Security and Defence Quarterly

3-22

Authors: Leszek Elak, Zdzisław Śliwa

The term ‘hybrid warfare’ proved to be very popular among academics, military thinkers and professionals leading to a variety of definitions and approaches. It was linked with the new generation concept popularised by Russian military thought. The essence of the hybridity is not new, as using a combination of military and non-military instruments is as old as mankind and is recognised but interpreted differently. The paper examines both the concept and its implementation based on case studies and theoretical considerations. It debates possible ways of using it to confront targeted nations by a combination of a variety of tools and approaches. The term ‘hybrid’, used in connotation with military domain, proved to be very popular at the beginning of the current century. It is linked with using other than military tools in combination with military pressure to influence the security situation in other opposing nations. It is based on the valid assumption that it is not necessary to use combat power in a globalised world to impact on the internal situation of other nations, which could lead to their partial or complete subordination. It was closely related to Russian operations in Georgia and later in Ukraine by the utilisation of asymmetric methods to subordinate Crimea without conducting large-scale military operations. Michael Kofman stated that just “in two short years, the word has mutated from describing how Moscow was fighting its war in Ukraine incorporating all the various elements of Russian influence and national power. The term continues to evolve, spawning iterations like ‘multi-vector hybrid warfare’ in Europe. Hybrid warfare has become the Frankenstein of the field of Russia military analysis; it has taken on a life of its own and there is no obvious way to contain it” (Kofman 2016). Those two wars in 2008 and 2014 proved that approaches to warfare are evolving when compared to the regime change in Iraq when a large-scale multinational force was used or the supporting of rebels in Libya with NATO’s air power. Therefore, “hybrid threats incorporate a full range of modes of warfare, including conventional capabilities, irregular tactics and formations, terrorist acts that include indiscriminate violence and coercion, and criminal disorder. These multi-modal activities can be conducted by separate units, or even by the same unit, but are generally operationally and tactically directed and coordinated within the main battlespace to achieve synergistic effects in the physical and psychological dimensions of conflict” (Hoffman 2009, p. 36). The ‘hybrid warfare’ concept supported by new technologies and opportunities has been evolving over the centuries challenging contemporary democracies and threatening them via evolving attacking options. This is a tool exploited by some nations, illegal organisations, terrorist groups etc. as they do not have any moral and legal impediments stopping them. Constant study of interstate conflicts is required to define multidimensional threats allowing the creation of comprehensive capabilities to face them. The military sphere is just one of many fields a country or an organisation must further and purposely develop to preserve independence. European security is currently very complex in both the south and east part of the continent. It has been necessary to confront a non-military influx of displaced persons and migrants coming from regions affected by conflicts that may lead to losing full control over state borders and disorganisation of internal security systems and partial breakdown of the economic system. In the East, there is a threat of military conflict to be preceded by other means. In relation to the growing threat, armed forces have already been deployed in problematic regions in the south and east of Europe to perform a series of tasks in support of civilian law enforcement entities. Securing state borders, protection of the population, ensuring the functioning of public administration, protection of important infrastructure and performance of tasks for extra-military support of armed forces are the priorities of such a non-military crisis. In Eastern Europe, NATO battle groups have been deployed to enhance security, to show decisiveness and to deter any aggression against member states. The aim of the paper is to show the complexity of modern security structure that is facing ‘hybrid’ challenges. It will present the overall concept of ‘hybrid warfare’ as defined by selected nations and organisations and possible ways of opposing the type of non-military pressure that could lead to an armed conflict. The assessment is that there is strong focus on debates related to terminology, definitions and overall discussion but actions are not implemented by prepared nations to face ‘hybrid’ confrontation using all the available instruments of power in an orchestrated way. This is bringing up such basic questions as: How do we understand ‘hybrid warfare’ in a national context? What are the major vulnerabilities of the national security system? and Are national security related entities prepared to face threats in a coordinated and organised way?

48-62

Authors: Agostino Massa

The location and building of big hazardous infrastructures is a typical feature of the modernization process, in all countries and epochs. Since they are usually useful for a large region but their impact is very localized, the people living around the places where these facilities are active, or where their building is planned, very often organize and perform protest activities against them. Starting from the presentation of recent data about these issues in Italy, considered as a good example of a liberal democracy country, the article is set to discuss their social and political consequences, focusing in particular on the so-called “NIMBY syndrome”, its development and the strategies elaborated by public and private actors to cope with it.

79-96

Authors: Artur Kuptel

Development of systems with an evolving level of autonomy is among the most controversial and yet promising aspects of military forces’ modernisation. The application of quasi- artificial intelligence in combat machines opens a new uncharted area of possibilities. In essence, these modifications aim to reduce the extent of human interference in the functioning of unmanned systems virtually to none. The potential risks are explored in dangerous scenarios, which consider that apart from offering far-reaching advantages of using platforms with autonomic capabilities, they can be used against humanity. These scenarios assume a pivotal role in forecasting possible directions for development of the armed forces. This paper attempts to determine the essence of combat systems autonomy while focusing on a few of the most sensitive issues. For a transparent and credible debate on combat systems autonomy, it is adviseable that no ambiguity is present in terminological, ethical, legal and technological complexities, whose misinterpretation may become a source of unnecessary understatements or even lead to distortion of the debate.

126-143

Authors: Kamil Kuć, Walentyna Trzcińska

Conflicts in the 21st century have forced qualitative changes in the way of training missionary personnel. Police forces are currently used in various joint operations, which include, among others, elements of the fight against terrorism, ensuring the security of civilians and training of security forces. New types of operations require corrected preparation systems. This article analyses the previous way of preparing such units as Individual Police Officers, Specialized Police Teams, Formed Police Units, as well as the issue related to the training modification proposal, and one of them is the implementation of the virtual game “Gaming for Peace” as a supplement to the training gap through modern and more effective training.