Towards Tallinn Manual 3.0

The two Tallinn Manuals, which are expert attempts at articulating how international law applies to cyber warfare and -operations, have sparked diverse opinions and interpretations across states and scholars. The CMS Report Towards Tallinn Manual 3.0 examines the disagreements and controversies that have arisen regarding the two Tallinn Manuals and provides recommendations for Denmark concerning the positions it should take ahead of Tallinn Manual 3.0. The report is authored by Dr. Keiko Kono, former Postdoc at CMS.

Previous paths of Tallinn Manuals and (dis)agreements and controversies
The report starts by tracking the paths that the Tallinn Manuals have previously followed. The paths are tracked by investigating the host organisation and process of Tallinn Manual 1 and 2, followed by questioning how stakeholders of the manual responded to the project’s deliverables after publication and whether they considered the project’s goals achieved. Secondly, the report focuses on points of (dis)agreement among the experts regarding the following topics: Espionage, extra-territorial enforcement jurisdiction, non-intervention, due diligence, collective countermeasures, the plea of necessity, and the notion of “attack” under International Humanitarian Law (IHL).

Recommendations
Based on the analysis, the report concludes with a number of potential tasks for the Tallinn Manual 3.0 and Denmark. The report emphasises expected changes in interpretations, especially regarding the international community, use of generative AI in espionage, the plea of necessity, collective countermeasures, extraterritorial enforcement jurisdiction, and the idea of “attack” in IHL. The potential changes are to be seen as tasks that Denmark can address by articulating its own positions and engaging with all the stakeholders involved in the TM3 project to ensure Danish perspectives are represented in Tallinn Manual 3.0.

The report can be downloaded here.

Topics