Commercial Technology Infrastructure Emerges as a Modern Conflict Target

As cloud services, satellite networks, undersea cables, data centers, identity systems, and communications infrastructure become more deeply integrated into state resilience and military operations, they are also becoming strategic chokepoints whose disruption can affect conflict outcomes, economic continuity, and public stability simultaneously. This dynamic makes technology companies a contested infrastructure during a conflict; one side may depend on them to keep government, military, and civilian systems running, while an adversary may seek to deny, disrupt, exploit, or destroy them. These services are commercial, but they become operationally consequential for military forces during crises because they host state data, route communications, authenticate users, distribute apps, provide cyber defense, and preserve connectivity. 

The ongoing conflict between Israel, Iran, and the US is only the most recent example of how commercial technology infrastructure is increasingly becoming part of the operational battlespace during crises. The combination of Iran’s verbal threats against Western technology firms operating in the Gulf, Tehran-engineered cyberattacks on several Western firms, and strikes targeting data centers in the Gulf has demonstrated that private digital infrastructure is increasingly functioning as strategic terrain during crises and armed conflicts. The vulnerabilities facing technology firms have become more evident as governments and militaries increasingly rely on commercial digital infrastructure - including cloud services, communications platforms, cybersecurity support, artificial intelligence, and satellite services - to sustain operations, protect data, transfer information, and influence conflict outcomes.

Russia’s war in Ukraine has also demonstrated how commercial technology infrastructure can become operationally consequential during modern conflict. Commercial cloud operations, satellite connectivity, cyber security support, and digital communications platforms helped sustain Ukrainian government services after Russian attacks degraded local networks. The conflict showed how decisions made by private technology firms regarding service access, geographic restrictions, and continuity support can directly influence operational tempo and state resilience without exercising formal political authority. 

Today, satellite networks, undersea cables, and technical functions increasingly support intelligence collection, or targeting for governments, creating a wider threat landscape for all users. As a result, adversaries are more likely to view these companies and their regional infrastructure as part of the opposing side’s operational ecosystem.

International humanitarian law generally protects civilian personnel and property; however, the enmeshing of commercial and military infrastructure increases legal and operational ambiguity. Adversaries can exploit that ambiguity to justify cyber and kinetic attacks, physical threats, coercive messaging, or pressure against employees and regional facilities. Governments rely on providers for intelligence support and cyber defense, meaning firms can be pushed into quasi-state roles without formal public authority, increasing legal, reputational, and targeting risk.

Client organizations face heightened continuity risk because many critical business functions depend on a concentrated group of technology providers operating in geopolitically exposed environments. Organizations that appear operationally diversified may still share common cloud or cybersecurity providers that only become visible during geopolitical disruptions. As a result, provider exposure can rapidly become downstream operational exposure for client organizations. Exposure is highest for financial services, logistics, aviation, energy, telecommunications, healthcare, media, and companies operating in Israel, the Gulf, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, or other conflict-adjacent markets.  

Both the conflict in the Middle East and the war between Russia and Ukraine have opened a new battlefield front within the commercial ecosystem, with implications for business continuity that will persist well beyond current conflicts. As commercial infrastructure becomes more deeply intertwined with military operations, it will likely become harder for technology firms and their customers to separate conflict exposure from normal business operations.  

• The notion of digital neutrality will decline as governments expect providers to maintain allied services, restrict adversary access, and support sovereign cloud and domestic artificial intelligence programs during crises
• Insurers will likely begin pricing this exposure through higher premiums, stricter underwriting, and closer scrutiny of data-center locations, government contracts, and conflict-linked revenue.  
• Review physical security, blast and drone exposure, access controls, backup power, fuel supply, fire suppression, repair logistics, and evacuation triggers for sites in politically exposed regions.
• Strengthen employee protection through travel controls, executive security, remote-work triggers, harassment monitoring, insider-threat controls, and crisis communications protocols.
• Map critical technology dependencies beyond primary cloud workloads. Firms should identify which services would fail if a provider region became unavailable, if a provider restricted access, or if government action compelled a service change.
• Test provider-side disruption scenarios. Practical controls include cross-region backups outside exposed markets, restoration testing into alternate regions, selective multi-cloud or minimum-viable-service designs for critical workflows, offline communications options, and contractual requirements for notification, portability, and crisis support.
• Review provider contracts for war exclusions, sanctions changes, emergency migration rights, data access, liability limits, and service withdrawal. The objective should be a tested ability to sustain priority operations if a strategic technology provider becomes degraded, physically disrupted, or legally compelled to alter services during a crisis.

Learn more about leveraging our industry-leading regional and subject matter experts for intelligence that helps your organization stay ahead of risks to your people and operations.