Hybrid Warfare from the Perspective of Classical Military Theories

  • Sedeeq Omid Saeed
doi: 10.32563/hsz.2025.3.3

Abstract

Hybrid warfare, a complex and evolving military strategy, combines conventional and unconventional tactics, encompassing elements like cyber operations, economic coercion, information warfare and the leveraging of non-state actors. While often perceived as a novel development in response to contemporary geopolitical challenges, this study argues that hybrid warfare has deep historical roots, traceable to classical military thought. This paper explores this historical continuity by analysing the key contributions of Sun Tzu, Emperor Maurice, strategic and ethical teachings within the Quran and Vegetius, demonstrating the enduring relevance of their insights to understanding contemporary hybrid conflict. These classical theorists, across different eras and cultures, consistently emphasised principles like deception, psychological manipulation, the integration of diverse tactics, unconventional approaches to warfare and the critical importance of adaptability, all of which are hallmarks of modern hybrid strategies. The paper also acknowledges and addresses the ongoing debate surrounding the significance and novelty of hybrid warfare.

Keywords:

Hybrid Warfare Classical Military Theory Military Strategy Historical Analysis Strategic Principle

References

BALL, Joshua (2023): The Changing Face of Conflict: What Is Hybrid Warfare? Global Security Review. Online: https://globalsecurityreview.com/hybrid-and-non-linear-warfare-systematically-erases-the-divide-between-war-peace/

BEN-ARI, Guy (2006): Technological Surprise and Technological Failure in the Current Lebanon Crisis. Center for Strategic and International Studies, Commentary, 25 July 2006. Online: https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/media/csis/pubs/060725_benari_commentary.pdf

BILAL, Arsalan (2021): Hybrid Warfare – New Threats, Complexity, and ‘Trust’ as the Antidote. NATO Review, 30 November 2021. Online: https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2021/11/30/hybrid-warfare-new-threats-complexity-and-trust-as-the-antidote/index.html

BODA, Mihály (2024): Hybrid War: Theory and Ethics. AARMS, 23(1), 5–17. Online: https://doi.org/10.32565/aarms.2024.1.1

CALISKAN, Murat (2019): Hybrid Warfare through the Lens of Strategic Theory. Defense and Security Analysis, 35(1), 40–58. Online: https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2019.1565364

CHARRON, Austin (2016): Whose Is Crimea? Contested Sovereignty and Regional Identity. Region, 5(2), 225–256. Online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24896628

CISA (2023): Phishing Guidance: Stopping the Attack Cycle at Phase One. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Online: https://media.defense.gov/2023/Oct/18/2003322402/-1/-1/0/CSI-PHISHING-GUIDANCE.PDF

CLARKE, Richard A. – KNAKE, Robert K. (2010): Cyber War. The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It. New York: Harper Collins.

DENSMAA, Oyuntsetseg – SUREN, Baasankhuu (2024): Understanding Certain Aspects of Military Strategy. International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science, 4(44). Online: https://doi.org/10.31435/ijitss.4(44).2024.3049

EROL, Mehmet S. – OĞUZ, Şafak (2015): Hybrid Warfare Studies and Russia’s Example in Crimea. Akademik Bakış, 9(17), 261–277. Online: https://doi.org/10.19060/gab.22813

ESPOSITO, John L. (2015): Islam and Political Violence. Religions, 6(3), 1067–1081. Online: https://doi.org/10.3390/rel6031067

FARRELL, Henry – NEWMAN, Abraham L. (2019): Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. International Security, 44(1), 42–79. Online: https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351

FOREST, James J. (2021): Political Warfare and Propaganda an Introduction. Journal of Advanced Military Studies, 12(1), 13–33. Online: https://doi.org/10.21140/mcuj.20211201001

GHAZI, Mahmood A. (2008): The Law of War and Concept of Jihad in Islam. Policy Perspectives, 5(1), 69–86. Online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42909187

GRAY, Colin S. (2007): Irregular Warfare. One Nature, Many Characters. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 1(2), 35–57.

