L8 - the gray zone Flashcards
(30 cards)
the Fifth Column
= Trojan horse of the Spanish civil war: people on the inside of the city that would ally with forces on the outside that would make capturing Madrid easier
- fear of adversary using supporters to destabilize on the inside
Hitler incorporated the ideas to capture
- Norway scholar: beware of German embassies: it is a potential center of Fifth Column mobilization every German consulate is an armory, a danger spot, the privileged stable of a Trojan horse
- Dutch gov: want to neutralize inside threat (nazi supporters) to not make it easier for Germany to come
Franklin D. Roosevelt:
“Today’s threat to our national security is not a matter of military weapons alone. We know of new methods of attack.
The Trojan Horse. The Fifth Column that betrays a nation unprepared for treachery.
… But there is an added technique for weakening a nation at its very roots, for disrupting the entire pattern of life of a people. It is important that we understand it.
The method is simple. It is, first, a dissemination of discord. A group—not too large- a group that may be sectional or racial or political—is encouraged to exploit its prejudices through false slogans and emotional appeals. The aim of those who deliberately egg on these groups is to create confusion of counsel, public indecision, political paralysis and, eventually, a state of panic.”
(matches with discourse used now)
Anschluss (1938)
Preceded by 1934 coup attempt and murder of Austrian Chancellor Dollfuss (supported by German nazis helping their Austrian..)
Pressure campaign on new Austrian leader Schuschnigg
- German government supports Austrian Nazi destabilization, esp. violent protests, disinformation
- German threat of invasion
Refusal to appoint Austrian Nazi leader to replace Schuschnigg leads to invasion/annexation
- Germany sends army in but no assistance
Austria does not offer resistance
Despite Treaty of Versailles prohibiting union of Germany and Austria, no action is taken to restore the status quo, esp. by UK and France
-> anschluss seen as acceptable internationally
Czech Coup (1948)
Czech communists seize power in February 1948 ahead of May election (bc they thought they wouldn’t win)
Preceded by subversion and communist control of Czech Interior Ministry (‘conquest from within’)
Threat of Soviet army invading in support of Czech communists weakens resolve to oppose coup
- essentially bloodless
Marked a key change in European/US views of nature of Soviet expansionism – adds pressure for creation of NATO
- fear they could do it elsewhere
Salami Tactics
= taking of one piece at a time, taking opposition apart slowly
- rather than taking over in one full sweep
- reduces resistance as it progresses
“Join with non-Communists in a coalition and then proceed, by various methods, to take over. … What methods? “Salami tactics” … demanding a little more each day, like cutting up a salami, thin slice after thin slice …Take the banks for instance. First we requested only state control; later, the nationalization of only three big banks. In industry the same way: first we demanded state management of the mines; we gradually expanded this to the biggest machinery plants—and finally we shifted to nationalization.”
Hungarian communist leader Matyos Rakosi
definition - Gray Zone
“a realm of international relations between peaceful interstate diplomacy, economic activity, and people-to-people contact on one end of the spectrum, and direct armed conflict on the other”
- US National Intelligence Council assessment, July 2024
- Is this definition too broad, effectively encompassing most forms of modern conflict? = it is a wide space of activities
- Does it include terrorism, insurgency, humanitarian interventions, peacekeeping, etc.?
ISIS in Syria/Iraq? - Chinese island building in South China Seas?
(we have seen such tactics in the past, pre-cold war, during cold war and now since 2014 (Russia)) = new term, but old idea
Gray Zone = space for conflict
Gray zones tactics = things that can occur in the gray zone
Gray Zone / Hybrid War
= practically used interchangeably
meaningful difference: hybrid war can also refer to non-state actors
Type of conflict utilizing tactics below the threshold of traditional warfare to undermine an adversary and advance one’s own interests, usually disguised to prevent attribution:
- Cyberattacks
- Economic coercion
- Propaganda and Political warfare
- Sabotage
- Sponsorship of irregular fighters
- Military threats
However, many of these same tactics can also be used in traditional war!
main diff = military threats BUT NOT use of military force
!!!!he said something on the exam couldn’t hear it though 11.34
lost in translation?
