New Technologies in International Law / Tymofeyeva, Crhák et al.

that cyber sanctions with its specificities and distinctive nature (as discussed above) as compared to ‘traditional’ sanctions were a direct result of the emergence and deployment of new technologies. In this sense, there is already a de facto divergence between digital/ non-digital sphere to some degree and we shall see if this fragmentation will intensify. Fourthly, it is hardly surprising that digitalisation/new technologies as novel developments caused a paucity in the international legal field. There is ambiguity or uncertainty regarding the legal regulation of cyberattacks or other aspects of the cyber space, as explained above. The relatively new cyber sanctions regime is also a case in point. The legal paucity in situations of novel societal or technological developments is, more often than not, deliberately maintained for strategic and political reasons. 570 The EU or other sanctioning powers seem to prefer the status quo, which gives them a degree of flexibility, being wary of committing to international rules that might, at the end of the day, be a limiting factor. On the other hand, middle and emerging powers could harness this uncertainty in the cyberspace too, which shows again the janus-faced character of these developments. Thus, the argument regarding the maintenance and reproduction of inequalities (see above) is not that straightforward. Conclusion Cyber sanctions are a relatively new phenomenon closely connected to the rise of new digital technologies. In particular, cyber sanctions have been adopted by major powers (e. g. US, EU) as a reaction against malicious cyber activities. This article aimed to expand and contribute to some aspects of the discussion on the relationship between digitalisation/new technologies and international law, focusing in particular on EU cyber sanctions regime, a relatively new phenomenon closely connected to the rise of new digital technologies. Let us sum up some of the conclusion(s) and future prospects . First, we discussed some of the specificities but also problems with regard to EU cyber sanctions. From the international legal perspective, we focused on the question of immunity law that remains unresolved for now, as there is no relevant judicial practice. In general, we outlined the janus-faced character of new digital technologies in the context of sanctions (i. e. there is a potential to undermine the effectivity of sanctions, while these tools could be in the future deployed to more effective enforcement). Furthermore, we critically assessed some of the arguments made by Dana Burchadt concerning the entrenchment of existing inequalities due to digitalization. We argued that the picture is more nuanced due to the ongoing shifts in the power-structure on the international level and the indeterminate character of, in our case, EU cyber sanctions regime, and the cyberspace more generally. So, what are the future prospects? In that regard, we propose that the imposition of cyber sanctions will not wither away and may even increase as a response to malicious cyber activities There are two reasons for this: first, there is a high probability that malicious cyber activities will increase, considering the current geopolitical tension between the US, EU, China and the emerging new powers, and furthermore, an ever

570 Poli S, Sommario E, ‘The Rationale and the Perils of Failing to Invoke State Responsibility for Cyber Attacks: The Case of the EU Cyber Sanctions’ (2023) 24 German Law Journal 522.

133