsibilities and to have a collective front when having these discussions. And one last thing I’d like to also say, like the discussions, to take in these discussions outside the shores of our countries, programs like GLX, like the one we are in, can really help bring people together and, like, build a collective knowledge of understanding the interplay between the two responsibilities, the two groups, rather. Thank you very much.

Nathaniel Fick:
Thank you, Sharif. And I think another reality in this work is that each of our countries is at a different stage of maturity in dealing with cybersecurity issues. And nonetheless, there are commonalities that cut across every level of the capacity building spectrum. So Pablo, what are some of these commonalities that you and colleagues face when it comes to promoting international cyberspace security?

Pablo:
Thank you, Ambassador, for the question. Also, thanks to Ambassador Shisuke, Ambassador Greenberger, met you before. And also, I’m going to speak on behalf of my lovely group from Ecuador, Malaysia, and South Africa, acquired the virus group, by the way. And I have to agree, again, was not to say that people, actually, who makes a difference in the process to promoting cybersecurity, and especially you and the governor, no matter if you’re a minister for foreign affairs and other agencies. Maybe I want to highlight three elements. The first one is probably maybe one of the most important ones. How you make cybersecurity the top priority for your governments or different administrations? Because our country, our state, has to face and deal with different threats. They are very complex, urgent sometimes. And sometimes cybersecurity probably is not the top priority. And you have to do a lot, I mean, in terms to convince your own authorities, other agencies, that this is important. And as an older boss sometimes used to tell me, Pablo, urgent things come first and important things. But in trying to make this something urgent, important, permanently, is a daily effort. And sometimes it’s frustrating, sometimes quite exciting. But it’s something you must do, definitely. The second point I would say is something which is quite important in terms of cybersecurity today. We were discussing a lot during this forum. It’s about the capacity building. Has to really has to work a lot in terms to how you create your expertise at national levels, get training on financial assistance. This is something that I would say all the state, but especially in my group, I mean, this is something quite critical. And I would say strategic, important, because with no capacity building, there’s no way to face the problem you have right now in cyberspace. And that is also permanent tax. It’s very important. And that means resources, which is not, I mean, too many resources we can get. So that’s also very important to highlight. And the last one is something that this is all about. I mean, in this photo, it’s about your work and your partnership with stakeholders. This is something that, of course, we, I mean, we’re trying, I mean, to do more, but in terms to your work with the private sector, the academia, civil society, it’s trying to also to understand and to make everyone can understand that those stakeholders are really important and relevant to include in your own process. Because sometimes governments say, well, this is just a government issue. We need to, I mean, to engage, but you have to tell they are important, not just at the national level, but also the international discussion area. So I would say these three elements is something we have as a permanent task regarding our group. Thank you.

Nathaniel Fick:
Thank you. My last question for the fellows before we turn to the ambassadors is for Sumiya. And this is an annual program, although this is the first class. What advice do you have for those who will come behind you about how to get the most out of it?

Sumiya:
Thank you very much, Excellency, and good morning to you all. I am speaking in behalf of my very wonderful colleagues from Panama, Jordan, and from Costa Rica, and I’m from Bangladesh. We are very proud to be the first cohort because we have all sorts of things that we have learned new. So we believe that our advice to the future cohorts as mentors would be very effective. In this journey, it would be vital to have a very comprehensive understanding of their own country’s cyber landscape, including the various agencies or entities are involved with their unique roles in the global context. In that line, multistakeholderism comes in because it’s so essential in this venture, and we believe that the foreign ministries will play a very important collaborative role to bridge between the public and the private entities. Next, because we are grateful that this program has been arranged by the U.S. State Department, which gives us, actually, it has given us the way to look into the U.S. cyberspace, how you have dealt with this cyber diplomacy, and how the country, United States, has evolutionalized their venture into this space. And this will give the future cohorts also an insight into this, and the various stakeholders and counterparts. This interaction will enhance their ability to understand their own ecosystem. So we would encourage them to further do so. And all this, summarizing all this, it brings us the past cohorts, which is us now, and the future cohorts very closer to achieving what we had actually set out to achieve in the first place when we began in May, and when, if I may quote our ambassador, this will be an opportunity to turn to a friend, an ally, or a fellow when we are having a bad day, or a good day. Thank you very much.

Nathaniel Fick:
Thank you very much for that. And now, for Ambassador Ishizuki, your government’s commitment to international leadership on cybersecurity and technology issues is clear. It’s demonstrated by hosting 9,000 attendees in person and virtually at this IGF. How is Japan organized around cybersecurity at the government level, and what’s changing as the MFA now continues to elevate these topics in Japan’s foreign policy? Thank you.

