While International attention has been focused on the growing demonstrations
taking place across Iran, another important development passed largely unnoticed.
In July and September 2022, Iran's intelligence services orchestrated
a series of destructive cyber attacks on Albania's critical infrastructure.
This has not only seen diplomatic relations severed between Tirana and Tehran,
but it's also seen the United States imposed new sanctions
on Iran and led to widespread condemnation from NATO members.
So, what exactly lay behind Tehran's attacks against this seemingly unlikely Balkan target?
And what does it tell us about the new era of cyber warfare?
Hello and welcome. If you're new to the channel, my name is James Ker-Lindsay and
here I take an informed look at international relations, conflict, security, and statehood.
When we think of conflicts, we tend to still think
in very traditional terms two countries going to war using conventional weaponry.
However, things are changing dramatically.
The old model of interstate war seems increasingly out of
touch with the reality of contemporary conflict.
And while events in Ukraine show that wars, especially territorial wars,
can certainly still be fought with bombs and bullets, a whole new mode of conflict is emerging.
Cyber warfare has become an increasingly serious challenge to peace and security.
Indeed, the damage done can often be far more extensive and costly than armed attacks.
Whereas a missile can destroy a power station,
a cyber attack can bring down an entire power network.
The growing importance of cyber warfare was recently highlighted with reports that Iran
had launched a series of cyber attacks on Albania, in July and September 2022.
These attacks cause widespread disruption and brought down parts of Albania's critical
infrastructure in what the U.S government has called a "troubling precedent".
But while Washington has now imposed sanctions on those it holds directly responsible for the
attacks, it also raises many interesting and important questions about the way that cyber
warfare is developing as a form of conflict in contemporary international relations.
So, what exactly lay behind the attacks?
By any account, a conflict between Iran and Albania seems unlikely.
Lying between the Middle East and Central Asia,
the Islamic Republic of Iran is the 17th largest member of the United Nations.
Its population stands at close to 90 million.
While it's almost wholly Muslim, approximately 90 to 95 percent follow the Shia branch of the
Islamic faith, n contrast to the Sunni Islam practiced in much of the rest of the Muslim world.
In contrast, the Republic of Albania sits three thousand kilometres away in southeast Europe.
It ranks 140th amongst 193 members of the UN.
Its population stands at around 2.8 million.
While it's also largely Muslim, and follows the Sunni branch of the faith,
it's known for being highly secular.
So, just how did the two countries come to blows?
Our story really begins with the Cold War.
With a long border with the Soviet Union, Persia as it was then known,
became an important Western ally.
However, the Shah, or Emperor, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, oversaw a corrupt and brutal regime.
And although the country's secret police cracked down on dissent during the 1960s and 70s,
opposition steadily grew across the social and political spectrum;
uniting religious conservatives, radicals and communist groups.
By the late 1970s, the situation was rapidly deteriorating.
As well as massive protests and strikes,
armed insurgents were increasingly challenging the security forces.
As a result, in January 1979 the Shah fled the country.
Just days later, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, a prominent exiled cleric, flew back to Tehran
to become the Supreme Leader of what would now become the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The revolution completely transform the country.
Internally, a theocratic political system was introduced and Islamic law strictly enforced.
At the same time, all opposition to the new regime was quickly purged.
Likewise, the country's foreign policy now changed dramatically as well.
Long-standing ties to Israel were severed amidst calls for the destruction of the Jewish state.
Elsewhere, fears grew that the new regime intended to export its revolution.
As well as raising tensions with the monarchies of the Gulf States,
it also became a leading factor in neighbouring Iraq's decision to attack Iran in September
1980 - a decision that sparked what would become an exceptionally bloody eight-year war.
But perhaps the most dramatic change was in terms of relations with the West,
and the United States in particular.
Just months after the revolution,
the U.S embassy in Tehran was stormed leading to a 15-month hostage crisis.
While the issue was eventually peacefully resolved, tensions nevertheless now grew
between Iran and what it called "the Great Satan".
In 1983, Washington held Iran responsible for several huge
bomb attacks on U.S Targets in Lebanon that left over 300 dead.
As a result, it now formally designated Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism.
Although tensions appeared to ease in the late 1990s,
following the election of a moderate president in Iran, relations soon deteriorated again.
In January 2002, President George W. Bush called Iran part of an "Axis of Evil",
alongside North Korea and Iraq.
And it was the U.S invasion of Iraq the following year that opens the next stage in the story.
As U.S forces swept through Iraq, they came across a large military camp belonging to an
exiled Iranian militia: the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, otherwise known as MEK.
Having emerged in the midnight 1960s as part of the growing opposition to
the Shah's Rule - and drawing on militant Islam, radical Marxism,
and fierce anti-Americanism - it became a leading opponent of the regime and the Western
presence in the country; even launching attacks on U.S citizens living in Iran.
However, relations between the Organization and
the new theocratic regime collapsed immediately after the Revolution.
As thousands of members were rounded up,
the leadership first fled to France before moving to Iraq just a few years later.
With the war against Iran now in full swing, Iraq warmly welcomed the group,
giving it a large military base - Camp Ashraf - just 65 kilometres from the Iranian border.
