Daily Times

States are created with a purpose and act for a purpose. Hamas’s actions of October 7, 2023, were for a specific purpose and Israel’s response since then is also with a purpose.

One can differ with that purpose and debate on the integrity of the respective purpose will continue, like always.

The purpose of each state’s actions is primarily to influence the behaviour of the adversary, the enemy state or the Non-State Actors (NSAs). And, to do that states acquire and accumulate power so that they accomplish their purpose.

Once the states have acquired and consolidated their power they look for suitable tools to execute their agenda designed for the purpose which is to influence the behaviour of the adversary. The acquisition and development of suitable tools largely depend on the available resources and technological prowess of the states.

The states, which aspire to dominate the regional or global political architecture, usually have the relevant wherewithal in the realm of both tangible and intangible terms. The tangible tools that are measurable may include military power, economic resources, technological prowess, and the capacity of the populace.

Hybrid warfare insists that the states deploy hard power or the kinetic application as a last resort.

States may deploy these resources in sync with intangible elements which may include diplomacy, values, and the conduct of the state.

Perhaps, the best example of influencing the behaviour of the state and the people is the spread of Islam. The spread of Islam gained momentum due to an extraordinary display of values and the conduct of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).

Once the tangible and intangible elements of these resources are employed in sync against the adversary to influence its behaviour, what Western academics are referring to hybrid warfare. Hence, the concept of hybrid warfare is as old as the warfare itself even if the terminology is relatively novel. Perhaps, Sun Tzu’s idea of winning the war without fighting also referred to the same in the conceptual domain.

Back to the purpose, which is to influence the behaviour of the adversary, hybrid warfare insists that the states deploy hard power or the kinetic application as a last resort.

However, we notice that in the 21st Century, all wars which were supposed to be engaged in a hybrid manner meaning the kinetic application will come to the fore only as a last resort, have been at the forefront against Unequal Military Powers (UMPs), which amounts to an overkill.

The dawn of the 21st century witnessed the unfortunate events of 9/11, followed by a disproportionate reaction of the US without any conclusive investigation that could point fingers at Afghanistan.

The unprecedented bombing of the war-ravaged territory of Afghanistan was started by the most modern and strongest air force, the USAF. As expected, the fearest of the air campaign could not achieve the stated objectives and hence the boots on the ground had to be placed in great numbers, again an attempt to overkill. Because the Afghans did not have organised armed forces, so-called NSAs put up resistance against the world’s most modern and history’s strongest armed forces.

The Afghan Taliban fought to liberate their homeland from the occupying forces no matter how strong they were. They succeeded in achieving their just purpose after a long-drawn war of over two decades.

In the bargain, the US lost over 2.0 trillion dollars and left Afghanistan in haste on August 14, 2021, after the US brokered a deal with the Taliban who were not even recognized officially by the US. Interestingly, the US signed the Doha Agreement with the same Taliban who were ousted by them soon after 9/11.

In my opinion, what Israel or the US are doing today under the banner of hybrid warfare, is not the spirit of hybrid warfare as pronounced by Sun Tzu or explained by me in the first few paragraphs of this short article.

The core lies in employing tangible and intangible elements of available resources in a hybrid manner to influence the behaviour of the adversary without causing too much damage to the life and property of the target state. However, what the 21st Century has witnessed is exactly opposite to what was conceived since time immemorial.

In its essence, India employed certain elements of hybrid warfare against Pakistan from 2005 to perhaps 2020, until they were exposed by the European Watchdog DisInfoLab. The Indian Chronicles revealed that India had deployed at least 750 fake websites which were aimed at implicating a terrorist state in the Western Capitals.

Therefore, in my opinion, the rest of the 21st-century wars do not fall into the domain of hybrid warfare in its essence, particularly between the UMPs.

The writer of this article has authored three international books: “Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan” “South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace” and “Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War.”