Here’s how the militaries of the US, China and Russia talk about blockchains — at least in public

In recent years, the militaries of China, Russia and the US have shown a growing interest in blockchain technology. But for what specific reasons?

At least part of the answer is probably classified. But officials from the armed forces of the three nations have issued a number of public statements about the technology. 

In search of distinct discussion themes, Sale Lilly and Bilyana Lilly, researchers at RAND Corporation, aggregated and analyzed the mentions of blockchain in open-source military publications and speeches by military leaders of the three nations. Their analysis of the data, which spans from 2016 to 2020, was recently published in the Royal United Services Institute Journal.  

Lilly and Lilly used methods called stance analysis and topic modeling to link mentions of blockchain and digital assets with sentiment and association to other topics. Topic modeling entails searching for words that tend to fall near certain keywords in order to identify trends in the discussion topics that occur alongside those keywords. Stance analysis is a means of rendering the attitudes behind online speech into a quantitative format. 

The researchers found some common threads. For instance, each respective military seems focused on its counterparts’ efforts in this area. “Chinese and Russian sources show a preoccupation with US military blockchain efforts, while the US sources reveal a preoccupation with Chinese and Russian blockchain developments,” the researchers write.

Lilly and Lilly conclude that “network security and military logistics are the dominant themes” in the discussions of blockchain by all three militaries.

But they also found unique themes in each of the three militaries’ statements.

The Chinese variation

Lilly and Lilly note that China’s discussions of blockchain “have been of two minds.” Though officials view permissionless networks and cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum as subversive technologies, politicians all the way up to President Xi Jingping have endorsed blockchain technology more broadly.

Based on topic modeling, the military in China is generally focused on blockchain applications in “logistics, equipment management and professional learning.” The People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) discussion “demonstrates nuance and pragmatic thought,” write the researchers, as well as an interest in “the conversion of commercial information technology into defence programmes.”

For instance, discussions in military journals focused on use cases that have already proved to work in commercial settings, such as supply chain management. China appears to be working to put battle orders on the blockchain — something that did not appear as a discussion topic in the other two countries.

The Chinese military also seems to be looking into blockchain as a means of decentralizing its propaganda network.

The Russian gambit

Lilly and Lilly found that relative to China and the US, there was much less open-source information available on the Russian military’s discussion of blockchains. This could be due to secrecy, though the researchers point out that the Russian army is typically fond of flashing its new technological capabilities.

Meanwhile, other parts of the Russian government seemed more interested than the military in promoting blockchain technology. The researchers speculated that this may reflect the fact that Russia has faced international economic sanctions, particularly since the 2014 invasion of Crimea.

“The military applications of blockchain are of secondary importance to Russia’s leadership and blockchain is first and foremost a tool for financial freedom from economic sanctions,” Lilly and Lilly write. 

Even so, they found the Russian military talking about blockchain in the context of secure military communications and, like China, the management of battle orders.

American defense

The US military, meanwhile, appears to see potential in blockchain for data protection, but still strongly associates the technology with the use of cryptocurrencies as a tool for sanctions evasion and terrorism financing. 

At a more fundamental level, the dominance of the US in the global financial system is reflected in discussions of blockchains and cryptocurrencies. Maintaining that dominance is a national security priority for the US, and that uniquely affects its perspective on digital currency. 

More particularly, America’s interest in crypto and sanctions is linked to its long-term engagement in the so-called War on Terror, and the PATRIOT Act’s extensive provisions for financial information gathering. Also, long-time US adversary North Korea has become adept at using crypto to finance its nuclear program.

Beyond sanctions, Lilly and Lilly’s analysis suggests that the US military has been unique in its exploration of blockchain as a means of auditing its supply chains and verifying credentials for network access.