Hideo Ishizuki:
Thank you, Ambassador. Good morning, everybody. And I’m quite honored to be here to participate this forum. And first of all, on behalf of the officials of the host country, I would like to extend a warm welcome to all of you who are here today. And maybe, I think there is also someone who is attending online, I think. And for those who are lucky to be here in Kyoto, please enjoy the rest of your stay in Kyoto. And I’m Hideo Ishizuki, Ambassador in Charge of Cyber Policy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. And I have taken up this position as Cyber Ambassador last October. So it’s been exactly one year since I took up this position. And I must confess, this is totally a new area for me. During my 30 years of diplomatic career. And what I learned from my one year struggle is the value of human network across the board. And I really, in that sense, I really appreciate the personal relationship with Ambassador Fick and Ambassador Greenberger. Both of whom I met for the first time in Singapore exactly one year ago at Singapore International Cyber Week. And I believe that human network fostered by through this fellowship will be a good foundation for to- international cooperation. And now let me turn to turn on to you your question how Japan is organized around cyber security at the government level. In Japan we are facing increasing threats of malicious cyber operations including including those of ransomware and those against critical infrastructure like hospitals and the reported cases of ransomware incident has increased by 58 percent from 2021 to 2022 so it’s a huge increase. And to respond to these increasing threats Japan is strengthening its cyber security organizations. In April 2022 our National Police Agency established the Cyber Affairs Bureau and National Cyber Unit with 2,700 fully engaged personnel. Also the Ministry of Defense aims to increase the number of self-defense force personnel in cyber specialized units from the current 890 to 4,000 by fiscal year 2027. So this is a very ambitious plan but we are trying to achieve that goal. And in addition we are currently working on the challenges tasked by our national security strategy which was issued in December last year in order to strengthen the response capability in the cyber in the field of cyber security. And these challenges include as somebody has already mentioned to enhance public and private collaboration which is a big challenge. And also we are now trying exploring the way to introduce active cyber defense for eliminating in advance the possibility of serious cyber attacks. And also there is also need to reform the government structure. We need to set up a new organization which will coordinate cyber security policies in a centralized manner allowing us to take more effective hold of government approach across sectors. So these are the challenges we face. And as for Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the national security strategy has given us a task of enhancing international cooperation for information gathering and analysis and attribution and the public announcement as well as the formulation of international frameworks and rules including those at the UN for responsible state behavior in cyberspace. So in Japan threats in cyberspace has become to be viewed as more related to international security. Traditionally it’s been the area of the law enforcement agencies but now it has become more important to Ministry of Foreign Affairs. And this is because as somebody has already mentioned increasing geopolitical competition such as Russia’s war on Ukraine together with increased threats of disinformation campaign as well as increased risk by cyber attacks against critical infrastructure. Then I must confess that maybe the biggest challenge our ministry or we face is short of staff in the ministry. Policy challenges we need to address in cyberspace and the importance of diplomacy in this area never stop increasing. We need more staff to handle these increasing tasks. I think this may be a common challenge as Pablo has already said that this is a commonality side we face I think. All the Ministry of Foreign Affairs all over the world may face this kind of situation and I think this is where the value of this fellowship lies. This would be a very important endeavor to improve the level of diplomats in the cyberspace and I think that’s where the value of this fellowship is. With that I conclude my remark. Thank you very much.

Nathaniel Fick:
Mr. Suzuki-san, thank you for that and sharing your insight. So Ambassador Greenberger, you’re a career diplomat with a background in economics and financial issues and agricultural issues. How do you bring that experience to bear now negotiating and discussing cyber policy topics? Thank you Nate for that

