{"id":16185,"date":"2021-01-08T06:22:07","date_gmt":"2021-01-08T06:22:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/informnapalm.org\/en\/?p=16185"},"modified":"2021-01-08T06:22:07","modified_gmt":"2021-01-08T06:22:07","slug":"hybrid-warfare-whether-is-it-new","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/informnapalm.org\/en\/hybrid-warfare-whether-is-it-new\/","title":{"rendered":"Hybrid warfare \u2013 whether is it new. Chapter one"},"content":{"rendered":"

Illustration: strategyinternational.org<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Article prepared by Info Ops Polska Foundation. <\/strong><\/a> Info OPS Polska Foundation was established for the implementation of projects aimed at ensuring the safety of the information environment. The project includes support for the development of the capacity to identify information and psychological operations, including conducting analyses of manipulation processes of the Polish-speaking information environment: disinformation, propaganda, social engineering and cyber activities.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

The purpose and object of study:\u00a0<\/strong>non-military tools in Hybrid Warfare.<\/p>\n

Title:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Non-military tools of fight in hybrid warfare \u2013 upstream activities. How to prevent them and prepare own means of discouraging.<\/p>\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n

There is no discussion that adversaries, past and present, have developed creative uses of the \u201cfull-spectrum\u201d of warfare, including the use of regular and irregular tactics across all dimensions of war.<\/p>\n

In the view of many Western analysts it is the non-military tools, such as information, that are seen as the biggest threat in information society today.<\/p>\n

Title: Non-military tools of fight in hybrid warfare \u2013 upstream activities. How to prevent them and prepare own means of discouraging.<\/p>\n

The Introduction of \u201clittle green men\u201d is followed by the whole spectrum of the so called \u201cnon military activities\u201d. Institutions, influence groups, or single persons concerning pulse survey, infiltration, or inspiring, usually work in accordance with the law of the particular country on the premises of which they act or they make use of legislation\/law vacuum. It is dangerous because these activities are hard to prevent and it is even harder to catch somebody red-handed. NATO has been created in order to prevent heavy dangers and so far, they have dealt with an identified opponent using brutal power. Nowadays, we have to learn to identify and prevent hybrid warfare dangers (like information war), which are followed by the use of military warfare. This helps with the reduction the possibility of \u201clittle green men\u201d appearance and separating civilians from creating and engagement of paramilitary groups, opting for \u00a0the particular side in conflict.<\/p>\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

Since the beginning of the history of humankind, as people started to group together, our history is inseparably linked to conflict, war, and violence.<\/p>\n

In the history of the world, peace periods are constantly interlaced \u00a0with the times of war.<\/p>\n

The course of the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine overthrows this classic division and forces us to deliberate over the question of the \u00a0time of war and the time of peace. Because how ,in this context, can we determine today the situation in Ukraine when its eastern part is taken over the war and the west lasts in peace?<\/p>\n

At present, we are dealing with the changing face of war, its hybridization.<\/p>\n

What is a hybrid war? Mythological hybrids are\u00a0non-existent, imaginary creatures, partly human, partly animals. The best example of this is Chimera \u2013 a creature that has the head and front legs of a lion, the head and back legs of a goat, and the head of a snake for a tail. Some media appearances have a three-headed Chimera that often include a dragon head and wings to go with the other parts.<\/p>\n

Another most recognizable example of the hybrid is the Egyptian sphinx, with a lion body, human head and occasional bird wings. Hybrids mean interspecific crosses, and the \u00a0examples cited can be the premise that\u00a0 explains the nature of the hybrid war.<\/p>\n

Simply speaking, a hybrid war can be defined as a combination of a military strategy that blends conventional warfare and \u00a0irregular warfare. It is an armed conflict in which doctrinal and unconventional organizational solutions are used. In this kind of war there follows integration into a whole, as a single organism of unconventional activities, informational struggle, cyberwarfare and asymmetric and terroristic forms.<\/p>\n

Hybrid warfare \u2013 whether is it new?<\/strong><\/p>\n

To a considerable degree, the American theory of hybrid wars is a synthesis of prior enriched proposals by a crucial thesis of a hybridity of methods of the fight of the opponents of the USA and the West. For the precursor of the term, it is possible to regard the historian from the Chicago University DePaul and the Institute of strategic studies \u00a0(ISS) USA of Thomas R. Mockaitis who used it in his works about expeditionary campaigns of Great Britain. Because he recognized that a lot smoothly combined British campaigns and wars of the period of the decolonization to the extreme of fluidity featured \u00a0the conventional war about low intensity with the pacification of the resistance movements or fighting against terrorist groups. In \u00a0both of Mockaitis works he also underlined \u201ehybrid\u201d character of the British military forces supported by the diplomacy and politics.<\/p>\n

\u201eHybridwarfare\u201d is this notion \u00a0often incorrectly translated as a new kind of wars and it means indeed new but methods of the fight.<\/p>\n

The differentiation of it introduces a greater clarity and shows that this phenomenon isn\u2019t new. Connecting of these types of methods of the fight is something universal.<\/p>\n

So where does \u00a0this novelty result from?<\/strong><\/p>\n

it results from the Western tradition of thinking about armed conflicts which is dominated by Clausewitz and his work (on war) which in the main measuring cup\u00a0 relies on kinetic action, more widely looking at conflicts between countries and regular military forces where thanks to enforcing professional regular armies \u00a0as well as certain regulation and the law defining the military action, we can separate the war from the rest of the social life.<\/p>\n

At present the international environment of the security is far more complex. More and more we often deal with non-government actors, and it causes, obvious stirring and consternation, because looking at least at the past conflict and the intervention in Afghanistan the Clausewitz theses do not fit. We also marginalize other classics of strategy such as B.H. Liddell Hart who was the author of the work \u201cStrategy. Indirect actions\u201d, issued in 1929. In this book, the author attempts to demonstrate that warheads are defeated by commanders who decide to look outside the battlefield \u2013 moving on to fight the opponent\u2019s \u201cindirect action.\u201d Using force is treated as the ultimate solution and it is not necessarily\u00a0 the most important in the whole competition.<\/p>\n

In addition to analyzing British expeditionary campaigns from 1919 to 1960, another great example of how to conduct war by hybrid methods\u00a0 was very Winston Churchill.<\/p>\n

Postponing experiencing from mentioned above wars, of which was a participant created the whole machine for running the hybrid war.<\/p>\n

Churchill during the Second World War when held the prime ministership created inter alia:<\/p>\n