Search results

1

How can NATO as a collective alliance effectively counterthe threat of Russia’s hybrid warfare?

100%

Heinloo P.

Security Forum

|

2018

|

vol. 2

|

issue Volume 2 No 1/2018

27-36

EN

Currently some are arguing that we are facing a change in the character of warfighting – the emergence of hybrid warfare. This as this evolution has been rapid enough to raise concerns about the security of even the strongest contemporary military alliance, evoking questions of NATO’s ability to cope with the alleged transformation. It is visualized by many articles published after Russia’s surprising aggression in crimea in 2014, that brought the term hybrid warfare to widespread use, several publications mention specific NATO members as the next possible targets of similar belligerent actions. the paper is discussing opposing opinions and argues that the hybrid warfare concept used by Russia cannot be applied universally; therefore NATO can devise successful preventive and counteractions by focusing its efforts to specific threatened regions. the theoretical background of Russia’s new generation warfare concept is presented along with its practical application. Next, the implications for NATO – the extent of the threat and the possibilities for countering it – is discussed.

2

With the challenge from Russia, should European countries now swich back to focusing exclusively on territorial defence and deterrence?

100%

Zinke S.

Security Forum

|

2017

|

vol. 1

|

issue Volume 1 No. 2/2017

35-46

EN

During the Munich Security Conference 2017, US Secretary of Defence Jim Mattis confirmed US commitment to European security, being an important factor for stability of the continent. Especially for Baltic States as those after gaining NATO and EU membership believed that it resolved their security concerns. However, Russian occupation of Crimea caused real security concerns and Baltic countries invested into conventional capabilities and territorial defence forces. The paper argues that, given the complex and dynamic security situation, it is insufficient if European countries focus exclusively on territorial defence and deterrence. Therefore, a case study, where attention is drawn to the Baltic States, where the challenges from Russia have led into the dilemma of reconciling alliance defence requirements and national defence requirements, is discussed leading to conclusions and recommendations.

3

Hybrid warfare: minding the conceptual GAP

86%

Lebrun M.

Security Forum

|

2018

|

vol. 2

|

issue Volume 2 No 1/2018

19-25

EN

This article addresses a series of difficulties raised by the concept of hybrid warfare. The central tenet is to demonstrate that hybrid warfare as an expression has less academic than political validity. In other words, it is more often used as a normative denunciation for Russian actions than as a term grasping the relevant experience of contemporary warfare. The article sets out to demonstrate that hybrid warfare as set out by Russia should rather be understood as a tool of integral statecraft. The article outlines the main determinants of Russian security policy and puts hybrid warfare into perspective with the main technological disruptors affect the nature of contemporary warfare. The article finally advocates for a clearer division of work between NATO and the EU in countering hybrid threats.

4

Hybrid Warfare and Deniability as Understood by the Military

58%

Gunneriusson H.

Polish Political Science Yearbook

|

2019

|

vol. 2 (48)

267-288

EN

Russia and China are terraforming the maritime environment as part of their warfare. In both cases the actions are illegal and the performance is offensive to its actual nature. In the case of China, the practice is construction of artificial islands in the South Chinese Sea and in the case of Russia it is about the infamous bridge built over the Kerch strait, Ukraine. Neither Russia nor China expects an armed conflict with the West in the near future. That is a reasonable assumption, which is weaponized at the political-strategically level. The attack of this weaponized situation is that the trust in the West. Primarily the EU (European Union) and NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), is eroded for every day which these countries challenges the international system which the western democracies say that they present and defend. China and Russia offer their authoritarian systems as a replacement and there are a lot of pseudo-democratic or even out-right authoritarian regimes on the sideline watching this challenge unfold. The article highlights the difference for the NATO-countries in logic of practice when it comes to the political social field on one hand and the military political field on the other hand. The article uses material from a previously unpublished survey made on NATO-officers then attending courses at NATO Defense College (NDC).

Refine search results

3 Security Forum

1 Polish Political Science Yearbook

1 Gunneriusson H.

1 Heinloo P.

1 Lebrun M.

1 Zinke S.

1 2019

2 2018

1 2017

How can NATO as a collective alliance effectively counterthe threat of Russia’s hybrid warfare?

With the challenge from Russia, should European countries now swich back to focusing exclusively on territorial defence and deterrence?

Hybrid warfare: minding the conceptual GAP

Hybrid Warfare and Deniability as Understood by the Military