Hybrid warfare is a military strategy that blends conventional warfare,

irregular warfare and cyberwarfare.[1] By combining kinetic operations

with subversive efforts, the aggressor intends to avoid attribution or
retribution.[2] Hybrid warfare can be used to describe the flexible and
complex dynamics of the battlespace requiring a highly adaptable and
resilient response.[1][3] There are a variety of terms used to refer to the
hybrid war concept: hybrid war, hybrid warfare, hybrid threat, or hybrid
adversary. US military bodies tend to speak in terms of a hybrid threat,
while academic literature speaks of a hybrid warfare.
Any adversary that simultaneously and adaptively employs a tailored mix
of conventional, irregular, terrorism and criminal means or activities in
the operational battlespace. Rather than a single entity, a hybrid threat or
challenger may be comprised of a combination of state and non-state
actors.
Hybrid conflicts therefore are full spectrum wars with both physical and
conceptual dimensions: the former, a struggle against an armed enemy
and the latter, a wider struggle for, control and support of the combat
zones indigenous population, the support of the home fronts of the
intervening nations, and the support of the international community. To
secure and stabilize the indigenous population, the intervening forces
must immediately rebuild or restore security, essential services, local
government, self-defense forces and essential elements of the economy.

is a Shi'a Islamist militant group and political party based in

Lebanon.[17][18] Hezbollah's paramilitary wing is the Jihad
Council,[19][20] and its political wing is Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc
party in the Lebanese parliament. After the death of Abbas al-Musawi in
1992, the group has been headed by Hassan Nasrallah, its SecretaryGeneral.
After the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, Israel occupied a strip of
south Lebanon, which was controlled by the South Lebanon Army (SLA),
a militia supported by Israel. Hezbollah was conceived by Muslim clerics
and funded by Iran primarily to harass the Israeli occupation.[4] Its
leaders were followers of Ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained
and organized by a contingent of 1,500 Revolutionary Guards that arrived
from Iran with permission from the Syrian government,[21] which was in

occupation of Lebanon at the time. Hezbollah waged a guerilla campaign

in South LebanonSLA collapsed and surrendered, and Israel withdrew
from Lebanon on May 24, 2000. Backed by Iran, Hezbollah fighters
fought against Serbian forces during the Bosnian War.[22]
One of the most often quoted examples of a hybrid war is the 2006
conflict between Israel and the Hezbollah. The Hezbollah is a
sophisticated non-state actor sponsored by Iran. While the group often
acts as a proxy for Iran, it has its own agenda. It was Hezbollah policy,
rather than Irans, that led to the kidnapping of Israeli troops that was the
impetus for the war.[8] The war featured about 3,000 Hezbollah fighters
embedded in the local population attacked by about 30,000 Israeli regular
troops.[7]
Hezbollah is more than a military force, and therein lies its real strength.
It has political, social, diplomatic, and informational components that
provide bedrock support for its military organization. That foundation,
established by years of providing humanitarian aid, building physical
infrastructure, educating Lebanese, and serving as medical provider
would remain even in the aftermath of military defeat. Like the deep roots
of a plant, these other facets of Hezbollah would over time spawn new
forces to replace those lost in combat.
This key to Hezbollahs strength is a capability many developed nations
seek as they pursue their international objectives: an effective
comprehensive approach.

Nationalism. Wars are not only fought by military means. Media and
journalists have gained an increasingly central position due to
developments in media technology such as satellite TV channels
broadcasting 24/7 news so rapidly that it is possible to report live from a
combat zone.

Operation Olympic Games was a covert and still unacknowledged

campaign of sabotage by means of cyber disruption, directed at Iranian
nuclear facilities by the United States and likely Israel. As reported, it is
one of the first known uses of offensive cyber weapons.[1] Started under

the administration of George W. Bush in 2006, Olympic Games was

accelerated under President Obama, who heeded Bushs advice to
continue cyber attacks on Iranian nuclear facility at Natanz.[1] Bush
believed that the strategy was the only way to prevent an Israeli
conventional strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.[1]

The best-known hybrid in the animal world is the mule, the product of a
horse and donkey. The mule is sterile; it cannot by itself evolve. One
must study the evolution of horses and donkeys to understand the
potential nature of future mules. The metaphor holds true for the study of
what are being labeled hybrid conflicts. The new term may help inspire
debate and a better understanding of modern warfare much as did
indirect approach for some. However, hybrid conflict is ultimately a
concept whose character is better described in terms of other constructs
that offer superior clarity and will be better understood by students of
conflict. Hybrid in its several forms fails to clear the high hurdle and
therefore should not attain status as part of formal doctrine.