The term ‘hybrid war’ is not a legal term. It belongs to the terminology and concepts used in the studies on international relationships. Due to its popularization in mass media it has recently started to be used in new contexts. The purpose of the article is to ascertain the precise meaning of the term, and to determine the legal implications which a particular understanding of it may have in international public law. Certain understandings or interpretations of a given term determine its legal consequences and allow the assessment of their implications from the point of view of international law. Therefore in the first part of the article, a review and an examination of different ways of understanding the term ‘hybrid war’ have been conducted. Although the definitions that had been analyzed are noteworthy and they emphasize some aspects of the ‘hybrid war,’ they lack a definition of the term that would take into consideration all the dimensions of the issue of a hybrid war. Thus the attempt taken by the author to propose his own definition, aggregating all observations and insights made by the international relations experts so far, and enumerating the distinctive characteristics of hybrid wars. After that, some typical elements of a hybrid war are analyzed from the point of view of international public law. The paper investigates the possibility of qualifying hybrid methods as the ‘use of force,’ an ‘aggression’ and an ‘armed attack’ within the meaning of the United Nations Charter. It also examines the admissibility of a counter-attack within the framework of the right to self- defence. The issue raises many doubts particularly with regard to activities from below the threshold of war that are distinctive characteristics of a hybrid war. The legal implications of the use of a non-state actor to conduct an armed activity under international law were also raised, being referred to as proxy war.
The armed conflict in the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine introduced a new notion of hybrid war into security studies, but such kind of armed conflict is not anything new. History of wars provides at least a few examples when a country was attacked not by conventional armed forces, but by a mixture of special forces, information campaigns and backdoor proxies. Such armed struggles have taken place many times before, for example, during the so called Kargil War in 1999. Lessons for India emerged from the Pakistani operation in Kargil region necessitating a holistic national security review as well as rethinking of the nature of conflict and conduct in the new strategic environment and are very similar to the lessons learnt today by NATO, Poland and Baltic states concerning current warfare in Ukraine.
Contemporary terrorism is characterised by a complex and networked model of operation. While the main objectives of terrorist acts remain the same, the attack environment, tactics and tools are changing. The international community is taking steps to strengthen counter-terrorism systems, but these are peaceful solutions. These models do not consider the conditions of hybrid armed conflicts in which terrorism is an element of combat tactics. It is a relatively new phenomenon and particularly dangerous for the civilian population. The acts of terror in hybrid warfare are not mechanisms with a simple scheme of action, and, as we try to show in this article, they represent a deliberate and broad spectrum of action. Therefore, there is an urgent need to understand terrorism in the context of the threat of hybrid war (especially when terrorist acts complement hybrid tactics or significantly replace conventional tactics). This type of threat must be recognised before achieving its strategic goals. From the substantive point of view, the article studies the problem of terrorism as one of the threats of an armed conflict in Ukraine, commonly known as hybrid war.
The paper deals with internal conflicts, their internationalisation and a hybrid war. In the 1990s many military conflicts could have been regarded as domestic conflicts or internationalised internal conflicts. According to the authors internationalised internal conflicts and a hybrid war have much in common. The purpose of the paper is to compare and confront distinctive characteristics of internationalised internal conflicts with the model of hybrid war. The authors scrutinize definitions of an internal, domestic conflict and a hybrid war, and the possibilities and likelihood of their occurrence. Finally the issue is analysed in terms of international public law. ‘Hybrid war’ is a term not defined in public international law. However it is commonly used not only by media and politicians, but also by academics in a sci- entific discourse. A question arises to what extent it is justified to use a term in the context of different military conflicts, like for instance the one in the East Ukraine that has been going on since 2015. Therefore it is necessary to explain what the term ‘hybrid war’ means. In order to do so, it is necessary to try to define the term. Its distinctive characteristics must be indicated. Then, many military conflicts will be analysed to determine whether they satisfy the requirements for qualifying them as a ‘hybrid war’ or an internationalised internal conflict. The research leads to a conclusion that an internationalised internal conflict gives many opportunities for applying to it methods characteristic of a hybrid war. In the course of an internationalised internal conflict there are many ways in which the aggressor can evade international liability and the authors attempt to answer how to prevent this.
The article concerns the possibility of using Lithuanian Poles and their political representation: Electoral Action of Poles in Lithuania-Christian Families Alliance (AWPL-ZChR) as a potential element in Russian aggression against Lithuania. The author cites previous media reports and expert opinions suggesting such an opportunity, and analyzes the activities of the AWPL-ZChR. The author focuses on such aspects as: cooperation of the AWPL-ZChR with the Russian Alliance - the party of the Russian minority in Lithuania - or alleged pro-Russian statements of the leaders of the Polish minority. The author tries to embed these aspects not only in the geopolitical space, but discuss them in the context of the AWPL-ZChR’ position on the Lithuanian political scene.
The article presents the phenomenon of the Moldovan diaspora, indicating the „old diaspora” to the countries of the former USSR, as well as the „new emigration”, mainly to the European Union. Attention was focused on Kishinev’s policy towards emigration, above all in the institutional and legal context. Relations were related to changes in policy in the context of the hybrid war in Ukraine.