But even after the Iran-Iraq War ended, the group continued to serve a useful purpose.
As well as helping Iraqi forces suppress Kurdish insurgents in the north of Iraq,
it continued its campaign against Iran.
But by now the group was coming under increasing International pressure.
As part of the rapprochement with Iran at the end of the 1990s,
and with Saddam Hussein's Iraq now seen as a pariah, Washington and
other Western states now decided to list MEK as a terrorist organisation.
However, the 2003 U.S invasion of Iraq radically changed the group's fortunes
again as the Bush Administration saw a chance to use it to undermine Iran.
Despite its continuing terrorist designation, MEK was therefore given formal U.S protection.
But as Washington handed Iraq over to a new administration that was made
up of Kurds and Shia groups with ties to Iran, the organisation came under attack.
Deciding to stand by the group, Washington now
revoked its terrorist designation and began looking to relocate it.
However, and perhaps understandably,
most countries were reluctant to take in thousands of trained insurgents.
And it's at this point that Albania enters the story.
Staunchly pro-American after the Washington support for Kosovo's independence from Serbia,
and having joined NATO in 2009, Tirana agreed to accept the organisation.
Over the course of 2014-2016, several thousand MEK members were airlifted to their new home.
Once there, the group acquired a large piece
of land close to the capital and established a new base.
However, as it was now clearly impossible to maintain an armed Insurgency against Iran,
the group instead switched tactics.
Setting up 'troll farms',
it became the Vanguard of the online campaign against the Iranian government.
And it's this that appears to have sparked Iran's recent attacks against Albania.
According to reports published by the U.S government on the incidents, the planning for
the cyber attacks began in early 2021, when Iran started infiltrating Albanian government systems.
This was stepped up with significant reconnaissance activity in May and June 2022.
And, on the 15 July, a group called "Homeland Justice", which had been identified as an Iranian
state cyber actor, launched a ransomware attack - an attack that included anti-MEK messages.
As the Albanian authorities responded, a wave of destructive malware was then unleashed.
The attack caused considerable disruption across Albanian government systems.
As well as affecting a range of critical government services,
it disrupted medical appointments and school databases.
In addition, the websites at the Prime Minister's office and the Albanian Parliament were shut down,
as was the government's main online portal "e-Albania".
Then, in September, it was followed by another attack.
This time focused on the police computer network, it brought down the border control systems,
leading to large queues at the country's entry and crossing points.
It was at this stage that the Albanian government decided to reveal the full
extent of what had happened and name those it held responsible.
In a video address to the nation, the prime minister, Edi Rama, directly blamed the
Islamic Republic of Iran for the attacks, calling it an act of State aggression.
In response, he also announced that the Council of Ministers had decided
to sever diplomatic relations with Iran with immediate effect and that
all Iranian diplomats in the country had been expelled.
While Iran vigorously denied the allegations, Albania's allies quickly rallied to its support.
Leading the way was the United States.
Just days after the White House issued a statement heavily condemning the attacks,
which it called a "troubling precedent for cyberspace", the U.S. Treasury announced
that sanctions had been imposed against the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence,
and the minister in charge, for "malign cyber activities".
Likewise, NATO Partners also issued a statement throwing their support behind Albania.
Strongly condemning the attacks against an ally, the alliance promised to support
Albania's efforts to strengthen its cyber defence capabilities.
Importantly though, Albania stopped short of referring the matter to NATO under the terms
of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty covering collective defence.
As Prime Minister Rama later said, he didn't want to escalate the matter any further.
And this raises an interesting question about cyber warfare and
the appropriate way to respond to such attacks.
For now, the preferred reaction seems to be relatively low-key condemnation,
sanctions, and perhaps cyber retaliation.
There's seemingly little appetite for any conventional counter-attack.
In one sense, this may be for the best.
There's an argument that online attacks should be viewed separately from traditional armed attacks.
Then again, we're now at a stage where such attacks can do as much, if not more,
damage to a country than conventional weapons.
So, does the low-key response to cyber attacks mean that states
now feel that they can cause mayhem and damage with relative impunity?
Meanwhile, the attack also raises interesting questions about the
implications of supporting dissident groups in the contemporary era.
Albania was clearly attacked because it had provided sanctuary for one of
the most significant Iranian dissident groups; a group that had a long history
of waging a conventional and then an online insurgency against Iran.
In this sense, the Iranian cyber attack fits into the long history of states retaliating
against other countries that allow their territory to be used by armed insurgencies.
Obviously, many will argue that Albania is right to host MEK
given Iran's long history of sponsoring terrorism.
This may be so. But it nevertheless shows that such support still comes with risks,
sometimes significant ones, and even at a distance.
For all these reasons, Iran's cyber attack on Albania - an incident that received
remarkably little international attention - actually raises some
profoundly important questions about the evolution of conflict in the 21st century.
But, of course, Iran isn't the only country using
alternative and non-traditional methods to attack other countries.
Here's a video on how Belarus used migrants and refugees to attack Poland,
Latvia, and Lithuania - and the European Union more widely.