Breathe
By Ana Cecilia Pérez
In a world where digital borders have become as important as physical ones, cybersecurity has taken a leading role in the international policy arena.
The upcoming US presidential elections, with Kamala Harris and Donald Trump as possible contenders, will bring with them different approaches to digital protection and the strengthening of cyber defense. But beyond their impact in the US, these changes in US leadership will also have repercussions globally and, in particular, for Mexico, in a context where the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, as well as between Israel and Hamas, have highlighted the importance of robust cybersecurity and strategic alliances.
Modern wars are not fought only on physical battlefields; today, most conflicts involve cyberattacks ranging from the sabotage of critical infrastructure to the use of disinformation campaigns to manipulate public opinion. In the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, for example, cyber attacks have become an extension of traditional warfare, affecting power grids, banking systems and essential communications. The same is true in the Israel-Hamas conflict, where digital threats range from espionage to direct attacks on the digital infrastructure of both sides.
For Mexico this context represents a clear warning about the vulnerability of its critical infrastructure in a cyber conflict, even without being directly involved. The lack of a robust national cybersecurity strategy leaves the country exposed not only to targeted attacks, but also to indirect attacks that could impact essential services such as energy, the banking system or commerce.
It is crucial that the government abandon its austerity stance in this area and make the necessary investments to protect Mexico's digital and physical infrastructures. In addition, it is essential that incentives and support be provided so that all organizations, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, can not only digitize, but also have adequate cybersecurity protection measures in place. This investment is not just an expense, but a strategic priority that protects the economic and social stability of the country.
Kamala Harris in the Presidency
Should Kamala Harris win the presidency, her approach to cybersecurity could be a continuation of the Biden administration, which has promoted closer collaboration between government and the private sector to address digital threats. Harris has shown a stance in favor of strengthening digital rights, which could translate into regulations requiring companies to better protect citizens' personal data. This is particularly relevant in the current context, where attacks on critical infrastructure and personal data are used as weapons in international conflicts.
For Mexico, a Harris approach that encourages cross-border collaboration on cybersecurity could represent an opportunity to strengthen its own digital defenses through cooperative programs. Cyber defense partnerships and information sharing with the U.S. could strengthen Mexico's resilience to external threats, especially considering that many of its telecommunications infrastructure and energy systems are interconnected with those of the U.S. and would be vulnerable to regional cyber attacks.
Donald Trump in the Presidency
In a second Trump term, the focus could be different, with a greater focus on U.S. national security and more relaxed regulation for businesses. Trump prioritized military defense in his previous term and it is likely that, in cybersecurity, his approach will continue to favor national security with fewer regulatory interventions for private companies. This could mean that companies have greater freedom to manage their own security policies, but it also poses a risk of vulnerability in critical sectors.
In addition, Trump has had an isolationist stance in his foreign policies which could reduce cybersecurity collaboration with other countries. This would affect Mexico indirectly, as a more autonomous U.S. approach would limit support for joint cyber defense strategies in the region. For Mexico, this would mean less availability of critical information sharing and pressure to develop its own defenses against the risk of indirect attacks by international actors in the region.
In the midst of a global scenario where digital threats cross borders, Mexico finds itself in a vulnerable position. The country's digital infrastructure, which relies heavily on imported technology and services interconnected with the United States, can become the target of both direct and collateral cyber-attacks. In a context of international conflict, such as Ukraine and Russia or Israel and Hamas, communication, energy and financial infrastructures have become targets of cyber attacks, demonstrating that cybersecurity is a matter of national stability.
For Mexico, the risk is not only that of targeted attacks, but also the impact of attacks that, even if they do not target Mexico, may affect its systems due to proximity or interdependence with foreign systems. The lack of a robust national cybersecurity strategy leaves the country exposed to being caught in the middle of global cyber conflicts, affecting its economy, the lives of its citizens and its position on the international stage.
The U.S. election will not only define the nation's domestic cyber policy, but also its posture in a world increasingly threatened by complex and constant cyber attacks. With Kamala Harris, Mexico would have a greater opportunity to collaborate with the United States to strengthen its digital defense and prepare to face the risks that international conflicts may bring to its critical systems. Under Trump, Mexico could find itself more isolated, facing the need to develop its own defenses in the face of a possible reduction in collaboration with its northern neighbor.
Recognizing that the war is also being waged in cyberspace, Mexico cannot afford to be left behind. Strengthening its cybersecurity capabilities and securing its digital infrastructure is key to protecting its stability and growth.
The opinions expressed are the responsibility of the authors and are absolutely independent of the position and editorial line of the company. Opinion 51.
Comments ()