The article presents the phenomenon of the Moldovan diaspora, indicating the „old diaspora” to the countries of the former USSR, as well as the „new emigration”, mainly to the European Union. Attention was focused on Kishinev’s policy towards emigration, above all in the institutional and legal context. Relations were related to changes in policy in the context of the hybrid war in Ukraine.
The beginning of the 21st century is characterized by a deep crisis of the national and international security system. For many factors caused by the intensification of military-political conflicts of a new type, the term “hybrid war” is now used. A feature of these conflicts is, in the first place, the use by the opponents of a wide scale of non-military means of influence: economic, informational, environmental, social, political and others. It is important here to justify the importance of the transformation of the state system of civil protection, which is being developed under the influence of contemporary military and political conflicts. The problem of military-political rivalry, by defining the content of the term “military-political conflict”, leads to a confrontation of political entities both within the state and at the state level, as well as between states, aimed at achieving their own political interests using various means and ways of influencing the political, military, economic, social and information spheres. The purpose of this speech is to present the mechanisms of solving all existing problems related to the functioning of society and to present the forms and features of contemporary hybrid conflicts.
Russian military aggression against Ukraine was the culmination of inter-civilizational confrontation of Russia with the West for the final consolidation of spheres of influence in Europe and the world in terms of transformation of international relations from a unipolar to a multipolar system. An important interest for Russia in this confrontation is to return it to the status of a world power. Revolutionary changes in Ukrainian society led to democratization, desovietization and consolidation of the Ukrainian nation. The immediate reaction on this revolutionary process was the Russian military aggression against Ukraine. The military aggression against Ukraine was carried out in the form of a hybrid war. The basic composition of Russian hybrid war in Donbas was inspired internal conflict in Ukraine between the center and the separatist regions. The distinction of Donbas hybrid version of the war is to use armed terror, high intensity combat operations, maneuver their character and widespread use of heavy weapons fire power. The annexation of the Crimea and the occupation of Donbas by Russian troops have a number of consequences that negatively affect international relations and modern system of international law. Aggression of leading to the erosion of the foundations of world order and international security, which could lead to the destruction of the existing world order.
This article is a combination of reporting and analysis, constituting a relatively innovative approach in the scientific literature. It combines a report on a science-topical conference with the author’s attempt to weigh up and analyse the 16 years (as of 2017 – Z.M.) of the “war on terror” in terms of security (both external and internal) and the Republic of Poland’s raison d’état with particular emphasis on what are termed “contemporary challenges and threats”, dynamically occurring in the so-called “broad security environment” (in the perspective of Central and Eastern Europevs. the EU and NATO) (see: Summary and Conclusions). The author has used his own holistic analytical-synthetic and predictive method in accordance with the analytical paradigm proposed by Col. dr hab. Mirosław Banasik (Ph.D.), professor at UJK (Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce, Poland) (2018 – see especially: p. 13).
The article describes the main challenges to the energy security of Ukraine in the 21st c., including the context of hybrid warfare. As modern armed conflicts actively use the economic component (energy) alongside the military actions, it is expedient to focus on the energy sector characteristics of the Ukrainian economy. The article discusses the main sources of threats and challenges to Ukraine’s energy security and the keystones of energy strategy for the next decade, followed by the analysis of several indicators of energy security and their dynamics in the years 2010–2014. A brief presentation of Russian military and economic impact on the energy security of Ukraine concludes the text.
Whereas scholarly accounts have mushroomed, especially since 2014, on what a ‘hybrid warfare’ is and is not, the phenomenon has taken a centerstage in international politics, thus confidently entering the everyday political vocabularies and practices in a growing number of states and societies worldwide. Drawing on the recent evidence of spatial and temporal diffusion of hybrid warfare theatres, this article argues that hybrid wars are highly contagious, thus prone to substantially challenge the international order, its normative and structural foundations. It therefore aims to explore the trends in the ideational spread and political uses of both hybrid warfare methods as well as the proliferating instances of hybrid wars fought across the globe. Finally, drawing on the empirical evidence and scholarly achievements in related fields of study, the article offers explanatory account of the mechanisms, conditions and dimension of hybrid war(fare) contagion. Among other featured cases, Russia’s hybrid war(fare) campaigns in Ukraine, Europe and further afield are employed as illustrative ‘archetypal’ cases.
This article describes the important role that international broadcasting has played since its inception in promoting state sovereignty and reducing foreign propaganda in information warfare, with a particular focus on Ukraine. The author provides a thorough overview of the historical development of international broadcasting in Ukraine and how it has evolved since the Russian annexation of Crimea, the occupation of Donbass, and the full-scale invasion. While research in the field has been dominated by analyses of ‘traditional’ or ‘mainstream’ media, such as radio and television, this article analyses how the Ukrainian International Broadcasting UATV English on YouTube and Facebook social media platforms have functioned over the first six months since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The author finds UATV effective in restricting the aggressor’s propaganda in the Western media space, pointing out the lack of activity in Asia-Pacific and the strategic importance of ensuring the presence of Ukrainian International Broadcasting in the Asia-Pacific region.
