Hybrid wars, utilizing the opportunities offered by communication and technology, are much more comprehensive than limited wars. Stating that hybrid wars are referred to as ‘hybrid warfare’, Prof. Dr. Havva Kök Arslan said that the activities of the British against the Ottoman Empire during World War I carried the traces of hybrid warfare. Prof. Dr. Havva Kök Arslan stated, “Russia’s military operations against Ukraine, and policies to intimidate and wear down the Ukrainian government, can also be considered hybrid warfare.”
The prevalence of hybrid wars is increasing…
Prof. Dr. Havva Kök Arslan, Head of the Department of Political Science and International Relations (English) at Üsküdar Üniversitesi Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, made evaluations regarding hybrid wars, which have examples in both distant and recent history.
Hybrid wars are referred to as ‘hybrid warfare’
Stating that hybrid wars are also referred to as ‘hybrid warfare’, Prof. Dr. Havva Kök Arslan said, “Hybrid war is defined in different ways by different thinkers. Thinkers who approach it as a new concept define hybrid warfare as the combined use of irregular and regular forces, while some thinkers tend to view it as asymmetric warfare. In asymmetric warfare, irregular armed groups that are not affiliated with any state are the weaker actors and aim to inflict more damage on the stronger actor than their own strength and potential.”
Much more comprehensive than limited wars
Prof. Dr. Havva Kök Arslan stated that hybrid wars can also be considered as limited wars and continued:
“States do not clash totally with each other in hybrid wars, just as in limited wars. However, hybrid war is much more comprehensive than limited war, and the priority of military power gives way to other means. Generally, hybrid wars are the combined application of irregular and regular forces, civilian and military elements, traditional and modern strategies, non-violent and violent methods, utilizing social, political, military, economic, and similar opportunities offered by communication and technology. In other words, hybrid wars include traditional capacities, irregular tactics and formations, as well as methods of warfare such as acts of terror, random violence, coercion, and creating chaos in society.”
The prevalence of hybrid wars is increasing
Prof. Dr. Havva Kök Arslan pointed out that despite hybrid warfare being a new conceptualization, it has been widely preferred in various wars throughout history. She stated, “The activities of the British against the Ottoman Empire during World War I, the tactics used by American colonies during the American Civil War, and the strategies applied in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars bear the traces of hybrid warfare. With advancing technology, the effectiveness and variety of war tactics are increasing. This leads to the growing prevalence of hybrid wars. The simultaneous use of combined forces and combined strategies in hybrid warfare makes it an effective method.”
A policy of intimidation is being applied to the Ukrainian government
Prof. Dr. Havva Kök Arslan stated that today, hybrid threats encompass a very wide range of terrorist and piracy activities, as well as migration and ethnic conflicts, and continued:
“In hybrid warfare, these hybrid threats are deliberately used by the adversary to achieve their political objectives. In this context, for example, Russia's military operations against Ukraine, and policies to intimidate and wear down the Ukrainian government, can also be considered hybrid warfare. Russia's long-standing ‘maskirovka’ strategy, meaning deception and concealment, includes intense propaganda, the threat of using physical force, and other non-violent methods. This strategy makes it difficult to define the war while making harassment against the target country invisible. On the other hand, the concept of hybrid warfare expands the definition of modern warfare by incorporating such tactics into its domain.”
The target state becomes more open to occupation
Prof. Dr. Havva Kök Arslan stated that hybrid wars, which blur the line between war and peace, are also very effective due to some of their non-violent methods. She said, “The social, economic, and political damages caused by these wars are no less than those of hot wars. Therefore, these non-violent tactics are sometimes preferred over military tactics. However, there is always the threat of using military force. Activities carried out under the guise of ‘humanitarian aid’ in the target country, the support of movements by a covert military force, and the use of civilian opposition protest activities together with propaganda, communication, intelligence, psychological, economic, and political tools, make this type of war even more effective. Consequently, the destabilized and weakened target state in every sense becomes more open to occupation and manipulation.”