Search Results (5)

Operational Technology (OT) and Industrial Control Systems (ICSs) along the NATO-EU eastern flank face escalating hybrid threats, yet existing cyber-resilience metrics remain IT-centric, lacking OT-specific constraints and geopolitical exposure dimensions. This paper presents a Design Science Research contribution: the development and simulation-based feasibility demonstration of two interconnected artefacts. The first is the AI-enabled Cyber-Resilience Index (ACRI)—a composite 0–100 metric operationalized through 16 indicators across four domains (detection performance, operational continuity, governance maturity, supply-chain risk), aggregated as a three-term convex combination of capability domains with a linear subtractive supply-chain exposure penalty, weighted via AHP-based illustrative sector-reference profiles. The second is the Unified Compliance Framework (UCF), a structured R → C → E → SLO mapping linking 47 atomic regulatory requirements (NIS2, DORA, CER, AI Act, CRA) to standards (IEC 62443, ISO/IEC 27001) and auditable evidence artifacts, with a Continuous Assurance Loop operationalizing continuous control monitoring. Feasibility is demonstrated through digital twin simulation under three OT-representative threat scenarios (energy SCADA APT, railway supply-chain compromise, manufacturing ransomware). Results in simulated environments show ACRI improvement from Moderate-Risk baselines (45–61) to Adequate-Resilience thresholds (65–73); the proposed federated autoencoder–LSTM detector attains a composite $D_{perf}$ of 0.883 versus 0.510 for a static ±3$\sigma$ threshold baseline (a 73% relative improvement at the domain level). Sensitivity analysis confirms classification robustness ($\pm 7.3\%$ weight perturbation; coefficient of variation below 9.1% across 10,000 Monte Carlo iterations). Critical limitations are explicit: simulation-only evidence ($n=12$ scenario instances), illustrative (non-empirical) AHP weights, no operational field validation, and limited inferential statistical power. instances), illustrative (non-empirical) AHP weights, no operational field validation, and limited inferential statistical power. The contribution is positioned as a proof-of-concept design artifact establishing methodological foundations for OT-centric resilience assessment and compliance-to-engineering traceability, not as a field-validated operational system. Full article

The Visegrad Group, comprising Czechia, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia, has several common features, including their geographical proximity, membership in the EU and NATO, and similar levels of economic development. However, they also have significant differences. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has exposed new disagreements among them, particularly regarding how to ensure energy security amid a changing geopolitical landscape and the issue of sanctions on Russian energy supplies. Despite these differences, the Visegrad Group countries have shown unity in their approach to nuclear power. Although their use of nuclear technology varies, they have recently aligned their nuclear energy policies. Czechia and Slovakia have a long history with nuclear technology, dating back to the 1970s, while Hungary began its nuclear program in the 1980s. Poland, which had paused its nuclear program after the Chernobyl disaster, has recently resumed its nuclear energy efforts. All four countries aim to expand their nuclear energy capacity to either maintain or increase its share in their electricity mix. This paper provides a comparative analysis of their nuclear energy policies, focusing on the political initiatives driving advancements in this field. It argues that these nations see nuclear energy as crucial for creating a resilient, crisis-resistant, and secure energy sector. Full article

