By Melodie Ha
This summer, I was able to spend four weeks in the United Kingdom at Magdalene College, Cambridge University with the International Security and Intelligence Programme. Over the last few weeks, I was able to experience the unique Cambridge style of education through various lectures, seminars, and supervisions. A few of my favorite lectures featured Sir Richard Dearlove, the chair of our program, as well as the former head of MI6, the British Intelligence Service. Apart from the themed lectures and classes, we were expected to write a research essay on a topic of our own choosing. And of course, a big part of the experience was living the the quintessential Cambridge life, with formal dinners in the college dining halls, punting tours along the river Cam, Shakespeare in the gardens, afternoon tea, and other fun social events!
One of the highlights was being able to attend the annual ISI Conference, which took place on July 20-21st. Over the span of two days, we had the pleasure of listening to scholars, professionals, and former British intelligence and government officials speak to us on a range of international security topics, including the rise of artificial intelligence, law in international security, regional security issues in the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific, and more.
My biggest critique of this program is the lack of female representation in both the faculty and at the annual conference. I was disappointed to only see four women speak on panels at a two-day conference. Moreover, of all the lectures given by special guests, only two featured women. The field of international security is already largely dominated by men, and I would have appreciated a more diverse exposure in this program.
How will this experience help you in your job search and career?
This program was able to offer a unique perspective on the Cambridge education. Here, students are encouraged to pursue their own thoughts and passions, and the professors are merely guides to help you structure your research and your analytical methods. On the one hand, I was able to learn a lot about British intelligence and the unique relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom, and on the other hand, I had the independence to conduct my own research project.
I believe this program provided a new perspective on international security, and will broaden my own views on how to approach new challenges in security upon my return to Washington D.C. Moreover, ISI focused on the academia behind intelligence history and international security. That alone taught me to think from a new angle that was different from the policymaking angle I was accustomed to, and I was able to learn new research methods and develop the ability to ask smarter questions.
How did you come up with your project and why does it interest you?
I decided to focus my independent research paper on cyber conflict. I have always been interested in the topic of conflict in the cyber domain, and wanted to have the opportunity and time to sit down and pursue my research further. My paper aims to identify cyber espionage between the United States and China as a military conflict legally. I argue that the Office of Personnel Management hack in 2015 should have been properly attributed to China using a legal framework, and offer recommendations on how the U.S. should respond. Through the guidance of my supervisor who is a legal scholar, I was able to take a deeper look into the international laws surrounding military conflict and how that could apply in the cyber domain. I hope this paper will open up new avenues of research in dealing with Chinese cyber conflict.
Why did you choose this particular country/internship? Please be specific.
I was drawn to this program due to its focus on intelligence. At SSP, I have yet to take a class on intelligence, but it is an area that I have always been interested in. Being at Cambridge in the United Kingdom was the best place to explore this topic. In a way, Cambridge was the birthplace of some of the most incredible espionage cases in history; we studied the Cambridge Five, a spy ring that passed confidential information from the highest ranks of the British government to the Soviets for decades during World War II and the Cold War. We also learned about some of the greatest British spies, including Harold “Shergie” Shergold. He was famous for running Oleg Penkovsky, the GRU officer who informed the British that the Soviets were placing missiles in Cuba and, arguably altering the course of the Cold War. We were also able to take a field trip to the nearby Bletchley Park, Britain’s codebreaking center during WWII where Alan Turing produced Ultra intelligence, the Duxford Air Show, and the Churchill War Rooms in London. The United Kingdom was the perfect place to learn about intelligence and to feel like a part of history.
One of the highlights was being able to attend the annual ISI Conference, which took place on July 20-21st. Over the span of two days, we had the pleasure of listening to scholars, professionals, and former British intelligence and government officials speak to us on a range of international security topics, including the rise of artificial intelligence, law in international security, regional security issues in the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific, and more.
My biggest critique of this program is the lack of female representation in both the faculty and at the annual conference. I was disappointed to only see four women speak on panels at a two-day conference. Moreover, of all the lectures given by special guests, only two featured women. The field of international security is already largely dominated by men, and I would have appreciated a more diverse exposure in this program.
How will this experience help you in your job search and career?
This program was able to offer a unique perspective on the Cambridge education. Here, students are encouraged to pursue their own thoughts and passions, and the professors are merely guides to help you structure your research and your analytical methods. On the one hand, I was able to learn a lot about British intelligence and the unique relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom, and on the other hand, I had the independence to conduct my own research project.
I believe this program provided a new perspective on international security, and will broaden my own views on how to approach new challenges in security upon my return to Washington D.C. Moreover, ISI focused on the academia behind intelligence history and international security. That alone taught me to think from a new angle that was different from the policymaking angle I was accustomed to, and I was able to learn new research methods and develop the ability to ask smarter questions.
How did you come up with your project and why does it interest you?
I decided to focus my independent research paper on cyber conflict. I have always been interested in the topic of conflict in the cyber domain, and wanted to have the opportunity and time to sit down and pursue my research further. My paper aims to identify cyber espionage between the United States and China as a military conflict legally. I argue that the Office of Personnel Management hack in 2015 should have been properly attributed to China using a legal framework, and offer recommendations on how the U.S. should respond. Through the guidance of my supervisor who is a legal scholar, I was able to take a deeper look into the international laws surrounding military conflict and how that could apply in the cyber domain. I hope this paper will open up new avenues of research in dealing with Chinese cyber conflict.
Why did you choose this particular country/internship? Please be specific.
I was drawn to this program due to its focus on intelligence. At SSP, I have yet to take a class on intelligence, but it is an area that I have always been interested in. Being at Cambridge in the United Kingdom was the best place to explore this topic. In a way, Cambridge was the birthplace of some of the most incredible espionage cases in history; we studied the Cambridge Five, a spy ring that passed confidential information from the highest ranks of the British government to the Soviets for decades during World War II and the Cold War. We also learned about some of the greatest British spies, including Harold “Shergie” Shergold. He was famous for running Oleg Penkovsky, the GRU officer who informed the British that the Soviets were placing missiles in Cuba and, arguably altering the course of the Cold War. We were also able to take a field trip to the nearby Bletchley Park, Britain’s codebreaking center during WWII where Alan Turing produced Ultra intelligence, the Duxford Air Show, and the Churchill War Rooms in London. The United Kingdom was the perfect place to learn about intelligence and to feel like a part of history.