Regine Grienberger:
question. Where could I start? I think cyber diplomacy as such is of a cross-cutting nature. So you don’t only deal with one particular field of experience or expertise within the foreign ministry but you have to connect several dots that lie mostly in different departments. Not only within the ministry but also within the government and Ambassador Suzuki mentioned this already. The joint approach of a government to tackle these challenges by cybersecurity has to be strengthened. And my personal background helps me because I am not specialized in any of the fields so I have a general approach by my own training. Then the second element that is important to understand and it was also mentioned but I would like to highlight it again and stress it a little bit more is that we are basically speaking about a security policy portfolio which means that there is a role for foreign ministries. It’s not only for agencies, homeland affairs, military. It is really a foreign and security policy issue and so a career diplomat like myself who has wandered through different bureaus and has served at different assignments sees also the commonalities of this particular field of security policy with others. So this I would say is another element that from my personal background helps me to deal with the portfolio that I have now. And then of course cyber diplomacy is also, also the internet is not new. Cyber diplomacy is quite a new avant-garde topic I would say in many of the ministries and is not very well structured even in our case where we established the first unit for cyber diplomacy in 2011. So you know 10, 12 years ago and still we have to fight for you know the awareness that Pablo also mentioned the awareness at the highest level of leadership in our ministry and what is what is necessary to do this is this entrepreneurial spirit that you perhaps also you know you can share you can relate to that. This spirit that means you have a new you have a product that is interesting for other people and you try to sell it to them. And then perhaps also something that is important to have confidence as a you know as a diplomat who has different experiences but has no cyber experience. I mean this is basically about diplomacy. So we are diplomats. We use the diplomacy toolbox. We don’t fix the computers of our colleagues. You might help them when the printer is out of order but basically we are diplomats. So the diplomatic toolbox is valid also here. Ambassador Ishizuki mentioned the multilateral negotiations. I mean this is tradecraft at its best. So we have to deal with the same you know terms of reference as in other fields. And you mentioned it that my last point it’s team sport. So you might not be an IT expert yourself but you have to work with IT experts and that is something that I have learned during my all of my career that I always have to turn to colleagues who know it better than myself and then my role is to bring all these arguments and perspectives to the table. Thank you for that really

Nathaniel Fick:
wonderful synopsis. I think that really ought to help drive home the point for all of us that that our colleagues who may not have as much exposure to these topics as we collectively now do need not be intimidated. Right. There is a role here for diplomats with diplomatic skills and we need to apply those skills in this new and emerging domain of diplomacy. So with that I think we have time for discussion. My colleague Catherine Fitrell will moderate any questions that come in from online viewers. But this is an opportunity for audience questions or comments. It’s an opportunity for the fellows to weigh in with more thoughts or questions and of course my colleagues. Yes let’s can we pass the mic only because otherwise it may be very hard to hear online. Thank you.

Audience:
Hi Ambassador Figg, Ambassador Hisuzuki, Ambassador Greenberger. The other key word that we learned in the different panels was the gaps between the global north and the global south. Not only must multi-stakeholderism but also this gap existing between both regions in the world. In terms of international cooperation, what is your best advice to digital ambassadors for developing nations in terms of capacity building and digital literacy?

Nathaniel Fick:
I’m happy to give my colleagues the first crack at that.

Regine Grienberger:
So the first thing that is to be done is to acknowledge the relevance of cyber security for national security. So that might be the case if you have a national security strategy or cyber security strategy from whichever angle you approach it. In the end it has to be clear okay this is a national security issue and somebody said it from you it’s also not a national it’s actually an international security issue. So there should be some you know some reflex in a foreign ministry to claim ownership for this topic. This is a leadership decision. Then the next one is of course literacy as you said is important but literacy can be acquired by but on different paths pathways. So I think there is a lot of opportunities for example online learning tools and so on. It doesn’t necessarily have to start with you know you don’t have to start with a cyber diplomat you can become a cyber diplomat on the job. So that would perhaps be my two advices.

Hideo Ishizuki:
Maybe I’m speaking from a bit of different perspective. In order to build up the capacity in this area maybe we are thinking that regional mechanism or regional effort might be might be a valuable might be effective and such that with ASEAN countries we’ve been working on here our capacity building support and we have set up a center in Bangkok which is called AJCCBC. AJCCBC ASEAN Japan Capacity Building Center in Bangkok and it was set up it was set up five years ago and during these five years we have given the training program through this AJCCBC more than more than 1,000 people from the ASEAN member state. So these kind of you know regional efforts might be kind of you know might be useful to level up the capacity of each state. And also just a bit of advertisement that there is also the World Bank is working on the capacity building support and they have recently set up a fund called multi-donor capacity building trust fund and multi-donor cybersecurity trust fund and this is a kind of you know worldwide effort conducted by the kind of you know World Bank and this is this is this kind of you know multilateral framework efforts is also useful to level up the capacity building of each country. Thank you. I can just add a

