What Is Hybrid Warfare? Tactics, Examples and Global Security Risks
Modern conflict does not always begin with tanks crossing a border or missiles striking military targets. A state can pressure an opponent without formally declaring war, combining cyber operations, information campaigns, economic coercion, political interference, covert activity and the threat of military force.
This increasingly important security concept is commonly described as hybrid warfare.
NATO describes hybrid threats as combinations of military and non-military, covert and overt methods that can include disinformation, cyberattacks, economic pressure, irregular armed groups and conventional forces. Their purpose can be to destabilize societies while blurring the distinction between peace and open conflict.
For governments, the challenge is not simply identifying an attack. It is determining who is responsible, whether separate incidents are connected, and when pressure below the threshold of war becomes serious enough to require a national or collective response.
That ambiguity is precisely what makes hybrid warfare strategically powerful.
What Is Hybrid Warfare?
There is no universally accepted definition.
Broadly, hybrid warfare describes the coordinated use of different instruments of power to weaken, influence or pressure an adversary without relying exclusively on conventional military combat.
The European Union describes hybrid threats as harmful activities that can combine information manipulation, cyberattacks, economic coercion, covert political maneuvering, coercive diplomacy and threats of military force. Such campaigns may deliberately remain below the threshold normally perceived as an act of war.
A conventional conflict may have relatively recognizable participants, battlefields and military objectives.
Hybrid competition can be much harder to identify.
A cyberattack might disrupt government networks. False narratives could spread across social media. Economic restrictions might increase pressure on an industry. Political groups could receive covert support. Critical infrastructure could suffer unexplained disruption while military forces conduct exercises nearby.
Any single event might appear isolated.
When coordinated toward the same strategic objective, however, those actions can become part of a broader hybrid campaign.
Cyber Warfare Explained: How Digital Attacks Are Reshaping Global Security
Why Countries Use Hybrid Warfare
Direct war between major powers carries enormous risks.
Modern militaries possess precision weapons, long-range missiles, sophisticated air defenses and, in several cases, nuclear arsenals. Direct confrontation can therefore produce costs far greater than the political objective being pursued.
Hybrid strategies provide another option.
They may allow governments or other actors to pursue strategic objectives while maintaining ambiguity about responsibility and avoiding immediate escalation into conventional war.
CSIS places many of these activities within the broader gray zone between ordinary statecraft and open warfare. Its research identifies tools including political and economic coercion, information operations, cyber activity, proxy support and provocations by state-controlled forces.
The objective is not necessarily to defeat an opponent's army.
Sometimes the objective is to make the opponent less capable of making decisions.
If political institutions become divided, public confidence falls, infrastructure becomes unreliable and leaders cannot determine how to respond, considerable strategic damage may occur without a conventional invasion.
The Main Tools of Hybrid Warfare
Hybrid warfare is powerful because it can combine several forms of pressure simultaneously.
1. Cyber Operations
Government agencies, financial institutions, communications networks, transportation systems and energy infrastructure increasingly depend on digital systems.
That creates opportunities for cyber operations.
An attacker might seek intelligence, disrupt services, steal sensitive information or create uncertainty about the reliability of critical infrastructure.
Cyber operations also create an attribution problem. Establishing responsibility can require lengthy technical and intelligence investigations, potentially giving an attacker valuable time and plausible deniability.
2. Information Manipulation
The information environment has become another strategic arena.
NATO distinguishes deliberate disinformation from misinformation that spreads without malicious intent. Coordinated information threats can seek to manipulate public opinion, deepen social divisions or weaken confidence in institutions.
Social media has dramatically increased the speed at which such campaigns can operate.
A successful influence campaign does not necessarily need to convince everyone that one narrative is true. Creating confusion about what is true at all may itself weaken public trust.
3. Economic Pressure
Trade restrictions, control over strategic resources, investment leverage, supply-chain dependencies and other forms of economic coercion can also become geopolitical instruments.
Economic pressure is especially important because modern economies depend on interconnected financial, energy, technology and transportation networks.
The boundary between legitimate economic policy and coercive geopolitical behavior can consequently become difficult to define.
Read Global Power Desk's explainer on How Sanctions Affect International Business for the economic-security side of this competition.
4. Proxy and Irregular Forces
States do not always need to deploy their own conventional forces.
Local militias, political movements, private actors or other armed organizations can sometimes advance broader geopolitical objectives while creating distance between a sponsoring state and events on the ground.
This is where hybrid warfare overlaps with proxy conflict.
Proxy Wars Explained: How Powerful Nations Compete Without Fighting Directly
Proxy warfare and hybrid warfare are not identical. Proxy forces are one potential instrument inside a much larger hybrid toolkit.
5. Military Pressure Without Full-Scale War
Conventional military power still matters.
Large exercises, troop deployments, naval patrols, air operations and missile deployments can communicate political intent without necessarily beginning a war.
Military pressure can become especially effective when combined with diplomatic, cyber, economic and informational tools.
This is why the word hybrid matters: the strategy derives much of its effectiveness from combining different instruments rather than relying on a single method.
Hybrid Warfare vs. Conventional Warfare
The distinction can be simplified:
Conventional warfare primarily seeks military objectives through direct armed force.
Hybrid warfare combines military and non-military instruments and may deliberately operate below the threshold of declared war.