Russia doesn’t use the term, it mostly conforms to Western conceptions
Russia prefers using the term non-linear war
China: non-war military operations
- problem in translation: not all gray zone tactics are military operations
For Western commentators, hybrid war is used by Russia against the West, whereas for Russia it is used by the West against Russia
- Russia: color revolutions (spread of democratic/popular revolutions) is all inspired by the west + considered hybrid war (essentially: there is no such thing as popular protest, it has to be orchestrated from the outside)
China e.g. in Taiwan: threatening but not actually invading it
the view from Moscow
“… it is clear that behind the term ‘soft power’ hides activities such as meddling in domestic affairs by organizing colour revolutions which in turn leads to a violation of the balance of power with catastrophic consequences for regions and the entire world”
- Aleksandr Fomin, Deputy Minister of Defence, 2018
conception of gray zone as a strategy
certain tactics towards a certain end
Pursuit of political objectives through cohesive, integrated campaigns
Employing mostly non-military or non-kinetic military tools
- i.e. military can assist gray zone efforts via intimidation and threats
- More likely use of paramilitary forces: e.g. Africa mercenaries from the Wagner group?
Strive to remain under key escalatory or red line thresholds to avoid outright conventional conflict
Moving gradually to objectives rather than seeking conclusive results in a specific period
What is the advantage? Cheap? More likely to work?
!crucial = avoid war: remain underneath the threshold, the red line of what is unacceptable and will lead to war
issue: it is a gradual strategy: you are eating away the enemy slowly = assumption it will take a lot of time
advantage = it is cheaper
disadvantage = probably less likely to work
remember the stability-instability paradox + escalation ladder
peace -> gray zone war -> conventional war -> nuclear war
when gray zone fails to achieve objectives and you still want to achieve the objective you move on to conventional war
(and this counts for all steps on the ladder)
challenge how to respond
how does Ukraine respond to Russia prior to 2022 (after 2014)?
- Ukrainians were positive if they would go against the rebels in the East, the Russian army would come in = they were really cautious in treating the rebels
how does NATO respond to Russia after 2014?
- OMG they did it in Crimea, what if they do it elsewhere (history suggests they will, e.g. Anschluss, Czech Coup WW2)
- respond in various methods
how have Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan and Japan responded to China since early 2010?
- China Gray Zone tactics incl. swarming fishing ships, the countries don’t want to go to conventional war bc they aren’t strong enough to win
!!strong legal element: if you spell out a red line after which war will come, it says everything below that is acceptable
a cold war by any other name?
“That is not a Cold War. It is a grey war. Permanently teetering on the edge of outright hostility. Persistently hovering around the threshold of what we would normally consider acts of war”
UK Defense Secretary Michael Fallon
cold war maybe was a Gray Zone? a hybrid war?
cold war: int’l conflict in which all means other than ovvert military force are used; a description of the state of East-West relations in the late 1940s-mid50s period. the use of a combination of economic warfare, propaganda, subversion and covert operations is now described as confrontation
covert action
“more muscular than diplomacy and less expensive and obtrusive than military force”
- propaganda
- political action (e.g. support anti-communist politicians)
- paramilitary action (e.g. for training)
(e.g. CIA cold war)
these are supposed to be deniable allegations (everything in the Grey Zone: put some diff between them and what they’re doing) =plausible deniability
1991 Intelligence Authorization Act:
Activities “meant to influence political, economic or military conditions abroad, where it is intended that the role of the United States Government will not be apparent or acknowledged publicly”
Cuba 1961-1962
US decided to support/arm Cuban exiles, send them off to try to control Cuba (failed)
(can’t invade the country, bc that would be seen as aggression)
!calculating your actions bc military force looks back internationally: invading another country
(if you use other means you can somehow get away with it)
e.g. the Congo
1960s crisis
US gov did not send troops: send mercenaries
= indirect measures to help fund mercenaries and armies bc they didn’t want to interven themselves
Propaganda Assets Inventory
e.g. Radio Free Europe
covert operations CIA with worldwide network for dissemination of propaganda
became public -> continued under public money (state department)
covert war vs traditional war
Lindsey A. O’Rourke:
- US attempted ten times as many regime changes via covert (rather than overt) action during the Cold War—64 covert regime change campaigns compared to 6 overt ones
- American-backed forces assumed power in 25 covert campaigns, whereas the remaining 39 covert missions failed in that goal
- Each administration during the Cold War engaged in at least 3 covert campaigns to replace the political leadership of another state at some point in their respective presidencies, and numerous covert operations continued across administrations.
