Just a decade ago, the debate over sovereignty was primarily associated with territorial integrity, military strength, or energy security. Today, however, nations are entering a new era in which one of the most important pillars of national security is the ability to control their own digital space. Digital infrastructure has become a fundamental prerequisite for the functioning of the state, the economy, and society. Without stable data networks, cloud systems, telecommunications, cybersecurity, and trustworthy information channels, it is impossible to effectively manage public administration, the military, healthcare, or critical infrastructure.

Digital sovereignty therefore refers to a state’s ability to make autonomous decisions regarding its own data, digital systems, technologies, and infrastructure without dependence on foreign powers, foreign technology corporations, or hostile intelligence services.

The Czech Republic finds itself in a unique position. On the one hand, it is firmly anchored in NATO and the European Union and has access to the technological and security resources of the democratic West. On the other hand, however, it is heavily dependent on imported technologies, foreign cloud platforms, proprietary software, and scarce human resources. This combination creates vulnerabilities that can be exploited against the Czech state in times of geopolitical crisis, hybrid conflict, or economic pressure.

At the same time, the digital space has become a new battleground for power competition between democratic states and authoritarian regimes. Russia systematically uses cyber operations and disinformation campaigns as tools of destabilization. China is building global technological influence through infrastructure, telecommunications networks, and control of supply chains. The United States dominates cloud and software platforms, which form the backbone of the digital economy.

For the Czech Republic, digital sovereignty is thus ceasing to be an abstract technological concept. It is becoming a matter of the state’s strategic survival in an environment where wars may not begin with a tank attack, but could start with a network collapse, a massive data breach, or the paralysis of state systems.

Digital Sovereignty as a Component of Modern National Defense

Modern armies, government agencies, and the economy are now vitally dependent on digital systems. Any outage of cloud infrastructure, any disruption to telecommunications networks, or any successful cyberattack can have immediate consequences for the functioning of the state.

Digital infrastructure today plays a role similar to that of railways, power grids, or airports in the 20th century. The difference is that digital systems are far more interconnected, centralized, and vulnerable to remote attacks.

If a state fails to ensure the protection of its own data, control over critical digital infrastructure, the security of communication networks, technological independence, a sufficient number of experts, and society’s resilience against information operations, it becomes strategically vulnerable in the long term.

In the case of the Czech Republic, the problem is exacerbated by the fact that the domestic technological base is relatively limited and the state has long outsourced key parts of its digital infrastructure to foreign suppliers.

The result is a situation where the state often does not own the infrastructure on which its data runs, the software it uses, the communication platforms through which it communicates, or a sufficient number of experts capable of protecting these systems. This creates an environment in which the digital space can be exploited as a tool for political, economic, and security coercion.

Seven Scenarios of a Breach of the Czech Republic’s Digital Sovereignty

In order to assess individual scenarios not only descriptively but also strategically, it is advisable to use risk weighting. Each scenario can be assigned an indicative weight on a scale of 1–10, where a value of 10 represents an existential or systemic risk to the functioning of the state, and a value of 1 represents only a minor threat with limited impact.

The assessment methodology is based on four basic parameters. The first is the probability of the scenario occurring, i.e., how realistic it is that a given type of incident will actually occur within the next few years. The second parameter is the extent of the impact on the functioning of the state, the economy, critical infrastructure, and society. The third factor is the speed of escalation – some threats develop gradually, while others can escalate into a nationwide crisis within a matter of hours. The fourth parameter is the difficulty of recovery and returning to normal operations. There is a fundamental difference, for example, between a temporary system outage and a massive data breach, the consequences of which can be practically irreversible.

The resulting weighting therefore represents not merely the “strength of the attack,” but a comprehensive assessment of a scenario’s strategic danger. The highest ratings are assigned to risks that combine a high probability of occurrence, extensive impacts, rapid escalation, and difficult recovery. Conversely, lower weights are assigned to scenarios that have more long-term and indirect effects, even if they may be strategically very significant.

From this perspective, the most serious threats appear to be a cyberattack on critical infrastructure, a massive leak of government and personal data, and dependence on foreign cloud infrastructure. These scenarios have the potential to directly paralyze the functioning of the state.
 

