Kautilya’s Arthashastra, Hybrid Warfare and the Fractal Nature of Military Thinking
Copyright (c) 2025 Zoltán Jobbágy

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Abstract
This article claims that addressing the hybrid nature of conflict, there is scope for new definitions, concepts, assumptions and generalisations at various levels of abstraction. By establishing connections to prior classics, each method contributes to the meaningful synthesis or combination of vast volumes of knowledge to enhance comprehension of real-world events. As a philosophy of warfare, hybrid warfare is successful, enhances research value, and creates maturity of a corpus of war knowledge. Still, every theory of war entails theorising about irregular, fragmented patterns with different levels of intricacy. The Arthashastra, an epic work by Kautilya, clarifies that any such allusion could compromise a solid comprehension of the message and theoretical implications of hybrid warfare. It detaches theory from its practical relevance and forbids decoding particular historical circumstances.
Keywords:
References
BRODIE, Bernard (1949): Strategy as a Science. World Politics, 1(4), 467–488. Online: https://doi.org/10.2307/2008833
BUCHLER, Justus (1966): Metaphysics of Natural Complexes. New York – London: Columbia University Press.
CAMBRIA, Antonio – FISSORE, Cecilia – MARCHISIO, Marina – SACCHET, Matteo – SPINELLO, Enrico (2023): Educational Innovation in Hybrid Warfare. ICERI 2023 Proceedings, 9433–9440. Online: https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2023.2432
CÎRDEI, Ionuţ A. (2023): Training of the Forces for Carrying Out Military Actions in Operational Environments Characterized by the Existence of Hybrid Threats. Land Forces Academy Review, 28(1), 11–19. Online: https://doi.org/10.2478/raft-2023-0002
CÎRDEI, Ionuţ A. – TUDORACHE, Paul – ISPAS, Lucian (2023): Functional Models of the Sponsor–Agent Relationship in Proxy Warfare. International Conference. Knowledge-Based Organization, 29(1), 27–33. Online: https://doi.org/10.2478/kbo-2023-0005
CLAUSEWITZ, Carl von (1993): On War. London: Everyman’s Library. Edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret.
CRANE, Conrad (2001): Effects-Based Operations: A Blast from the Past. Defense Week, 14 May 2001.
CREVELD, Martin van (1991): The Transformation of War. The Most Radical Reinterpretation of Armed Conflict Since Clausewitz. New York: The Free Press.
FULLER, John Frederick Charles (1937): The Foundations of the Science of War. London: Hutchinson and Co.
FULLER, John Frederick Charles (1923): The Reformation of War. London: Hutchinson and Co.
GALEOTTI, Mark (2014): The ‘Gerasimov Doctrine’ and Russian Non-Linear War. Online: https://inmoscowsshadows.wordpress.com/2014/07/06/the-gerasimov-doctrine-and-russian-non-linear-war/
GALEOTTI, Mark (2018): I’m Sorry for Creating the ‘Gerasimov Doctrine’. Foreign Policy, 5 March 2018. Online: https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/05/im-sorry-for-creating-the-gerasimov-doctrine/
GALEOTTI, Mark (2019): The Mythical ‘Gerasimov Doctrine’ and the Language of Threat. Critical Studies on Security, 7(2), 157–161. Online: https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2018.1441623
GAUTAM, Pradeep K. (2013): Understanding Kautilya’s Four Upayas. Online: https://idsa.in/idsacomments/UnderstandingKautilyasFourUpayas_ pkgautam_200613
GERASIMOV, Valery (2016): The Value of Science Is in the Foresight. New Challenges Demand Rethinking the Forms and Methods of Carrying out Combat Operations. Military Review, 96(1), 23–29. Translated by Robert Coalson.
GWYNN, Charles W. (1934): Imperial Policing. London: Macmillan.
HAGELSTAM, Axel (2018): Cooperating to Counter Hybrid Threats. Online: https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2018/11/23/cooperating-to-counter-hybrid-threats/index.html
HOFFMAN, Frank G. (2007): Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars. Arlington: Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.