The article discusses cinematic depopulation, the strategy of appropriation of the colonized by the colonizer widely used in the Soviet and post-Soviet cinema made in Ukraine and Russia and, until now, never analyzed in academic literature. The cinematic depopulation is a mode of filmic representation whereby a given ethnoscape (Ukraine) is cleansed of its national community (Ukrainians) and instead is populated by the colonizer (Russians) as if it were an integral part of his historical territory. As a form of cultural imperialism, this strategy has, until quite recently, been widely used in both Soviet and post-Soviet Russian and Ukrainian filmmaking to promote the idea of Ukraine conceivable outside of and without the Ukrainian language, culture, and other attributes of Ukrainian identity.
Hybrid war: real casualties in UkraineThe Russo-Ukrainian war that broke out in 2014 in the wake of Russia’s annexation of Crimea continues to be all too rarely noticed in the West. Observers comment widely on the novel ‘hybrid’ character of warfare as developed and trialed by the Kremlin worldwide during the recent years, but pay scant attention to the Russian ‘training ground’ in eastern Ukraine. The article probes into the realities of the ongoing RussoUkrainian war, alongside the ideological underpinnings of the Kremlin’s intervention and Ukraine’s response to this attack. It appears that the Russian government adopted ethnolinguistic nationalism, typical of Central Europe, namely, that all Russian-speakers constitute the Russian nation, especially if their communities compactly inhabit areas directly bordering on the Russian Federation. Wojna hybrydowa: Prawdziwe ofiary wojny rosyjsko-ukraińskiejWojna rosyjsko-ukraińska, która wybuchła w 2014 r. w następstwie aneksji Krymu przez Rosję, jest nadal zbyt rzadko zauważana na Zachodzie. Obserwatorzy szeroko komentują „hybrydowy” charakter działań wojennych, wypracowywanych i wypróbowywanych przez Kreml po całym świecie w ciągu ostatnich lat, lecz nie zwracają uwagi na rosyjski „poligon doświadczalny” we wschodniej Ukrainie. Artykuł analizuje realia toczącej się tam wojny rosyjsko-ukraińskiej, jak i ideologiczne założenia interwencji militarnej Kremla oraz reakcję Ukrainy na tenże atak ze strony Rosji. Wydaje się, że rosyjski rząd przyjął jako uzasadnienie etnolingwistyczny nacjonalizm (typowy dla Europy Środkowej), a mianowicie, że wszystkie osoby rosyjskojęzyczne to członkowie narodu rosyjskiego, zwłaszcza jeśli ich społeczności zamieszkują tereny bezpośrednio graniczące z obszarem Federacji Rosyjskiej.
The world is developing at a very high rate, in fact all areas of life such as science, technology, medicine and cyberspace. At the same time, proportionally to this progress and in relation to the development of technology, security-related concepts have evolved and are becoming a priority for many countries. The new face has come also for military activities. Developed countries have dealt with problems such as providing food and water to citizens, controlling the epidemic, and guaranteeing education, however, regardless of the level of urbanization, they face a new threat – a hybrid war. What are its features? What is its nature and direction? How to recognize its beginning and end? What measures are used to carry it out? Are international organizations able to counteract it effectively? This article attempts to answer the above questions and diagnoses the current level of threat of a hybrid war for Poland, mainly in the context of a specific geopolitical situation.
This article addresses the urgent issue of hybrid threats within the international legal framework. It examines their implications through the lens of the conflict in Ukraine, Israel and other violations of fundamental principles of international law by authoritarian actors. The author critically evaluates the inadequacy of the current international legal system in dealing with the complex nature of hybrid threats, which exploit vulnerabilities in democratic societies. The article advocates for a comprehensive approach, calling for reforms at national, regional, and international levels to strengthen resilience and establish a more secure and adaptable international system. Throughout the article, various proposals are presented with the aim of reshaping the global security architecture. The author emphasizes the need for a thorough reassessment of existing international norms and institutions, highlighting the urgency of adopting innovative strategies to protect against the sophisticated tactics employed by authoritarian actors in hybrid warfare.
The author in the article represents some Russians opinions on the war. He presents, how Russia used its knowledge and experience to conduct unconventional military operations. The author’s another objective was to raise awareness of the necessity for the recognition and research on military concepts which originate and develop in the Russian Federation.
The purpose of this article is to present the origins and assumptions of the Russian concept of coercive migration engineering and its practical application with particular emphasis on the role of special services in such activities. The engineering of coercive migration has become an unprecedented form of leverage through which the Russian Federation pursues its geopolitical interests. The country’s use of this tool is a fact and not a conspiracy theory devoid of empirical evidence, as some analysts associated with European Union institutions believe. A comparison of the course of the exodus of Cubans from Mariel to Miami in 1980 and the Finnish-Russian migration crisis in 2015-2016 proves that at least since the Cold War, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and then the Russian Federation - on the basis of innovative approaches to security problems and conflict theory in military science - have developed effective means and methods of engineering coercive migration, making it a tool for destabilizing states and forcing political concessions favorable to themselves.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.