Telecommunications dependence and vendor lock-in represent long-term structural threats that may not be visible on a daily basis but dramatically limit the state’s ability to act autonomously during a crisis.  Disinformation operations and the brain drain of technological talent have a slower impact but systematically weaken societal resilience and the state’s ability to respond to other types of crises.

It is also important to note that individual scenarios cannot be assessed in isolation. In practice, they often reinforce one another. A shortage of experts increases vulnerability to cyberattacks, cloud dependency amplifies the impact of data breaches, and disinformation campaigns can significantly complicate crisis management during a technical incident or geopolitical crisis. It is precisely this interconnectedness that represents one of the most fundamental aspects of a modern state’s digital security.

1. Reliance on foreign cloud infrastructure (scenario severity: 8.5/10)

The Czech public sector and private sector are increasingly relying on cloud services provided by global technology giants, particularly Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud. The cloud offers flexibility, lower costs, and rapid scalability, but it also creates an entirely new type of strategic dependency.

The key issue is that most of these services fall under U.S. jurisdiction. The U.S. CLOUD Act allows U.S. authorities to demand access to data operated by U.S. companies regardless of where it is physically stored.

From the perspective of digital sovereignty, this is a fundamental problem. The Czech state may gradually lose control over citizens’ data, healthcare systems, registries, or financial databases. In the event of a geopolitical crisis, there is also a risk of restricted access to cloud services or a legal conflict between European and U.S. legislation.

The greatest danger of this scenario lies in its subtlety. Cloud dependency does not appear to be a security crisis until a crisis actually arises. However, every additional migrated system increases the cost of a potential return. The state may thus find itself in a situation where it is no longer able to effectively change its technological infrastructure without massive economic and operational impacts. It is precisely the asymmetry between the convenience of normal operations and the potentially catastrophic consequences in a crisis situation that makes this scenario exceptionally dangerous.

2. Cyberattack on critical infrastructure (scenario severity: 10/10)

A cyberattack on critical infrastructure represents the most serious scenario for a breach of the Czech Republic’s digital sovereignty. The energy sector, hospitals, transportation, water management, and the banking sector are increasingly interconnected with digital systems and industrial control platforms.

These systems were often designed at a time when massive cyberattacks were not anticipated. Digitalization has therefore created new vulnerabilities that can be exploited by state actors as well as organized hacker groups.

Modern cyber operations are not improvised attacks by individuals. They are long-term and systematic operations supported by states. Attackers often spend months or years mapping the infrastructure, gaining access to systems, and waiting for the right moment.
It is precisely the latent nature of these operations that poses one of the greatest threats. An attack may not come immediately. An adversary may be present within the infrastructure for a long time and activate malicious code only at the moment of a geopolitical crisis. The consequences can be devastating. A successful attack on the power grid or telecommunications infrastructure can, within a matter of hours, cause transportation collapse, hospital shutdowns, supply chain disruptions, economic chaos, and public panic.

Unlike a conventional military attack, however, it can be very difficult to quickly identify the source of the attack or the extent of the compromise of systems. This complicates both the defense and the state’s political response.

3. Telecommunications dependence on untrustworthy suppliers (scenario severity: 8/10)

Telecommunications infrastructure is the nervous system of a modern state. Without stable and secure networks, it is impossible to effectively manage defense, crisis situations, or the functioning of the economy. Building 5G networks is therefore not merely a technological issue, but also a matter of geopolitics and national security. The security debate surrounding the Chinese companies Huawei and ZTE has shown that technological infrastructure can potentially be used as a tool of strategic influence. The problem lies not only in the hardware itself, but also in the legal environment of the supplier’s country of origin.

If there is a possibility that an infrastructure manufacturer could be forced by an authoritarian regime to cooperate with intelligence services, a long-term security risk arises. The danger of this scenario is that it may not lead to an immediate network outage. It may involve covert and long-term operations – such as metadata collection, communication monitoring, selective service degradation, or the ability to disrupt the network in a crisis. In the context of hybrid conflicts, it is precisely this covert capability that is strategically extremely valuable.

4. Disinformation campaigns powered by artificial intelligence (scenario severity: 7.5/10)

Artificial intelligence is fundamentally changing the nature of information operations. What once required extensive human resources can now be automated using generative models. Modern AI makes it possible to produce realistic text, fake videos, deepfake audio, and mass social media campaigns on an unprecedented scale.