e.g. US backed tactics
- election interference
- coup
- assassination
- democracy promotion
- dissidents
target states e.g. Bolivia, Dominican Republic, Congo, Syria, Angola, Liberia, France
Information Research Department (UK)
created within UK Foreign Office in early Cold War
at its height consisted of some 350 staff
Responsible for waging a secret propaganda war around the world, including manufacturing and spreading disinformation
(covert intelligence agencies, also in other countries)
Soviet/E. European Disinformation
KGB was really active around the world with ‘active measures’ (use that term rather than covert operations)
Active measures (aktivnye meropriyatiya) included a range of underground activities: media manipulation, the use of front groups, forging documents, influence operations, and ‘special actions’ involving various degrees of violence.
Purpose was to hasten victory in the Cold War ideological struggle by undermining and confusing the United States and its Western allies, splitting the Western alliance, sowing seeds of distrust and discord within democracies, and winning friends in the Third World.
- e.g. Czech intelligence disinformation campaign targeted at West Germany
- e.g. KGB sent to Bulgarian intelligence service trying to spin AIDS as biological weapons program designed by the CIA
!!disinformation to try to undermine trust/cohesion of the Western alliance + to undermine relations with African countries (e.g. the AIDS example)
active measures (Russia)
= Soviet term for a variety of overt and covert methods meant to influence the policy of other governments, disrupt their relations with third countries, or discredit opponents. the most common covert method is the dissemination of false or misleading information. overt active measures include official propaganda and the manipulation of diplomatic relations and cultural exchanges. covert active measures include disguised propaganda disseminated by non-Soviet sources; forged documents, clandestine (“black”) radio broadcasts; and the use of agents of influence and front organizations (such as the World Peace Council). active measures are primarily political, but military maneuvers and terrorism may also be used
- idea that Soviets and Eastern European allies were supporting terrorist groups in Western Europe: chaos as strategy to undermine govs
“Gray, it seems, is the new black”
2014-2022 started using the term gray zone and hybrid war, mostly for Russia but later also China
The term ‘hybrid war’ had been coined in 2006 to characterize a type of warfare that blended conventional and irregular elements, with Hezbollah as the model
- According to Frank Hoffman, Hezbollah combined highly disciplines, well trained and properly equipped regular units, adaptive guerrilla tactics in both urban and mountainous areas, high tech weapons and UAVs, and swift and effective information operations
- speech writer wrote about multidimensional warfare, but speaker couldn’t pronounce it -> became hybrid war
- like Three block war Iran: one block peaceful, next low scale peace w protection, the next warfare
The term was later adopted by NATO in 2014 following the Crimea annexation
“Gray zone” also becomes popular from mid-2010s onwards
Although it remains widely used within NATO, the term has fallen out of use somewhat due to the ongoing conventional war in Ukraine
- since 2022 sort of out of use, bc now more proper/full on war BUT STILL USING MUCH THE SAME TACTICS
Redlines
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”
NATO Article 5
1948-49 example of coup in Czecho-Slovakia important for the design of the article
-> where to draw the line? at what point do we consent to use military force?
- prior to NATO treaty: cases of left-wing parties in western Europe + if one of those took over perhaps supported by SU -> would that give other NATO countries allowance to fight that gov
ART 4 talks about consultation if political independence of any of the states is threatened
vague red lines -> space for Russian propaganda
e.g. Russian red lines in relation to Ukraine: they are vague, and if they are broken there is no response -> have to create new line
popularity gray zone tactics
“The very ‘rules of war’ have changed. The role of nonmilitary means of achieving political and strategic goals has grown, and, in many cases, they have exceeded the power of force of weapons in their effectiveness. The focus of applied methods of conflict has altered in the direction of the broad use of political, economic, informational, humanitarian, and other nonmilitary measures—applied in coordination with the protest potential of the population. All this is supplemented by military means of a concealed character, including carrying out actions of informational conflict and the actions of special operations forces.”
Russian General Gerasimov + Russian leaders prior-2022 talking about non-kinetic uses of force (non-military tools and not crossing threshold of military intervention) in order to reach political effect
- idea that it was working really well