HALDON, John (1999): Warfare, State and Society in the Byzantine World, 565–1204. Abingdon: Routledge.

HANDEL, Michael I. (2001): Masters of War. Classical Strategic Thought. London: Frank Cass.

HAYWARD, Joel (2010): The Qur’an and War: Observations on Islamic Just War. Air Power Review, 13(3), 41–63. Online: https://raf.mod.uk/what-we-do/centre-for-air-and-space-power-studies/aspr/apr-vol13-iss3-3-pdf/

HOFFMAN, Frank G. (2007): Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars. Arlington: Potomac Institute for Policy Studies. Online: https://www.potomacinstitute.org/images/stories/publications/potomac_hybridwar_0108.pdf

Home Office (2024): Cyber Security Breaches Survey 2024. Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, 9 April 2024. Online: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/cyber-security-breaches-survey-2024/cyber-security-breaches-survey-2024

IMLAY, Talbot (2008): Preparing for Total War: The “Conseil Supérieur de la Défense Nationale” and France’s Industrial and Economic Preparations for War after 1918. War in History, 15(1), 43–71. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0968344507083993

MALIK, S. K. (1992): The Quranic Concept of War. Delhi: Adam Publishers and Distributors. Online: https://dn790005.ca.archive.org/0/items/thequranicconceptofwarskmalik/The%20Quranic%20Concept%20of%20War%20-%20SK%20Malik.pdf

MAURICE (1984): Maurice’s Strategikon. Handbook of Byzantine Military Strategy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Translated by George T. Dennis.

MELLO, Patrick A. (2010): In Search of New Wars: The Debate about a Transformation of War. European Journal of International Relations, 16(2), 297–309. Online: https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066109350053

MILEVSKI, Lukas (2014): Asymmetry Is Strategy, Strategy Is Asymmetry. Joint Force Quarterly, 75, 77–83. Online: https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/577565/asymmetry-is-strategy-strategy-is-asymmetry/

MOORE, Molly (2006): Israelis Confront ‘New Kind of War’. The Washington Post, 9 August 2006. Online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/08/09/israelis-confront-new-kind-of-war-span-classbankheadhigh-tech-tactics-fail-to-halt-rocket-firespan/af1e6e04-7db7-4c42-b097-1ef529536059/

MULLINS, Sam (2024): The Role of Non-State Actors as Proxies in Irregular Warfare and Malign State Influence. Arlington: Irregular Warfare Center. Online: https://irregularwarfarecenter.org/publications/research-studies/the-role-of-non-state-actors-as-proxies-in-irregular-warfare-and-malign-state-influence/#_ednref10

MUMFORD, Andrew (2013): Proxy Warfare and the Future of Conflict. The RUSI Journal, 158(2), 40–46. Online: https://doi.org/10.1080/03071847.2013.787733

MUMFORD, Andrew (2020): Ambiguity in Hybrid Warfare. Hybrid CoE Strategic Analysis, (24). Online: https://doi.org/10.1080/03071847.2013.787733

PRICE, Jason T. (2005): An Analysis of the Strategy and Tactics of Alexios I Komnenos. Master Thesis, Texas Tech University. Online: https://deremilitari.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/pricej.pdf

Quran (s. a.). Online: https://quran.com/en/al-baqarah/190

RID, Thomas (2020): Active Measures. The Secret History of Disinformation and Political Warfare. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

SALIFU, Shamsudeen (2017): Warfare and War Ethics: An Islamic Perspective. The Strategy Bridge, 23 June 2017. Online: https://thestrategybridge.org/the-bridge/2017/6/23/warfare-and-war-ethics-an-islamic-perspective#_edn2

SUN TZU (2012): The Art of War. New York: Chartwell Books. Translated by James Trapp.

VEGETIUS (1996): Vegetius: Epitome of Military Science. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Translated by N. P. Milner.

WITHER, James K. (2020): Defining Hybrid Warfare. Per Concordiam, 10(1), 7–9. Online: https://perconcordiam.com/perCon_V10N1_ENG.pdf

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.