18 Improving Transparency: International Law and State Cyber Operations eral participants called for more attention to the role of international human rights law in cyberspace; a topic that the Committee could address alone or in concert with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. 27. In addition, the Committee might seek to improve transparency around how international law protects the healthcare sector. The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the region in both humanitarian and economic terms. Unfortunately, cyber threats risk even further harm as witnessed by cyber-attacks on hospitals and, most recently, vaccine research efforts. The Committee thus could focus attention on a topic of critical current interest that would assist Member States and their nationals throughout the region.29 Proposal 3: Support or Undertake Additional Legal Capacity Building Efforts 28. CICTE and several Member States have already undertaken significant and important efforts to build capacity on cyber-issues among Member States—both the capacity to understand the technical nature of ICTs and the threats they pose, as well as the capacity to understand and evaluate the legal issues these threats raise. Yet, both the questionnaire responses and the June 23 consultations make it clear that much more work remains to be done, especially in the context of legal capacity building. The participants in the June 23 consultations where quite vocal about the need for additional capacity building on international law’s application in the cyber context. Similar views were expressed by several Member States (e.g., Argentina, Canada and the United States) in their recent comments to the OEWG.30 Thus, the Committee For one ongoing effort to clarify international law protections of the healthcare sector from cyberthreats, see Dapo Akande, Duncan Hollis, Harold Hongju Koh, and Jim O’Brien, Oxford Statement on the International Law Protections against Cyber Operations Targeting the Health Care Sector, JUST SECURITY (May 21, 2020) (cross posted at OPINIO JURIS & EJILTALK!). 30 See, e.g., Argentina, Initial “Pre-draft” of the report of the OEWG on developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security; Michael Walma, Canadian Comments on Draft OEWG Report (April 6, 2020); United States, United States Comments on the Chair’s Pre-draft of the Report of the U.N. Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) (April 6, 2020). These (and other) national Statements are available at United Nations, Open-ended Working Group, at https://www.un.org/disarmament/open-ended-working-group/. 29 Inter-American Juridical Committee Fifth Report would appear to have solid support should it choose to signal a willingness to lend its expertise or resources to existing capacity building efforts. 29. Alternatively, the Committee might consider whether it could support or conduct its own additional (and more diverse) capacity building efforts. Courses on international law’s application to cyber-space could be supplemented with courses that offer some “technical training” to non-technical experts to assist State diplomats and other representatives in accurately understanding and gauging how cyber threats operate. Alternatively, the Committee might use its meetings with Foreign Ministry Legal Advisers to “game” certain scenarios involving cyber-threats to give government lawyers more opportunities to apply relevant legal rules and standards (and, in doing so, help facilitate a State’s development of its own view of how the law applies). Finally, the Committee might wish to regularize conversations like those that occurred in June – by hosting and moderating conversations on the application of international law among Member States (and perhaps at some point, other relevant stakeholders from industry and civil society). 30. In short, thru more transparency and capacity building efforts, the Committee could make an important contribution to improving the application (and efficacy) of international law as a regulatory tool in cyberspace. Moreover, it could do this on its own or in concert with other parts of the OAS, certain Member States or other organizations. The ICRC, for example, has expressed enthusiasm for supporting more capacity building efforts around international law in the region. 31. It has been a real privilege to work on this topic during my time on the Committee. I continue to believe that cyber threats – including operations by States and their proxies – create risks that have significant economic, humanitarian, and national security consequences. International law provides a time-tested mechanism for regulating new threats. Yet, technical, political, and legal challenges have made the law generally (and the State practice and opinio juris that comprise custom specifically) less visible—and thus less effective—to date. With more transparency on how States understand the law to operate, it should have a greater opportunity to play a much-needed regulatory role in restraining unwanted behavior and facilitating greater assistance and cooperation. It is my hope that reporting on the questionnaire International Law and State Cyber Operations 19