IntroductionWhat exactly is Hybrid War? When somebody says the word war we automatically start to think about tanks, explosions, infantry, jets, plane carriers, subm

What exactly is Hybrid War? When somebody says the word war we automatically start to think about tanks, explosions, infantry, jets, plane carriers, submarines, etc. But, for common wisdom, even in 2023, it is very complicated to picture that hero raising the flag of their country, not in the middle of the most disastrous battlefield, but inside a computer room. However, the truth of the present-time style of war couldn’t be further from any of that. Many anonymous heroes battle in the most unsuspected battlefields to protect their country. That is the definition of what in Geopolitics we call Hybrid War. As an official definition it is useful to read 

, he defines hybrid warfare as the use of conventional military force supported by irregular and cyber warfare tactics. In particular, the Russian concept of “nonlinear conflict” is an example of an approximation toward hybrid warfare. He amplifies this definition by stating that this non-linear war is a type of fight that takes place at the exact moment in which a state employs conventional and irregular military forces (guerrillas, insurgency…) combined with psychological, political, and cyber assaults. 

For example: “Confusion and disorder ensue when weaponized information exacerbates the perception of insecurity in the populace as political, social, and cultural identities [are] pitted against one another.” This is not something so new though. In ancient Egypt, there were already campaigns of “erasing the previous pharaoh” from history. 

That was done precisely by literally scratching his image from temples and other possible testimonies of him in the civilization. Another case from a later date that adds to the point is the “propaganda war” developed during the second world war (1939-1945). Which consisted of a very successful campaign to depict the image of who was the enemy and motivating voluntary enrolment into the war by the United States. And as later examples, we can see the suspected meddling of social network websites like Facebook in the American elections. All of the above are part of the non-stopping hybrid warfare, which is the most complicated to pinpoint to raise awareness amongst the public. As can be read in 

 everything that used to be a bridge of connection in a globalized world, became a battlefield to fight over. Imagine if it is diverse, that today we will talk about Booking Engines and their collaboration to change the image of Taiwan as fully part of China.

 the study explains the case of how China has been paying several booking websites to display Taiwan as a region of China and Taipei as a Chinese city. As referred to in my first article in this application, the case of Taiwan is far more complicated than deciding if it is part of China or not. And many forget to research in the process what the Taiwanese would like (

Consult Why is Taiwan so Important in 2023

). The case itself is quite interesting and makes the critical mind question its own conceptions. Imagine how something seemingly so unharmful as an engine usually used for tourism, as is a website to make flight and hotel reservations, is being used as a weapon. 

The Chinese strategy with it consisted in spending money on several of those websites to make them portray cities like Taipei or Kaohsiung as “in China” when they officially are not part of continental China. Such an operation might seem like a waste of money and time at first, but, in reality, it is the type of strategy that given enough snowball effect can change the way people think and favor Chinese interests in the future. It is a very powerful weapon precisely aimed at changing the image of China that foreigners have in their imagination with something as simple as making reservations for their holidays. Let me show you how: Imagine Peter, Peter is 24 years old and studying to become a lawyer. So, he doesn’t have the time, nor the interest (which is perfectly valid), or even his suspicion raised which would make him fact-check a seemingly uninterested website that tells him: “Hey your flight to Taipei, China on the 4th of March of 2023 is 400 dollars, your hotel in Taiwan, China for a week is 600 dollars, in total your travel to Taiwan, China is 1000 dollars. Would you like to play with Visa or Master Card?”. Peter, then, which is more worried about organizing the holiday with his classmates, cheerfully calls them to break the news that he is ready to travel to Taiwan for their well-deserved holiday together. But while drinking his morning coffee, and explaining it to other friends, or family, or amongst that same group of friends, he unconsciously doesn’t just say he will be traveling soon to Taiwan or Taipei, he says: “I am going to Taipei, which is in China”. 

And his friends will share the image in which Taiwan is part of China. Therefore, they unsuspiciously will replicate such comment many times causing a snowball effect that will not be challenged until maybe somebody knowledgeable about the situation tries to dispel the spread fake. But, as many experts in any field will concur, the problem is that by that time the damage is already done. 

The spread is too wide, and the diffusion of the reality behind the curtain will never catch up to the snowball effect still ongoing behind the scenes. Furthermore, when people have already formed an image about something, they have a tendency to treat the new information as fake, independently of how elaborate of an argumentation it has behind. The aim of this explanation is not to point out an accusatory finger at China but to observe their clever strategy, the snowball effect of these cases has prompted social networks like Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook to implement ways to verify the possession of accounts by opinionmakers. Nowadays it is close to impossible to pose as an analyst of the white house or the kremlin because the “tick” or any symbol of choice is not there. Thus, netizens can form their own opinion in a safer way. But that is always in theory.

Michelle Foucault said that the most important part of the discourse is none other than the one we avoid. That is, when a president or a decision maker of any kind pronounces a speech we have to look for the problems, issues, or developments that they don’t want to address. The present time is a very good moment to learn about this and find many examples to observe. Regarding the discourse of the west toward Asian powers we can observe how it swifts according to international developments and interests. And reading my fellow specialists on the Balkans and their studies on confronting Russian propaganda we can approach one of the most successful wielders of such kind of war. The Kremlin used this approach to conflict, with a strategy including fake news and propaganda, so successfully that impeded any action by the EU and NATO when they took Crimea from Ukraine. But let’s not assume that it is a strategy only used by certain powers, it is widespread all over the world. 

The United States also showed a very successful use of such way of war, as explained by 

: in the case of US vs Iraq, combining Operation Desert Storm in a large coalition, with political actions in the UN, coordinated with traditional military operations, and synchronized with a decade of pressure by occupation, land troops, and economic sanctions. The reality of the present time is that there is no such thing as an absolute truth and that is an absolute truth, a permanent contradiction. Critical minds need to compose the truth from a puzzle from all the pieces from different sources to make sure they understand as much as possible from a subject before voicing their opinion on it. You might be collaborating with somebody’s strategy.

Hybrid war: alternative battlefields

0 Comments