Hybrid Threats and the Constabularization of Strategy
.
By Joshua Tallis
April 22, 2019
Hybrid Threats and the Constabularization of Strategy
Ever since the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea, the concept of “hybrid threats†has exploded into the strategic lexicon. Legions of articles were written about the various ways state actors could leverage unconventional tactics to compete without triggering a conventional confrontation, thus bleeding into the debate on the gray zone, which produced yet another deluge of articles.[1] Largely lost in this discussion, however, was the reality that hybridization specifies tactics, not the actor employing them. Not only states like Russia leverage hybrid tactics, but non-state actors do as well. How militaries address the challenges imposed by hybridized nonstate groups is a conceptual issue that would benefit from a deeper interrogation of the unique relationship between crime and war that such threats represent.[2]
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2019/04/22/hybrid_threats_and_the_constabularization_of_strategy_114354.html