Nathaniel Fick:
my perspective on this. It’s easy as a as a cyber tech diplomat to spend all of your time and energy focused on the most sophisticated aspects of this work and all of the advantages that these emerging technologies can bring to our societies but we need to never forget that there are still 2.8 billion people 2.7 or 2.8 billion people on this planet who are not connected and without basic connectivity they will have little or no opportunity to participate in all of the advantages that we spend our time and energy on. So priority number one in in many regards in my view is focusing on that basic connectivity. A second observation is that capacity building actually applies to all of us. It’s it’s not just a matter of some more developed nations building capacity in some that are less developed in these areas. A key challenge for us at the State Department is building capacity inside our own organization where where we don’t have nearly the the skill base that we need in order to meet the challenges in the world in these areas. And one of the that can sometimes seem like a daunting challenge but there’s very little need to reinvent the wheel. We can take what we’ve done or what we’ve learned we can take what anyone has done or learned and try to share it or repurpose it for others in order to accelerate their path up that maturity curve. So we try to try to keep both of these aspects in mind when we’re when we’re building or negotiating or discussing policies across the full spectrum of technology issues. Okay I’ll need I’ll need someone with eyes behind me to we’ve got the video as

Christopher Tate:
well. So good morning everyone I’m Christopher Tate with Connect Free and Internet 3. I’d like to apologize first on behalf of all IT experts for making your jobs harder as diplomats. It wasn’t our really kind of idea to make the internet a hard thing to do but there is hope and there’s hope in the in the sense that the United States has really brought a lot of new standards online called zero trust and what that means is that we can re-architect the way that the internet works in order to really bring security into the heart of the internet and so there’s a lot of really hard people really hard work going on to make sure that the internet can be a new not will keep the keep the existing infrastructure in place but also extend it to a lot of places. We here at IGF have Connect Free here at IGF have announced kind of a new way of thinking about the internet where everyone can own their own IP address and it’s based off of public-private key pair so that means that everyone can essentially generate their own IPv6 address and therefore extend into these regions where there’s really hard to it’s really hard to bring in these network operation centers and other infrastructure so I really appreciate your delegation here and your time and consideration and I really think that you know there’s a lot of diplomatic side and also there’s a lot of things that we can do on the technical side and bringing bridging the gap as it were to connect these two technical and to book other things so thank you for your attention and time. Yes.

Audience:
Good morning Ambassador Isorzuki, Ambassador Greenberger and of course Ambassador Fick. I have a question directed to Ambassador Fick. So I have read somewhere that a certain Marine in the early 2000s stated that good commanders act and create opportunities great commanders ruthlessly exploit those opportunities so in order for these fellows for us to be great leaders as a person who rose from the ranks of leadership in many forms how would you advise us to go about in our post-gelics journey in affecting the necessary changes and updates in policy in our respective ministries and governments to reflect the lessons we have learned from this great program this great opportunity provided by the USDOS and Meridian. Thank you. Thank you for the

Nathaniel Fick:
question and I appreciate the researcher reading that may have gone into that question. Look a couple a couple observations here. I am new to this government bureaucracy and and still maybe a little more than a year in have the benefit of fresh eyes so a couple things that I would I would urge you to remember as you go back fully into your your roles on the other side of this fellowship are first assume good intentions on the part of your colleagues back to our last discussion there’s uneven understanding of these issues there are many different factors and considerations many different values to weigh we are going to have different points of view about what matters most how to rack and stack those priorities but I think most people working on these issues generally share a similar desire to to connect people to bring to benefits of technology to people to to mitigate the harms and to try to make the world a better place so first is assume good intentions I think at a very personal level that the next thing that I would urge is it’s it’s very helpful to have the ability to walk away and sometimes in our system people talk about that in financial terms that’s not what I mean I mean psychologically or emotionally don’t fall so in love with your position that you can’t consider other points of view and I think that’s actually quite hard to do the one of my favorite authors F Scott Fitzgerald said it wrote at one point that the the mark of a first-rate intelligence is the the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time. And I think with these issues, you have to be able to do that. And you have to be able to walk away from an idea that maybe you’re deeply invested in, because these are complicated things and they change.

Garima Vatla:
Yes. Thank you. Is it working? Thanks a lot. I’m Garima Vatla from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Estonia, currently posted to Geneva. It’s been really a nice journey with these people all around the table. And I think the human component indeed is the most important thing about that. I would maybe continue which Ambassador Fick just said about having always those two sides or positions in mind, because I feel very often when we talk about cybersecurity issues, we focus on the security perspective, the threats that come from it, but we shall not forget that technologies as such bring us a lot of opportunities, as well as when we train people, we need to train them to also look at the digital perspective. Because I feel there’s a lot of sort of confusion around semantics or definitions of what is a cyber diplomacy, what is a digital diplomacy, and how they actually connect to each other. It was very interesting to hear Ambassador from Japan saying that there’s a need to increase the amount of people, because we have three countries behind the table with a very big administration, as I come from a country where the amount of diplomats is around 400, 500, and we have to tackle those sort of global issues all the time, right? So I would just, I think it’s more of a comment than a question that we need to really emphasize the capacities or the knowledge of people to understand that digital and cyber issues both are part sort of the global policy sort of questions, not as a domain or a field on its own. Thank you very much.

