What is behind the spying indictment?

The United States indicted five Chinese military officers on May 19, playing a "thief crying stop thief" farce again.

The fact that the United States, with the world's most advanced cyberspace technology, its high-profile commitment to set up a cyber army, its notorious Prism programs and its long-term wiretapping into Chinese enterprises such as Huawei, should present itself as a victim of cyber attacks, is beyond absurdity.

But what is behind the farce is not simple as the Chinese saying "those who are ignorant are the boldest", nor is it simply gangster logic. As I myself have participated for a dozen or so times in the dialogues between China and the United States on cyber security, I am able to see the rationale the United States holds on this issue.

At the end of the last century, the United States took a completely different position on the issue of cyber security than it does today. When Russia submitted the draft resolution "Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security" to the UN in 1998, the United States refused to talk about the issue on international occasions, and was indifferent to international cooperation in cyber security. When it came to October 2006, a 169 "yes" and 1 "no" vote eventually passed the resolution, the "no" vote was cast by the United States. The veto, by a nation that now flaunts its responsibility for cyber security, should never be forgotten.

The United States turned down international cooperation because of its own interest. It has set its eyes on military and economic interests in cyberspace from day one, and has been committed to developing its prowess in cyberspace in order to maintain its dominance in the new century. Thus it comes as no surprise that it would not allow its hands to be tied by letting the resolution pass. And since it was not prepared at that time, it chose to stay silent on the issue.

But when the United States is geared up, it begins to restrain other countries in their development of cyber technology and spearhead the formulation of international rules -- just as it did after it armed itself with nuclear weapons. Were the restrictions intended to prevent other nations from developing cyber attack capabilities, they might as well be counted as a peaceful move. But as a matter of fact, the ultimate aim of the United States is to hype the cyber threat theory of and create an unfriendly environment for other nations to develop independent and innovative information technology. For its part, the United States could maintain its own advantage in information technology, infiltrate into other countries' cyberspace, continue to build its cyber army and eventually, impair other nations' capabilities in the new revolution of information.