HOOKER, Richard D. Jr. (2011): Beyond “Vom Kriege”: The Character and Conduct of Modern War. Parameters, 41(4), 1–13. Online: https://doi.org/10.55540/0031-1723.2609
JOBBÁGY, Zoltán – ZSIGMOND, Edina eds. (2025): Hybrid Warfare Reference Curriculum, Volume I, Compulsory Lectures. Budapest: Ludovika University Press. Online: https://doi.org/10.36250/01237_00
KAUTILYA (1992): The Arthashastra. India Penguin Classics.
KHALIL, Elias L. (1990): Natural Complex vs. Natural System. Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 13(1), 11–31. Online: https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-1750(90)90031-Z
LORENZ, Edward N. (1993): The Essence of Chaos. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
MANDELBROT, Benoit B. (1983): The Fractal Geometry of Nature. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company.
MATTIS, James N. – HOFFMAN, Frank (2005): Future Warfare: The Rise of Hybrid Wars. Online: https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2005/november/future-warfare-rise-hybrid-wars
MCNICOLL, Iain (2003): Effects-Based Air Operations: Air Command and Control and the Nature of the Emerging Battlespace. The RUSI Journal, 148(3), 38–44. Online: https://doi.org/10.1080/03071840308446887
MEYER, Andrew – WILSON, Andrew R. (2003): Sunzi Bingfa as History and Theory. In LEE, Bradford A. – WALLING, Karl F. (eds.): Strategic Logic and Political Rationality. Essays in Honor of Michael I. Handel. London: Frank Cass, 99–117.
NAGEL, Ernest (1979): The Structure of Science. Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
NATO (2015): Press Statements by the NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini. Online: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_125361.htm
NATO (2017a): NATO Welcomes Opening of European Centre for Countering Hybrid Threats. Online: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_143143.htm
NATO (2017b): Secretary General Participates in Hybrid Centre of Excellence Inauguration with Finnish Leaders and EU High Representative. Online: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_147497.htm
NATO (2021): What Is NATO Doing to Address Hybrid Threats? Online: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_183004.htm
RAȚIU, Aurelian – CÎRDEI, Ionuţ A. – HERMAN, Ramona-Elena (2023): Military Actions Characteristics in Hybrid Operational Environments. International Conference. Knowledge-Based Organization, 29(1), 78–85. Online: https://doi.org/10.2478/kbo-2023-0013
PINDJÁK, Peter (2014): Deterring Hybrid Warfare: A Chance for NATO and the EU to Work Together? Online: https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2014/11/18/deterring-hybrid-warfare-a-chance-for-nato-and-the-eu-to-work-together/index.html
PUYVELDE, Damien van (2015): Hybrid War – Does It Even Exist? Online: https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2015/05/07/hybrid-war-does-it-even-exist/index.html
ROBBINS, Stephen P. (1987): Organization Theory. Structure, Design, and Applications. Hoboken: Prentice Hall.
TOFFLER, Alvin – TOFFLER, Heidi (1993): War and Anti-War. Survival at the Dawn of the 21st Century. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
TUDORACHE, Paul – BÂRSAN, Ghiţă – JOBBÁGY, Zoltán – RAŢIU, Aurelian (2022): Hybrid Warfare – From Red to Blue Operational Behaviours. International Conference. Knowledge-Based Organization, 28(1), 128–133. Online: https://doi.org/10.2478/kbo-2022-0020
TUDORACHE, Paul – BÂRSAN, Ghiţă – JOBBÁGY, Zotlán – CÎRDEI, Ionuţ A. – GLIGOREA, Ilie (2023): An Innovative Conceptual Model for Education and Training on Hybrid Warfare. Management & Marketing, 18(3), 234–250. Online: https://doi.org/10.2478/mmcks-2023-0013
VAN DER WALDT, Gerrit (2021): The Judicious Use of Theory in Social Science Research. The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa, 17(1), 1–9. Online: https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v17i1.1039