Nathaniel Fick:
Karen, thank you. Can I respond to your comment though, and just point out that Estonia may have four or 500 diplomats total, but Estonia is small but mighty, especially in these areas. And that’s actually a generalizable comment, I think. One of the great benefits of these technologies is that the capital expenditure required to develop them is pretty low. The scale benefits that they bring with them are pretty high. And so there’s a bit of a decoupling between traditional measures of national influence and the ability to influence the world on these topics. Estonia is a perfect example. A very bad thing happened in Estonia. And in the wake of that bad thing, because of national leadership and investment and focus, you developed this kind of world-defining expertise in this area that is incredibly inspiring, I think, to everyone around this table. And I think that’s a huge success story. It’s a repeatable success story in other places with focus and discipline and investment.

Audience:
Good morning, everyone. My name is Andrew. I’m from Jamaica. A question I have for ambassadors. Coming from an island state, very small, there are different priorities that compete with each other all the time. This particular issue intersects with all issues of development. It’s a developmental issue, I see it as well, because the harms that exist online, they sometimes undermine what is done back home in terms of different areas. What would be your advice for countries who this issue may not be at a high level? And what would be your recommendations to help us go back to our different countries and to convince, to persuade different leaders of government and at different levels to put this issue at the focus which it needs to be, given that a lot of things compete and with a small country, you have to decide what’s the net benefit of pursuing X or pursuing Y. So what would be, let’s say, your top three recommendations that would help an individual to go back home to persuade the movers and shakers who need to approve these things? Thank you.

Regine Grienberger:
Thank you. It’s on. Okay, I give the first and you do the other two. Okay, so my point would be, sometimes digital is the door opener and cyber follows. So focus on the opportunities is sometimes much more convincing, especially for leadership, than focusing on the risks. It’s also, I mean, if you look at it at the corporate level, it’s also sometimes that the Department for Digitization gets all the means. The CISO has to ask for money all the time because when everything’s fine, he has done his work, but nobody sees it. So I mean, a little bit, it’s the same with cyber and digital. Digital is much more comforting for leadership, but it’s just the same topic, just look from the other side, focusing on the opportunities. And many, many countries will look at it from this perspective, although the other perspective, the security perspective cannot be neglected. And if you want to have a sustainable transition, you have to cover, protect also the backside of the project. Thank you.

Hideo Ishizuki:
I think this is, again, another commonality we are facing, actually. And as I have said that we are suffering from the short of staff in the ministry, and this is also the matter relating to the priority. So we have to deal with this issue of awareness, and we have to pass with our leaders so that we can have more resources on cyber security issues. And actually, I mentioned earlier that the World Bank has created a cyber security trust fund, and they are also struggling this kind of element, because traditionally, development agenda is for digital, not for the cyber security, because cyber security, you cannot see the benefit of cyber security unless you got cyber attacks. So this is, again, you know that you have to show it, why cyber security is important. And I think World Bank is working on that, how to, it’s very hard to get the statistics to show the effect of cyber security efforts, or sort of return of the investment on cyber security stuff. But they are working on that, and I think maybe if you approach to the World Bank, they may have some good statistics to show the importance of cyber security investment. So this is just an information. Thank you.

Nathaniel Fick:
I would echo and agree with the comments from my colleagues, and I think a useful analogy here is, it doesn’t matter how many times you tell a child not to touch a hot stove, the child has to touch the stove to learn not to do it again. And so I agree with Ambassador Shizuki’s point that cyber security is a cost, and it’s really about avoiding bad things. And rather than learn from our own hard experience, touching the stove, we need to try to learn from others’ hard experience. And so part of our challenge is convincing our leaders that the bad things that we see happening other places could happen to us. And that is a hard argument to make in a busy world where they may have 40 priorities, and this is number 41. Which leads really in my mind to Ambassador Greenberger’s point, which is, and this has been true for me as well, focus on the opportunity, focus on the upside. Often that’s digital, and digital can be a path to cyber security.