This article explores the pervasive influence of conspiracy theories, specifically the New World Order (NWO) and Golden Billion theories, within the context of the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. These theories form key narrative frameworks in Russian state media and global conspiracy communities, shaping perceptions of geopolitical events. This study dissects four pivotal episodes within the Russia–Ukraine conflict to illustrate how conspiracy theories shape public perception and policy direction, further entrenching ideological divides. In the first episode of the 2022 full-scale invasion, narratives of the Golden Billion were utilised to justify the attack, presenting Russia as a bastion against the Western elite’s plans to dominate the global economy and resources. The second episode examines the attack on Mariupol in 2022, framed by Russian propaganda as a necessary act to thwart the supposed expansion of NATO and the EU, underpinned by the NWO agenda aiming to dilute Russian influence in Eastern Europe. The third episode analyses the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage in 2022, interpreted by some conspiracy theorists as an act by the NWO to destabilise Europe’s energy security, thus consolidating control over energy routes and resources. The fourth episode delves into the 2024 Moscow terrorist attacks, which were seen by some as either a false flag operation conducted by Western powers or as a legitimate repercussion of Western encroachment orchestrated to weaken Russia’s resolve and international standing. Each episode is contextualised within a broader conspiratorial framework, highlighting the dualistic nature of the NWO and Golden Billion theories that paint the conflict not merely as territorial disputes but as a clash between fundamentally opposing worldviews and global orders. This narrative analysis not only underscores the role of conspiracy theories in shaping geopolitical discourse but also demonstrates their utility in mobilising domestic support, framing international criticism, and justifying military actions. Our findings suggest that these conspiratorial narratives provide a resilient, albeit misleading, lens through which supporters of the Kremlin’s policies can rationalise the war, attributing complex sociopolitical dynamics to the malevolent machinations of a global elite. This study contributes to understanding how modern conflicts are interpreted through ancient conspiratorial lenses, impacting national and international policy and public opinion. Full article

Resilience is a complex system that represents dynamic behaviours through its complicated structure with various nodes, interrelations, and information flows. Like other international organizations NATO has also been dealing with the measurement of this complex phenomenon in order to have a comprehensive understanding of the civil environment and its impact on military operations. With this ultimate purpose, NATO had developed and executed a prototype model with the system dynamics modelling and simulation paradigm. NATO has created an aggregated resilience model as an upgrade of the prototype one, as discussed within this study. The structure of the model, aggregation mechanism and shock parametrization methodologies used in the development of the model comprise the scope of this study. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which is a multi-criteria decision-making technique is the methodology that is used for the development of the aggregation mechanism. The main idea of selecting the AHP methodology is its power and usefulness in mitigating bias in the decision-making process, its capability to increase the number of what-if scenarios to be created, and its contribution to the quality of causal explanations with the granularity it provides. The parametrized strategic shock input page, AHP-based weighted resilience and risk parameters input pages, one more country insertion to the model, and the decision support system page enhance the capacity of the prototype model. As part of the model, the decision support system page stands out as the strategic level cockpit where the colour codes give a clear idea at first about the overall situational picture and country-wise resilience and risk status. At the validation workshop, users not only validated the model but also discussed further development opportunities, such as adding more strategic shocks into the model and introduction of new parameters that will be determined by a big data analysis on relevant open source databases. The developed model has the potential to inspire high-level decision-makers dealing with resilience management in other international organizations, such as the United Nations. Full article

Despite its conceptual uncertainty, resilience is mostly about the measurement of capacity. Current studies confirm the importance of resilience measurement and the necessity to support policy makers with a measurement mechanism. A holistic approach considering the measurement of different resilience domains interactively and concurrently is the critical element in this endeavor. In parallel with the rise of popularity of resilience in international organizations, NATO has initiated a project with the objective to discover whether the resilience capacity of a country can be evaluated in a dynamic way via a prototype model execution. The implemented model running both baseline (without any shock) and extraordinary scenarios (with strategic shocks), clearly demonstrates its capacity to represent quantitatively the resilience related factors of a country in the complex operational environment. Moreover, the outputs of the model substantially comply with the resilience concept existing in the literature and NATO applications. One of the main strengths of the model is its almost infinite capacity to create various scenarios and make what-if analysis limited only by the current number of endogenous parameters of the model. It allows studying the secondary and the third order effects of events introduced in scenarios. The user interfaces (input and output dashboards) of the model help decision makers modify the values of selected endogenous parameters, see and compare the time-based values of the resilience factors, and doing so to evaluate risk related to the Area of Operations. Subject matter experts have validated the model and identified the main areas of improvement. The further development brings more countries to the model and implements an aggregation mechanism for output values of both resilience capacity and risk functions. The model will form the core of the NATO Resilience expert system. Full article