Comparison Of Small War And Hybrid War Scenarios: The Role Of Covert Proxy Elements
The concept of hybrid war and the concept of small war have some similarities in terms of their nature, objectives and strategies though they are separate scenarios.
The terms "hybrid war" and "small war" both refer to forms of warfare that rely on covert and specialized operations to achieve their objectives. However, they are not identical in their scope, methods and implications. This article examines the similarities and differences between these two types of warfare, focusing on how they use clandestine and unconventional tactics to gain an advantage over their adversaries.
The concept of hybrid war and the concept of small war have some similarities in terms of their nature, objectives and strategies though they are distinct scenarios. Both concepts refer to a type of conflict that involves a combination of conventional and unconventional warfare, such as guerrilla tactics, color revolutions, cyberattacks, propaganda, terrorism and proxy forces. Both concepts aim to achieve political and strategic goals by exploiting the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of the adversary, such as its legitimacy, cohesion, economy, morale and public opinion.
In the realm of war, as illuminated by Clausewitz, we encounter a profound definition of War, he says, it is "an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will." It is the deployment of power and might, a relentless pursuit to bend the adversary to their desires. In The Art of War, Sun Tzu tells us that "the greatest victory is that which requires no battle." He believed that war should be avoided whenever possible, and that victory can be achieved by using deception, intelligence, diplomacy, and other non-direct means. Sun Tzu also advocated for adapting to changing circumstances and exploiting the enemy's weaknesses indirectly. These principles are still relevant today for both the small war and the hybrid war practitioners, who have sought to gain an advantage without engaging in direct confrontation.
But let us not be confined to the conventional realm of large-scale wars. In this twilight zone of the real, even small wars share the same objective – to compel the adversary to comply with our will – However, with hybrid wars the means employed to achieve this objective take on a kaleidoscope of possibilities. Contrary to popular belief, large-scale battles were not a frequent occurrence in early-modern warfare. Scholars have emphasized the scarcity of decisive field engagements and the importance of other forms of military activity. Among these, the small war, or the use of irregular forces, raids, sabotage, skirmishes, and sieges, was a crucial aspect of early-modern warfare that is often neglected by conventional narratives. While smaller in scale, these raids were very much an extension of the war effort. By surgically targeting certain weaknesses in the enemy forces or state.
One aspect that's intriguing in the comparison of the small war with the hybrid war is the prevalence of the covert element in both types of conflicts. The small war, known for irregular warfare, involves the use of unconventional tactics and strategies by non-state actors or state-sponsored proxies to achieve political or military objectives. One of these tactics is the strategic raid, which targets specific high-priority targets, such as crops, weapons, infrastructure, or resources. Thus a strategic raid is a covert operation that aims to inflict damage, disrupt operations, or create confusion among the enemy while minimizing exposure and risk for the attackers.
"The line between disorder and order lies in logistics." — Sun Tzu
One of the famous historical examples of this type of warfare is the Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815), which involved a series of conflicts between France and various coalitions of European powers. The Napoleonic Wars were characterized by conventional battles between large armies of course but also had plenty of irregular warfare involving guerrilla fighters, partisans, raiders, and spies. These partial combats were often covert operations that aimed to harass, ambush, or sabotage the enemy's movements or supply chains. They also served to gather intelligence or test the enemy's strength and intentions.
The hybrid war, on the other hand, is a combination of conventional and unconventional methods, such as cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, economic sanctions, and proxy forces, that aim to undermine the adversary's will and capacity to resist. The hybrid war is also covert, but it has a broader scope as it focuses on the macro from the shadows. It seeks to influence or manipulate the political, economic, social, or cultural spheres of the adversary, rather than just its military capabilities. Yet in both, the covert element serves to conceal the identity, intentions, and actions of the aggressors, as well as to create ambiguity and confusion among the defenders/targets. Which allows the aggressors to exploit the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of the defenders, such as their lack of preparedness, awareness, or coordination. Hence the covert element is a key factor that shapes the dynamics and outcomes of both the small war and the hybrid war.
Thus hybrid war refers to conflicts on a larger scale involving multiple domains (military, economic, political, information, etc.) and multiple actors (state and non-state actors), while small war typically refers to localized conflicts with limited scope and scale. Hybrid war often involves state-sponsored or state-supported actors engaging in unconventional warfare, whereas a small war operation can involve non-state actors or insurgent guerilla groups.
One of the ways that both types of warfare use the covert element is by imposing economic pressure on their adversaries. The small war can take the form of trade blockades, which aim to cut off or restrict the flow of goods and services to or from a target country or region basically as an extension of siege warfare. Trade blockades can have a significant impact on the economy and livelihood of the target population, as well as on their morale and support for their government.
In a hybrid war, economic pressure can be exerted through economic sanctions, which are measures that restrict or prohibit trade, investment, aid, or other forms of economic interaction with a target country or entity. Economic sanctions can have a similar effect as trade blockades on the target's economy and society, but they can also be more targeted and flexible. Economic sanctions are of course used as a tool of the US-led West’s Rules-Based Order or negotiation to induce compliance from the target. Both trade blockades and economic sanctions are non-direct forms of economic warfare that can have significant consequences for both sides of a conflict.
Overall, hybrid war and small war share the commonality of being covert and indirect forms of warfare, but they differ in terms of scale, scope, technological sophistication, and state involvement. For hybrid war encompasses a broader range of tactics and strategies, while small war today would now be largely absorbed within the whole of hybrid war operations.