Suchergebnisse

The hybrid warfare concept does not merit to be adopted as an operational concept. If we look at this concept through the lens of strategic theory, we could say it had been mainly about operational and tactical levels of warfare until 2014. After Russia's annexation of Crimea that the defense community began to incorporate other dimensions. However, this time the focus was rather on the informational dimension. What is required is to have a holistic vision of the strategic context and the adaptability to meet the unique challenges of the day through the use of all instruments of grand strategy. In this sense, Europe first needs a mentality change as politicians and decision-makers, in general, do not have the required appreciation of strategy-making in democracies. Secondly, in addition to tactical improvements such as PESCO and EDF, the EU needs a committee at the strategic and policy level, which has a cross-departmental ability to work in collaboration with EU institutions in other dimensions. Because the silo thinking or some say, stovepiping is the current biggest challenge of EU structure. In fact, External Action Service is a good candidate to assume this responsibility, as many of its current tasks overlap with the committee proposed here. Thirdly, if the EU can transform itself and has this working mechanism from policy to the tactical level, which balances the essential components of strategy; NATO would become a major part of the EU's military tool, rather than an alliance that EU based all its defense on. Last but not least, all recommendations explained here depends on one important fact, which is "EU members' willingness to see EU as a Global Actor" in their sincere thoughts.

The hybrid warfare concept does not merit to be adopted as an operational concept. If we look at this concept through the lens of strategic theory, we could say it had been mainly about operational and tactical levels of warfare until 2014. After Russia's annexation of Crimea that the defense community began to incorporate other dimensions. However, this time the focus was rather on the informational dimension. What is required is to have a holistic vision of the strategic context and the adaptability to meet the unique challenges of the day through the use of all instruments of grand strategy. In this sense, Europe first needs a mentality change as politicians and decision-makers, in general, do not have the required appreciation of strategy-making in democracies. Secondly, in addition to tactical improvements such as PESCO and EDF, the EU needs a committee at the strategic and policy level, which has a cross-departmental ability to work in collaboration with EU institutions in other dimensions. Because the silo thinking or some say, stovepiping is the current biggest challenge of EU structure. In fact, External Action Service is a good candidate to assume this responsibility, as many of its current tasks overlap with the committee proposed here. Thirdly, if the EU can transform itself and has this working mechanism from policy to the tactical level, which balances the essential components of strategy; NATO would become a major part of the EU's military tool, rather than an alliance that EU based all its defense on. Last but not least, all recommendations explained here depends on one important fact, which is "EU members' willingness to see EU as a Global Actor" in their sincere thoughts.

The hybrid warfare concept does not merit to be adopted as an operational concept. If we look at this concept through the lens of strategic theory, we could say it had been mainly about operational and tactical levels of warfare until 2014. After Russia's annexation of Crimea that the defense community began to incorporate other dimensions. However, this time the focus was rather on the informational dimension. What is required is to have a holistic vision of the strategic context and the adaptability to meet the unique challenges of the day through the use of all instruments of grand strategy. In this sense, Europe first needs a mentality change as politicians and decision-makers, in general, do not have the required appreciation of strategy-making in democracies. Secondly, in addition to tactical improvements such as PESCO and EDF, the EU needs a committee at the strategic and policy level, which has a cross-departmental ability to work in collaboration with EU institutions in other dimensions. Because the silo thinking or some say, stovepiping is the current biggest challenge of EU structure. In fact, External Action Service is a good candidate to assume this responsibility, as many of its current tasks overlap with the committee proposed here. Thirdly, if the EU can transform itself and has this working mechanism from policy to the tactical level, which balances the essential components of strategy; NATO would become a major part of the EU's military tool, rather than an alliance that EU based all its defense on. Last but not least, all recommendations explained here depends on one important fact, which is "EU members' willingness to see EU as a Global Actor" in their sincere thoughts.

The hybrid warfare concept does not merit to be adopted as an operational concept. If we look at this concept through the lens of strategic theory, we could say it had been mainly about operational and tactical levels of warfare until 2014. After Russia's annexation of Crimea that the defense community began to incorporate other dimensions. However, this time the focus was rather on the informational dimension. What is required is to have a holistic vision of the strategic context and the adaptability to meet the unique challenges of the day through the use of all instruments of grand strategy. In this sense, Europe first needs a mentality change as politicians and decision-makers, in general, do not have the required appreciation of strategy-making in democracies. Secondly, in addition to tactical improvements such as PESCO and EDF, the EU needs a committee at the strategic and policy level, which has a cross-departmental ability to work in collaboration with EU institutions in other dimensions. Because the silo thinking or some say, stovepiping is the current biggest challenge of EU structure. In fact, External Action Service is a good candidate to assume this responsibility, as many of its current tasks overlap with the committee proposed here. Thirdly, if the EU can transform itself and has this working mechanism from policy to the tactical level, which balances the essential components of strategy; NATO would become a major part of the EU's military tool, rather than an alliance that EU based all its defense on. Last but not least, all recommendations explained here depends on one important fact, which is "EU members' willingness to see EU as a Global Actor" in their sincere thoughts.