Analysis of Hybrid Warfare Tactics Within the Framework of International Law
The traditional concept of war involved open military conflicts between states, but in the modern world, the nature of warfare is evolving. Wars are now waged not only with tanks and rifles but also through cyberattacks, disinformation, economic pressures, and the use of proxy groups. How is this new form of warfare evaluated under international law?
Definition and Elements of Hybrid Warfare
Hybrid warfare is the combination of conventional military force with unconventional methods. This strategy includes:
Military operations,
Cyberattacks,
Disinformation campaigns,
Economic sanctions,
Use of proxy groups,
Terrorism and asymmetric warfare techniques.
Hybrid warfare aims to weaken rival states without a formal declaration of war. States use these methods to harm their adversaries while exploiting gaps in international law.
Hybrid Warfare in International Law
While international law includes a set of rules regulating wars and conflicts between states, it has not fully adapted to the new threats posed by hybrid warfare. Some of the most debated issues include:
1. The Issue of War Declaration and Legitimacy
For a war to be legally recognized, according to the United Nations (UN) Charter, it must either be based on the right to self-defense or be conducted with the approval of the UN Security Council. However, hybrid wars are often not explicitly claimed by states and are carried out through indirect means, making it difficult to apply international law in such cases.
2. Cyberattacks and International Law
One of the most commonly used methods in hybrid warfare is cyberattacks. Attacks targeting critical infrastructure, disrupting banking systems, or stealing state secrets pose serious threats to national security. However, international law has not yet established a clear framework equating cyberattacks with traditional acts of war.
3. Legal Liability of Disinformation
Social media platforms and propaganda tools play a crucial role in hybrid warfare. Spreading misinformation to create societal polarization, manipulate elections, or direct public opinion is a key component of modern hybrid war tactics. However, these activities exist in a legal gray area due to the thin line between freedom of expression and acts of hostility.
4. Use of Proxy Groups and Responsibility Issues
States can finance and support proxy groups to protect their interests without directly engaging in war. However, international law does not clearly define which state should be held accountable for the crimes committed by these groups. In particular, the legal framework for holding states responsible for war crimes and human rights violations committed through proxy forces remains a major debate.
Adapting International Law to Hybrid Warfare
The increasing prevalence of hybrid warfare necessitates that international law adapts to this new form of conflict. To achieve this, the following steps should be taken:
Expanding international agreements on cyber warfare,
Establishing clearer legal mechanisms for accountability in the use of proxy groups,
Recognizing disinformation and cyber threats as international security concerns,
Enhancing the role of the UN and other international organizations in countering hybrid warfare.
Conclusion: A Struggle Beyond Law
Hybrid warfare enables states to weaken their rivals without direct confrontation. However, international law has not yet fully responded to this form of warfare. In the future, it will be inevitable for international law to develop more detailed frameworks to regulate hybrid warfare tactics.
#HybridWarfare #InternationalLaw #CyberWar #Disinformation #ProxyWars