But the two categories can overlap.
A hybrid campaign can escalate into conventional warfare, while conventional wars increasingly include cyber operations, drones, information campaigns and economic pressure.
Modern conflict therefore exists on a spectrum rather than inside perfectly separated categories.
See Military Drones and Modern Warfare: How Unmanned Systems Are Changing the Battlefield.
Why Hybrid Attacks Are Difficult to Stop
The greatest defensive challenge is often attribution.
If an identifiable military crosses an international border, responsibility is relatively clear.
But what happens when a government network is hacked by an unknown group?
What if infrastructure fails under suspicious circumstances?
What if manipulated information originates from thousands of anonymous accounts?
What if armed groups receive assistance that cannot immediately be traced to a government?
Governments must determine whether these events are independent incidents or parts of a coordinated campaign.
Respond too slowly and the attacker may gain an advantage.
Respond too aggressively without sufficient evidence and the defender risks escalating the situation unnecessarily.
This creates what strategists often describe as the gray zone.
NATO and the Hybrid-Warfare Challenge
Hybrid threats have become an important issue for NATO.
The alliance says technological change and global interconnectedness have increased the speed, scale and intensity of hybrid activities. NATO has developed preventive and response options, strengthened intelligence analysis and increased cooperation with partners including the European Union.
The question becomes particularly important for collective defense.
A conventional armed attack presents a comparatively familiar scenario. A coordinated campaign involving cyber disruption, sabotage and information manipulation can be much harder to classify.
That means resilience—protecting communications, infrastructure, democratic institutions and information systems—has become increasingly important alongside traditional military deterrence.
For the alliance's broader structure, read NATO Explained: History, Members and Why the Alliance Still Matters.
Hybrid Warfare in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Artificial intelligence could make the information and cyber dimensions of hybrid competition even more complicated.
AI systems can process enormous amounts of data, accelerate intelligence analysis and support military decision-making. Generative technology can also make synthetic media and large-scale information manipulation easier to produce.
The strategic competition is therefore increasingly about information, networks and perception, not simply firepower.
Artificial Intelligence in Modern Warfare Explained
How Governments Defend Against Hybrid Threats
There is no single weapon capable of stopping hybrid warfare.
Effective defense requires resilience across multiple sectors.
Cybersecurity must protect government and infrastructure networks. Intelligence agencies need to identify coordinated campaigns. Governments must communicate credible information quickly. Energy and supply chains require redundancy. Democratic institutions need protection against covert interference.
International cooperation also matters because cyber networks, financial systems and information platforms cross national borders.
In March 2026, the Council of the European Union reaffirmed efforts to strengthen the EU's ability to prevent, deter and respond to hybrid campaigns and highlighted its existing hybrid-response toolbox.
For NATO's official framework, see NATO — Countering Hybrid Threats.
For the European perspective, see Council of the European Union — Hybrid Threats.
Why Hybrid Warfare Matters for Global Security
The central lesson is that the traditional distinction between war and peace is becoming less useful for understanding geopolitical competition.
A country can face sustained hostile pressure without experiencing conventional invasion.
Its networks can be attacked.
Its population can be targeted with information manipulation.
Its economy can face coercion.
Its political institutions can face interference.
And military power can remain visible in the background as a threat rather than immediately being used.
That creates a security environment in which countries must defend not only borders, but also networks, institutions, infrastructure, supply chains and public trust.
Hybrid warfare therefore represents more than a new military tactic.
It reflects a broader transformation in how states and other actors compete for power in an interconnected world.
Key Takeaways
- Hybrid warfare combines military and non-military tools.
- Cyberattacks, disinformation, economic coercion, proxy forces and military pressure can all form part of a hybrid campaign.
- Hybrid strategies often seek to remain below the threshold of conventional war.
- Attribution and ambiguity make hybrid threats particularly difficult to counter.
- Technology and global interconnectedness have increased the potential speed and reach of hybrid operations.
- National resilience is becoming as important as traditional battlefield capability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is hybrid warfare in simple terms?
Hybrid warfare is the coordinated use of military and non-military methods—such as cyber operations, information manipulation, economic pressure and irregular forces—to achieve strategic objectives.
Is hybrid warfare the same as cyber warfare?
No. Cyber warfare can be one component of hybrid warfare. A hybrid strategy can simultaneously use cyber, economic, political, informational and military tools.
Is proxy warfare a form of hybrid warfare?
Proxy forces can form part of a hybrid strategy, but the terms are not interchangeable. Hybrid warfare encompasses a much broader range of instruments.
Why is hybrid warfare difficult to counter?
Because individual actions may be ambiguous, responsibility can be difficult to establish and campaigns may deliberately remain below the threshold that would trigger a conventional military response.
Will hybrid warfare replace conventional warfare?
Probably not. Conventional military power remains central to global security, but hybrid methods increasingly operate alongside it and can shape events before, during and after armed conflict.
About Global Power Desk
Global Power Desk provides independent explainers and analysis on geopolitics, international security, military affairs, energy and the changing balance of global power.
Written and reviewed by the Global Power Desk Editorial Team.
Editorial note: This article is intended for news analysis and educational purposes. Assessments concerning hybrid threats can vary between governments, institutions and security researchers; where appropriate, the article distinguishes official assessments from established facts.