The Czech Republic has long been exposed to information operations aimed at undermining trust in democratic institutions, NATO, or the European Union. The advent of generative AI dramatically reduces the cost of conducting these operations.

The fundamental problem lies in the fact that the goal of modern disinformation campaigns may not be to convince the public of a single specific lie. Often, it is enough to create an environment of informational chaos in which the public ceases to trust any authorities.

In a crisis situation, the impact can be enormous. A fake video of a politician, an alleged declaration of mobilization, or manipulated crisis communication can trigger panic faster than the state can react. The risk of this scenario also lies in its low cost. Technologies that were available only to states just a few years ago are now commercially accessible to virtually anyone.

5. Vendor lock-in and technological dependence (scenario severity: 7/10)

The Czech public sector has long been dependent on proprietary software platforms from foreign vendors. This dependency has developed gradually over the past few decades and now creates structural constraints on the state’s ability to act autonomously. Vendor lock-in refers to a situation where systems, data, processes, and employees are so tied to a specific technological ecosystem that switching suppliers becomes extremely costly or practically impossible.

At first glance, this does not appear to be a dramatic security threat. The systems function, government agencies operate, and the infrastructure runs. The real problem only becomes apparent when the state needs to conduct a security audit, change technology, reduce costs, or respond to a geopolitical shift. That is when it becomes clear that technological dependence can escalate into political and economic dependence. A state that does not understand the technologies on which it operates and is unable to audit or operate them independently gradually loses part of its strategic autonomy.

6. Massive leak of government and personal data (scenario severity: 9/10)

The digitization of public administration brings a host of benefits, but it also creates an unprecedented concentration of sensitive data. Population registries, electronic health records, digital identities, and tax systems are extremely attractive targets for government intelligence agencies, organized crime, and geopolitical actors.

A massive data breach is among the most dangerous scenarios because its consequences are often irreversible. A system outage can be fixed, but leaked data cannot be retrieved. A health data breach can harm individuals, a breach of security agency employees’ identities can endanger the state, and a breach of infrastructure data can facilitate future cyber operations.

The severity of this scenario is further heightened by artificial intelligence’s ability to analyze vast amounts of information and link seemingly unrelated databases. Data that seems insignificant today may have critical intelligence value in the future. The more the state digitizes, the more important the issue of data security becomes. Without citizens’ trust in information protection, it is impossible to build a functional digital state in the long term.

7. Brain drain – the exodus of tech talent (scenario severity: 6.5/10)

Digital sovereignty is not merely a matter of infrastructure. It is, above all, a matter of people. The Czech Republic has long faced a brain drain of top-tier technology experts to other countries. The best graduates from technical universities often leave to join multinational companies or foreign research centers. The reasons include higher salaries, better research conditions, access to capital, and stronger technology ecosystems. At first glance, this scenario may not seem dramatic. In reality, however, it represents a deep structural problem. Without a sufficient number of experts, it is impossible to effectively protect critical infrastructure, audit cloud systems, develop secure software, or counter sophisticated cyber threats.

Moreover, the brain drain is a multiplier risk. It may not cause a crisis on its own, but it significantly increases the likelihood of failure in managing all other scenarios. Human capital is, in fact, the most important component of digital sovereignty. Technology can be purchased. However, the ability to understand, develop, and defend it requires the long-term building of knowledge, institutions, and expertise.

Conclusion: The Digital Realm as a New Strategic Battleground

Digital sovereignty is becoming one of the key security issues of the 21st century. It is not merely a matter of IT infrastructure or technological modernization. It concerns a state’s ability to maintain its autonomy, stability, and functionality in an environment of growing geopolitical competition.

Scenarios of digital sovereignty disruption show that a modern state can be weakened without a single military attack. The paralysis of cloud systems, data compromise, cyberattacks on infrastructure, or information operations can have consequences as severe as those of a conventional conflict.

The Czech Republic therefore faces a strategic challenge: to understand the digital space not as a technical appendage of the state, but as one of the fundamental dimensions of national security. In the era of artificial intelligence, hybrid conflicts, and growing technological rivalry, a simple rule applies: a state that loses control over its own digital space gradually loses the ability to fully exercise its sovereignty.