战时混合作战——概念与行动操作化尝试

A. Lesenciuc
{"title":"战时混合作战——概念与行动操作化尝试","authors":"A. Lesenciuc","doi":"10.55535/rmt.2023.1.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has made the concept of hybrid warfare almost forgotten. The literature has focused on the confrontation itself, but, as a rule, hybrid threats are activated when public attention is drawn to other issues and when the public is not prepared to meet the challenge. After the invasion of Ukraine, the term hybrid warfare has dissipated into the mass of frequently used operational terms. From the range of five dimensions of this term, which entails five types of associated interpretations (Solmaz, 2022), in the war in Ukraine, the emphasis seems to be on the aspects related to the hard component. The actual military confrontation, the occupation of Ukrainian territories by Russian troops and the violent actions (including those that exceed normative and moral boundaries on the battlefield) are the elements that attract public attention to a greater extent than the soft actions with a high degree of ambiguity (Mumford, Carlucci, 2022), contributing to the synergistic effect of sharp power. Under these conditions, hybrid warfare is not necessarily a form of war that substitutes for actual confrontation, but a way in which soft actions complement or compensate for the effects obtained by hard actions. Is the invasion of Ukraine a hybrid warfare, or can we talk about hybrid warfare as running parallel to and during the war? Which of these interpretative postures allows for the deviation from the classical meaning of war, as long as the action has been defined, from the perspective of the aggressor, as a “special military operation”? In the present paper, we attempt at perationalizing the concept of hybrid warfare, which has been analysed in the dynamics of application in several recent studies, starting from the study of its effects in the war in Ukraine (Muradov, 2022; Guerrero, 2022), and that of distinguishing between the hybrid warfare and ghibridnaia voina perspectives.\"","PeriodicalId":137367,"journal":{"name":"Romanian Military Thinking","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hybrid Warfare in Wartime – Concept and Action Operationalization Attempt –\",\"authors\":\"A. Lesenciuc\",\"doi\":\"10.55535/rmt.2023.1.3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\\"Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has made the concept of hybrid warfare almost forgotten. The literature has focused on the confrontation itself, but, as a rule, hybrid threats are activated when public attention is drawn to other issues and when the public is not prepared to meet the challenge. After the invasion of Ukraine, the term hybrid warfare has dissipated into the mass of frequently used operational terms. From the range of five dimensions of this term, which entails five types of associated interpretations (Solmaz, 2022), in the war in Ukraine, the emphasis seems to be on the aspects related to the hard component. The actual military confrontation, the occupation of Ukrainian territories by Russian troops and the violent actions (including those that exceed normative and moral boundaries on the battlefield) are the elements that attract public attention to a greater extent than the soft actions with a high degree of ambiguity (Mumford, Carlucci, 2022), contributing to the synergistic effect of sharp power. Under these conditions, hybrid warfare is not necessarily a form of war that substitutes for actual confrontation, but a way in which soft actions complement or compensate for the effects obtained by hard actions. Is the invasion of Ukraine a hybrid warfare, or can we talk about hybrid warfare as running parallel to and during the war? Which of these interpretative postures allows for the deviation from the classical meaning of war, as long as the action has been defined, from the perspective of the aggressor, as a “special military operation”? In the present paper, we attempt at perationalizing the concept of hybrid warfare, which has been analysed in the dynamics of application in several recent studies, starting from the study of its effects in the war in Ukraine (Muradov, 2022; Guerrero, 2022), and that of distinguishing between the hybrid warfare and ghibridnaia voina perspectives.\\\"\",\"PeriodicalId\":137367,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Romanian Military Thinking\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Romanian Military Thinking\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55535/rmt.2023.1.3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Romanian Military Thinking","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55535/rmt.2023.1.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“俄罗斯对乌克兰的侵略使混合战争的概念几乎被遗忘。文献集中在对抗本身,但是,通常,当公众的注意力被吸引到其他问题上时,当公众没有准备好迎接挑战时,混合威胁就会被激活。在入侵乌克兰之后,“混合战争”一词已经消失在大量频繁使用的作战术语中。从这个术语的五个维度的范围来看,它需要五种相关的解释(Solmaz, 2022),在乌克兰战争中,重点似乎放在与硬成分相关的方面。实际的军事对抗、俄罗斯军队对乌克兰领土的占领以及暴力行动(包括在战场上超越规范和道德界限的行动)是比具有高度模糊性的软行动更能吸引公众注意力的因素(Mumford, Carlucci, 2022),有助于锐实力的协同效应。在这种情况下,混合战争不一定是替代实际对抗的战争形式,而是软行动补充或补偿硬行动所取得效果的一种方式。入侵乌克兰是一场混合战争吗,或者我们可以说混合战争与战争并行并在战争期间进行?在这些解释姿态中,哪一种允许偏离战争的经典意义,只要从侵略者的角度来看,行动被定义为“特殊军事行动”?在本文中,我们试图将混合战争的概念具体化,最近的几项研究从其在乌克兰战争中的影响研究开始,分析了混合战争的应用动态(Muradov, 2022;Guerrero, 2022),以及区分混合战争和虚无视角的问题。”
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hybrid Warfare in Wartime – Concept and Action Operationalization Attempt –
"Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has made the concept of hybrid warfare almost forgotten. The literature has focused on the confrontation itself, but, as a rule, hybrid threats are activated when public attention is drawn to other issues and when the public is not prepared to meet the challenge. After the invasion of Ukraine, the term hybrid warfare has dissipated into the mass of frequently used operational terms. From the range of five dimensions of this term, which entails five types of associated interpretations (Solmaz, 2022), in the war in Ukraine, the emphasis seems to be on the aspects related to the hard component. The actual military confrontation, the occupation of Ukrainian territories by Russian troops and the violent actions (including those that exceed normative and moral boundaries on the battlefield) are the elements that attract public attention to a greater extent than the soft actions with a high degree of ambiguity (Mumford, Carlucci, 2022), contributing to the synergistic effect of sharp power. Under these conditions, hybrid warfare is not necessarily a form of war that substitutes for actual confrontation, but a way in which soft actions complement or compensate for the effects obtained by hard actions. Is the invasion of Ukraine a hybrid warfare, or can we talk about hybrid warfare as running parallel to and during the war? Which of these interpretative postures allows for the deviation from the classical meaning of war, as long as the action has been defined, from the perspective of the aggressor, as a “special military operation”? In the present paper, we attempt at perationalizing the concept of hybrid warfare, which has been analysed in the dynamics of application in several recent studies, starting from the study of its effects in the war in Ukraine (Muradov, 2022; Guerrero, 2022), and that of distinguishing between the hybrid warfare and ghibridnaia voina perspectives."
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Causes of the Failure of Russian Aviation in Achieving Air Supremacy in the Ukraine Conflict and Subsequent Influences on Its Evolution Scenario Development in Planning Military Actions to Prevent a Crisis Situation The Authentic Leader and Psychological Capital in the Military Environment EU Policies for Developing Capabilities to Counter Hybrid Threats 1946. The “Straits Crisis” as Reflected in the Intelligence Reports of the Romanian Military Attaché to the Republic of Türkiye Office’s Secretary
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1