Audience:
Hello, my name is Chittakiat Matapaniwat. I’m from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand. First of all, I wish to echo Ambassador Shizuki about the capacity building. I couldn’t agree more with what you just say about the capacity building, and then regional can be the way forward. Of course, I think on Thailand, we work closely with Japan for the ASEAN-Japan cyber security capacity building, and then we look forward to do more in our region. And capacity building can also be more of the global initiative, like what the Bureau of CDP has been doing for this program, this fellowship. I have one question that may be, or may not be echoed with other countries, but I think in my country, Thailand, when we talk about cyber security, most of the people think about cyber crime. They want to see how we can tackle cyber crime, but they don’t really know there is another aspect of security. Let’s say, in general security, as Ambassador Greenberger had mentioned about, how we can, of course, as a diplomat, and as a cyber diplomat who working day to day, every day with this issue, I know how important it is, but for the other ministry, other government officials, they don’t really know how we can raise awareness, and how we can convince them that this issue merit another investment, further investment, to make us prepare for the cyber attack or other challenges. Thank you.

Regine Grienberger:
Okay, let’s start with the investment part. There has also to be a trade-off between domestic investment and investment abroad in this field. That is when I talk with my colleagues about cyber capacity building, I always describe it as a two-way street. So you might be investing in a program that helps law enforcement in other places to get up to speed to what cyber criminal organizations are able to do, and you spend that money abroad, but at the same time, you get indirect reward from that activity, because this is by nature cross-boundary activities that you are combating here. So if your partner is able to reduce the level of activity, it will benefit yourself. So I think that is one trade-off that you can use in your argumentation towards other parts of the government. And the second one is, of course, should I go for investment in my own structures as for ministry, for example, or is the issue better taken care of in other parts of the governments? So increasing the international competencies, for example, of your cybersecurity agency. And in our case, we have decided that all of the players in the government architecture, or in the whole of, we have a whole of society approach to all of the actors in this architecture should be able to deal with the international aspect. So we have a cybersecurity strategy, a national cybersecurity strategy that defines one of the action fields is Europe. For us, it’s the first framework, Europe and international affairs. But it’s not a list of taskings only for the foreign ministry. It’s a list of taskings for all the actors in the field.

Hideo Ishizuki:
I think maybe the role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the government system is to collect the information from abroad, on the incident cases or threat intelligence or threat awareness. And with that, maybe we can convince other agencies that you have to work hard in order to protect yourself from these threats. So information gathering and dissemination of these informations inside the government is I think this is one of the roles and one of the things we can do vis-a-vis the other agencies. And as for the cyber crime, I think that nowadays, most of the threatening, I think one of the most threatening, one of the biggest threats in the cyber space is a ransomware. And for that, I think the US and United States has set up a framework called Counter-Ransom Initiative. And I think here, nowadays, I think there are more than 40 countries have already participated in this framework. And I think in our case here, our national police agency is quite active in that framework. So if you can have this kind of international framework where police agencies or law enforcement agency can participate, that would give them a kind of cause or interest to invest more heavily on the cyber security side. Thank you.

Nathaniel Fick:
And with that, all good things come to an end. Not only the session this morning, but this fellowship here for our inaugural class of Jellix Fellows. I wanna thank my friends and colleagues, Regina, Hideo, for not only joining us here today, but for your partnership around the world. And I really wanna thank our class of fellows for committing your time and energy to each other and to the fellowship. I hope it’s been a good year from your perspective. It’s been really exciting for us to see the energy in the group. We look forward to working with you now out in the world, all around the world in the years to come. We’re gonna look to you to help us set the tone for the classes that follow. And I just wanna conclude maybe with a round of applause to thank you for all your hard work.

Audience:
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We wish you well and we really are in it together. Take care. We’re all separate, but together we are? That is true. Thank you for doing this. Thank you for coming all the way down here. Yeah, good, good, yeah. It’s always nice to get out of the capitol, yeah. Ah, for sure, yeah. I’m a believer now, yes. Coming to Kyoto. It’s a special place, yes. Yeah, yeah, it’s good. Well, I’m off to the airport, so I’ll see you somewhere soon. Good luck in Singapore. Give David Cole my best. I’m sorry to miss him. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It’s great. Good. Okay. Bye-bye. Thank you. Thank you. There was one person who wasn’t here, so she’s right here. It’s good. Great. Let’s go do it. Perfect. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Bye. Bye. Bye. I’ll have that. And then I’ll come back and drop it in. I’ll see you soon. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.