Now, instead of the so-called classic “conventional” or “total” wars between states and coalitions, wars of a new conceptual type, known as hybrid warfare, are increasingly emerging. In modern conditions, war has significantly changed its essence and content, acquiring a hybrid character, although, according to experts, such signs of war are not completely new and unprecedented. In other words, hybrid wars and their possible substitutes (such as proxy wars) have already occurred in world history. Hybrid warfare has been used in various forms and scales for many decades and even centuries. Therefore, although the forms and instruments of hybrid warfare may change, the historical context and mechanisms of interstate conflicts often remain similar.
If the military sphere and the use of armed forces are chosen as the main tools for resolving interstate contradictions and confrontations, then a war arises in its classical and sense. During a hybrid warfare, aggression is waged simultaneously in all four spheres: political, economic, informational, and military. Consequently, the information, socio-political, ideological, and economic components of influencing the enemy come to the fore not by force but by information. In other words, hybrid warfare is dominated by non-military forms of struggle. This is due to the fact that at a certain stage of human development, economic, financial, and informational instruments of interstate confrontation have acquired the ability to cause losses commensurate with the losses from the use of means of armed violence.
Moreover, in the modern period, the concept of “hybrid warfare” is often used as a synonym for asymmetric, non-conventional, non-traditional, dispersed, etc. type of interstate confrontation. Therefore, Western military policy has already incorporated the concepts of “hybrid warfare” and “hybrid warfare threats” into its official terminology. In particular, since 2004, the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) has recognized the term “hybrid warfare” as the most acceptable for denoting new forms of aggression. In the conceptual documents of the United States and NATO, it is stated that hybrid warfare is a combination of conventional, irregular, and asymmetric means combined with constant manipulation of political, and ideological differences.
So, during hybrid warfare, purely military tools become auxiliary in achieving the military-strategic goals that the aggressor sets for itself. The combination of different tools (military and non-military) in the implementation of aggression against another state determines its hybrid nature. At the same time, before the start of an armed conflict, the aggressor focuses its main efforts on destabilizing the socio-political situation, provoking public discontent with the current government and inciting separatist sentiments in society, discrediting the military-political leadership of the country against which aggressive actions are directed.
For a more detailed look at the issue of hybrid warfare, it is worth referring to the book Hybrid Warfare (History, Politics, and Security), which examines hybrid warfare in all its aspects:
Historical Examples: The author gives examples of hybrid warfare from the past, analyzes their features and consequences.
Current trends: The book explores modern tactics and strategies of hybrid warfare, including the use of cyber threats, information operations, economic pressure, etc.
Recommendations for counteraction: Based on the analysis, the author proposes specific measures that states and institutions can use to effectively counter hybrid threats.
This book can be useful for a wide range of interested readers - from academics to government policy makers and security professionals.
If the military sphere and the use of armed forces are chosen as the main tools for resolving interstate contradictions and confrontations, then a war arises in its classical and sense. During a hybrid warfare, aggression is waged simultaneously in all four spheres: political, economic, informational, and military. Consequently, the information, socio-political, ideological, and economic components of influencing the enemy come to the fore not by force but by information. In other words, hybrid warfare is dominated by non-military forms of struggle. This is due to the fact that at a certain stage of human development, economic, financial, and informational instruments of interstate confrontation have acquired the ability to cause losses commensurate with the losses from the use of means of armed violence.
Moreover, in the modern period, the concept of “hybrid warfare” is often used as a synonym for asymmetric, non-conventional, non-traditional, dispersed, etc. type of interstate confrontation. Therefore, Western military policy has already incorporated the concepts of “hybrid warfare” and “hybrid warfare threats” into its official terminology. In particular, since 2004, the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) has recognized the term “hybrid warfare” as the most acceptable for denoting new forms of aggression. In the conceptual documents of the United States and NATO, it is stated that hybrid warfare is a combination of conventional, irregular, and asymmetric means combined with constant manipulation of political, and ideological differences.
So, during hybrid warfare, purely military tools become auxiliary in achieving the military-strategic goals that the aggressor sets for itself. The combination of different tools (military and non-military) in the implementation of aggression against another state determines its hybrid nature. At the same time, before the start of an armed conflict, the aggressor focuses its main efforts on destabilizing the socio-political situation, provoking public discontent with the current government and inciting separatist sentiments in society, discrediting the military-political leadership of the country against which aggressive actions are directed.
For a more detailed look at the issue of hybrid warfare, it is worth referring to the book Hybrid Warfare (History, Politics, and Security), which examines hybrid warfare in all its aspects:
Historical Examples: The author gives examples of hybrid warfare from the past, analyzes their features and consequences.
Current trends: The book explores modern tactics and strategies of hybrid warfare, including the use of cyber threats, information operations, economic pressure, etc.
Recommendations for counteraction: Based on the analysis, the author proposes specific measures that states and institutions can use to effectively counter hybrid threats.
This book can be useful for a wide range of interested readers - from academics to government policy makers and security professionals.