Digital infrastructure reshapes the logic of war

When Russian troops crossed the border into Ukraine in February 2022, it was not only soldiers and missiles that were mobilised. Behind the scenes, American tech giants such as Amazon, Microsoft and SpaceX played a crucial role in keeping Ukraine's digital infrastructure alive – and thus the country's ability to wage war.

A new study from the University of Copenhagen shows how digital infrastructures are not just technical aids, but actively reshape the relationship between states and private companies.

‘We have mapped how Big Tech's digital infrastructures not only support state functions – they help define what it means to be a state at war,’ says Tobias Liebetrau, associate professor at the Department of Political Science.

The cloud as a shield

In the study, researchers examined how cloud storage, satellite communications and cybersecurity mediate the relationship between states and Big Tech – not least in war-torn Ukraine.

"When Russian missiles and cybersecurity wiper attacks hit Ukraine, Amazon and Microsoft helped transfer enormous amounts of government data to secure data centres in Europe. These physical sites were beyond Ukraine’s borders, yet essential to its war effort." explains Tobias Liebetrau.

Ukraine's Deputy Prime Minister, Mykhailo Federov, noted on that occasion that ‘the cloud cannot be bombed’ and that ‘Amazon made us more resilient.’ According to Tobias Liebetrau, however, the cloud is not just a technical solution – it is political.

‘By placing data in NATO countries, Ukraine's digital infrastructure was indirectly protected by the alliance's deterrence strategy. This creates new forms of digital sovereignty, where the core functions of the state can only be maintained through private infrastructures,’ he says.

Satellites with selective coverage

The researchers find another example in SpaceX's Starlink satellites. These secured Ukraine's communications on the battlefield – until Elon Musk chose to turn off coverage over Crimea. Musk said he wanted to prevent a ‘mini-Pearl Harbor’ that could trigger Russian nuclear escalation.

‘This is an example of how CEOs with access to critical infrastructure can make geostrategic decisions without government control,’ clarifies Tobias Liebetrau, elaborating:

‘It shows how the line between contractual obligation and moral responsibility becomes blurred when private actors have a direct influence on warfare.’

Microsoft as a witness to the war

Microsoft also plays a central role in Ukraine. With its expertise in cybersecurity, the company is an authoritative source of knowledge about Russian cyberattacks. Microsoft's reports are cited by both intelligence services and EU institutions – and are used as a basis for political decisions.

‘Microsoft is not just a cybersecurity provider – they help define what the threat is. This gives them a power of interpretation that states become dependent on,’ assesses Tobias Liebetrau.

This dependence can create competition between allied states, which in times of crisis must fight for Microsoft's attention and resources, he points out, summarising:

"We should no longer ask whether states are losing power to Big Tech. We must ask how power and responsibility are shared and negotiated through the infrastructures that bind them together."

The study, entitled ‘Infrastructuring public-private relations: Big Tech, the Ukraine War and implications to security governance’, was written by Tobias Liebetrau in collaboration with Jeppe T. Jacobsen, National Defence Technology Centre.

The study is published in the European Journal of International Relations and can be read here.