In today's world, the combination of propaganda, disinformation, psychological pressure, and attacks on information and communication systems pose a danger no less than conventional armament. Productive scenarios for counteracting hybrid threats are based on the use of modern technologies of strategic communications, management of subjects of military conflicts, and information processing.
This article is aimed at analyzing the basic concepts of modern hybrid warfare and finding place, purpose, objectives, and features of strategic communications.
An integrated use of strategic communications and reflexive control technologies is proposed to develop hybrid warfare scenarios.
The concept of 'hybrid warfare' has gained and continues to gain traction in Western strategic and military circles over the last decade-plus. However, truth to say, it is still a highly contested concept. This article argues that the main reason for this is that the concept of 'hybrid warfare' has been taken out of its original context over time and applied to new cases that lack essential characteristics of the concept. The mismatch that happens when the concept of 'hybrid war-fare' does not fit new cases exemplifies what political scientist Giovanni Sartori has called 'conceptual stretching'. Using Sartori's notion of conceptual stretching, this article analyses the conceptual confusion surrounding hybrid warfare and discusses its possible implications for the West's defence policy.
This article presents the study of ambiguity as the essence of hybrid warfare to reconcile it with the international political context. It addresses the gaps in the literature in an effort to elucidate the essence of hybrid warfare not as a separate concept, but rather as the symptom of a changing political environment. The analysis of the literature is reinforced by two case studies: the war in eastern Ukraine of 2014 and the South China Sea dispute. Both these case studies express ambiguity in the combination of kinetic and non-kinetic means used to achieve political objectives. The article rests on three pillars which constitute the architecture of the central argument. The first pillar will address the gap in the current literature on hybrid warfare and how the current debate is too concerned with conflict dynamics rather than its political nature. The second pillar will delineate the essence, characteristics and value of ambiguity in hybrid warfare. The third pillar will address the practice of hybrid warfare as the conduct of war by great powers.
Hybrid warfare strategies blend conventional warfare, irregular warfare and cyber-attacks with other influencing methods, such as disinformation, diplomacy and foreign political inteference. There is a need for novel comprehensive approaches to counter them.
Hybrid warfare is the latest of the terms/concepts that have been used within the defence community in the last three decades to label contemporary warfare. It has been officially adopted in the core strategic documents of NATO, EU and national governments and has already inspired many articles, policy papers and books; however, this paper is unique in the sense that it analysis the hybrid warfare concept through the lens of strategic theory. It is argued that hybrid warfare does not merit the adoption as a doctrinal concept. Strategic theory instead, which lies at the nexus of all dimensions of warfare, provides a better viewpoint to approach contemporary warfare. It concludes that efforts should be directed towards exploring warfare under the light of eternal principles instead of proving the emergence of new types of warfare.
Hybrid warfare is the latest of the terms/concepts that have been used within the defence community in the last three decades to label contemporary warfare. It has been officially adopted in the core strategic documents of NATO, EU and national governments and has already inspired many articles, policy papers and books; however, this paper is unique in the sense that it analysis the hybrid warfare concept through the lens of strategic theory. It is argued that hybrid warfare does not merit the adoption as a doctrinal concept. Strategic theory instead, which lies at the nexus of all dimensions of warfare, provides a better viewpoint to approach contemporary warfare. It concludes that efforts should be directed towards exploring warfare under the light of eternal principles instead of proving the emergence of new types of warfare.
The European Union is in a political and security crisis. The crisis tends to become existential, which undermines the future of the EU as an integration project. The conflict of values between liberal democracy and authoritarianism is becoming an important factor in international security.
Negative current trends in the international security environment increase risks for the EU. In its foreign policy the EU does not demonstrate the ability to speak with one voice. It does not support EU's ambition to be a global international actor. Within the EU, centrifugal tendencies and Euroscepticism appear to be gaining ground. Among the destructive external and internal factors affecting European security, the hybrid threat posed by Moscow's ambitious plans and aggressive actions is at the forefront. These actions are aimed at undermining democracies, international solidarity and security. Russia is systematically acting to destabilize the EU, using a set of means of destructive influence, trying to undermine European unity both externally and internally.
Russia's aggression against Ukraine, operations in Syria and Libya, interference in domestic processes in the EU, etc., are exacerbating destructive trends in the European security environment. In this con- text, the EU faces the need to increase its resilience, as a tool to deter destructive actions of the Russian Federation and a means to mitigate their effect.
The purpose of the article is to analyze the causes and consequences of Russia's hybrid influence against the EU, plus to identify the means of Russia's destructive impact, such as the spread of misinformation, active special operations, energy pressure, etc.
The article examines the imperatives of Russian foreign policy, the impact of the value crisis on the European project and its future, as well as obstacles to strategic dialogue between the EU and Russia.
Europe returns to searching for its collective European identity, discussing revitalization of the global European narrative. Maintaining a system of liberal democratic values is a key precondition for the future of the EU in order to avoid the risk of disintegration of the European Union.
Sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, its national security could be guaranteed only by full-fledged integration into the European political, economic and security space. Europe's hesitations regarding the European perspective for Ukraine, which arise under pressure from the Kremlin and internal contradictions in the EU, negatively affect the security environment in Europe.