Information operations · Information Warfare · Russia · Ukraine

Revising The Theory Of Hybrid War

Lessons From Ukraine

Today, the term “hybrid warfare” is widely used to describe Russia’s approach to the war it has been waging in Ukraine since 2014. But this notion has largely been absent from Russian military literature. Some Russian strategists only adopted the term after its use by numerous Western journalists and experts.

In Revising the Theory of Hybrid War, CEPA’s Andrássy Fellow Krisztián Jójárt assess the lessons learned by Moscow in eastern Ukraine and the implications for the West. How has the Kremlin’s military thinking evolved with the introduction of “hybrid warfare” into the equation? And what are the implications for the West when considering potential hybrid threats in the future?

3 thoughts on “Revising The Theory Of Hybrid War

  1. I recall that it was the exact same procedure as with Blitzkrieg in the late thirties or early forties. That name on the Germans’ warfaring tactics was first mentioned and constructed by I think it was New York Times. The Germans hade no name for it themselves, it was just a part of the bigger picture. But I think they later on adopted the flattering epithet, why shouldn’t they. Since then there has got a bit of inflation in the word. Nowadays Blitzkrieg is used as a description on every surprize shock attack with a successful outcome. It doesn’t even have to have the same components for it to be called Blitzkrieg. Shock-and-awe is the modern Blitzkrieg. Lets se if that will undergo the same inflative evolving.

Comments are closed.