Brazil is a federal republic with a longstanding tradition of non-alignment and active diplomacy in multilateral security forums. It is cautious about binding international frameworks on cyber warfare, preferring dialogue and confidence-building measures over hard rules. Brazil's position on autonomous weapons is shaped by its traditional opposition to arms races and commitment to international humanitarian law, but it tends to seek consensus rather than confrontation in UNSC debates.

China is a single-party state with rapidly advancing cyber warfare capabilities and one of the world's most ambitious autonomous weapons development programmes. It calls for international norms on cyber warfare in UN forums while conducting extensive state-sponsored cyber espionage and offensive operations. China supports frameworks that would constrain Western cyber capabilities while opposing mechanisms that would create accountability for its own actions or limit its military-technological development.

Costa Rica is a small Central American republic that abolished its military in 1948 and has built its foreign policy identity around international law, human rights, and peaceful conflict resolution. It is one of the world's most consistent advocates for norms limiting cyber warfare and the development of autonomous weapons systems, arguing that these technologies pose existential risks to the international order. Costa Rica often punches far above its weight in international security debates by articulating principled legal positions.

Estonia is a small parliamentary republic in Northern Europe that suffered one of the world's first significant state-sponsored cyberattacks in 2007, attributed to Russia. This experience transformed it into one of the most active international advocates for norms against cyber warfare and has led it to develop significant national cyber defence capabilities. Estonia is a founding voice within NATO's Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence and brings both lived experience and legal expertise to UNSC debates on cyber threats.

France is a permanent member of the Security Council and a nuclear power with sophisticated military and intelligence capabilities, including offensive cyber capacity. It supports the development of international norms on cyber warfare and has been relatively open to discussing limits on autonomous weapons systems compared to other major powers. France approaches these debates with a combination of strategic pragmatism and commitment to international humanitarian law principles.

India is the world's most populous democracy and a rising military power with growing cyber capabilities and an active autonomous weapons development programme. It approaches UNSC debates on these issues with strategic caution, reluctant to accept binding frameworks that could constrain its own military modernisation or align it too closely with any single bloc. India supports dialogue on cyber norms in principle while protecting its freedom of action in practice.

Iran is an Islamic republic with significant and growing cyber warfare capabilities, having both suffered attacks — most notably the Stuxnet attack on its nuclear programme — and conducted its own operations against regional and Western targets. It approaches UNSC debates on cyber warfare with deep suspicion of Western-led frameworks, viewing them as designed to entrench existing power imbalances rather than create genuine equality. Iran strongly opposes autonomous weapons norms that it views as constraining its ability to develop asymmetric military capabilities.

Israel is a parliamentary democracy and one of the world's most technologically advanced military powers, with extensive experience deploying cyber operations and autonomous systems in conflict. It strongly resists binding international constraints on autonomous weapons, arguing that such systems can reduce civilian casualties when properly designed. Israel views proposals for strict cyber warfare norms with suspicion, particularly when they could limit its freedom to act against perceived existential threats.

Japan is a constitutional monarchy whose pacifist constitution has historically constrained its military posture, making it a natural advocate for limiting the militarisation of emerging technologies. It supports international frameworks to prevent the weaponisation of AI and autonomous systems and has invested in diplomatic initiatives to promote responsible state behaviour in cyberspace. Japan approaches these issues from a position of alignment with Western democracies combined with genuine constitutional commitment to peaceful dispute resolution.

Nigeria is a federal republic and Africa's most populous nation with a significant and growing exposure to cyber threats, including ransomware attacks on critical infrastructure and cybercrime originating both domestically and externally. It supports international cooperation to establish norms against cyber warfare and represents a major developing-nation voice in UNSC debates on emerging technology threats. Nigeria advocates for frameworks that protect less technologically advanced states from exploitation by more capable cyber powers.

 Russia is an authoritarian state and one of the world's most active state-level cyber aggressors, having conducted major operations against Ukraine, Estonia, Georgia, and numerous Western countries. It simultaneously advocates in UN forums for a state-controlled internet and internationally binding cyber norms — but primarily as a way to constrain Western cyber operations while preserving its own. Russia resists meaningful accountability frameworks and has used its veto power to block UNSC action on cyber and autonomous weapons issues.

South Africa is a constitutional republic with an active and independent foreign policy that frequently bridges Global South and Western positions in security debates. It supports international norms against cyber warfare and the militarisation of AI, approaching these issues through the lens of international humanitarian law and the protection of civilian populations. South Africa is wary of frameworks that could entrench the cyber advantages of major powers while leaving smaller states vulnerable.

South Korea is a presidential republic facing a persistent and serious cyber threat from North Korea, which has conducted numerous disruptive and financially motivated cyberattacks against South Korean targets. This direct exposure makes it a natural supporter of international norms against cyber warfare, and its advanced technology sector gives it both capability and credibility in these debates. South Korea supports international frameworks on autonomous weapons that incorporate meaningful human control requirements.

The United Kingdom is a permanent Security Council member with significant offensive cyber capabilities developed through its National Cyber Force. It supports international norms on responsible state behaviour in cyberspace but resists binding frameworks that would limit its own operational flexibility. On autonomous weapons, the UK has adopted a position that existing international humanitarian law is sufficient, opposing calls for a preemptive ban on lethal autonomous weapons systems.

The United States is the world's dominant cyber power and a significant developer of autonomous weapons systems, including drone technology used in armed conflict. It supports voluntary norms against certain cyber operations but resists binding international agreements that would constrain its own offensive capabilities or create legal accountability for its actions in cyberspace. The USA is deeply resistant to a comprehensive ban on autonomous weapons, arguing that human oversight requirements are sufficient.