The Missing Link: Civil-Military Cooperation and Hybrid Wars
Despite obvious overlap, there is very limited scholarship that has explored the potential cross-fertilisation between the concepts of civil-military cooperation (CIMIC) and hybrid warfare. Both concepts share the idea of putting the civilian domain centre stage in military strategic thinking. In contrast to civil-military relations, which looks at the relation between the military and society, CIMIC looks at the civilian domain as part of the operational theatre of military forces. Essential in the development of CIMIC have been national and international norms, laws, and values, which have driven the increasing merger of the civilian and military domains and advanced population-centric approaches to intervention. This population-centric approach is shared by existing conceptualisations of hybrid warfare, where the operational focus also hinges on targeting the civilian domain as the strategic fulcrum.
- Akkoc, R. 2014. Serving Russian Soldiers on Leave Fighting Ukrainian Troops Alongside Rebels, pro-Russian Separatist Leader Says. The Telegraph. [Online]. Available from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/angela-merkel/11060559/Serving-Russian-soldiers-on-leave-fighting-Ukrainian-troops-alongside-rebels-pro-Russian-separatist-leader-says.html. 28 Aug 2014 [17 Feb 2017].
- Asmussen, J., S. Hansen, and J. Meiser. 2015. Hybride Kriegsführung – eine neue Herausforderung? Kieler Analysen zur Sicherheitspolitik Nr. 43.Google Scholar
- von Benda-Beckmann, F., K. von Benda-Beckmann, and A. Griffiths. 2009. Space and Legal Pluralism: An Introduction. In Spatializing Law: An Anthropological Geography of Law in Society, ed. F. von Benda-Beckmann, K. von Benda-Beckmann, and A. Griffiths, 1–30. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- British Broadcasting Cooperation (BBC). 2014. Ukraine Crisis: Timeline. [Online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26248275. Accessed 10 Dec 2016.
- ———. 2008. The Historical Origins of Civil-Military Cooperation. In Managing Civil-Military: A 24/7 Joint Effort for Stability, ed. S. Rietjens and M. Bollen, 5–25. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- Chabal, P., and J.-P. Daloz. 1999. Africa Works: Disorder as Political Instrument. Oxford: James Currey.Google Scholar
- von Clausewitz, C. 1989. On War. Ed. and Trans. Michael Howard and Peter Paret. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Duffield, M. 2001. Global Governance and the New Wars: The Merging of Development and Security. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
- Duyvesteyn, I. 2009. The Effectiveness of Intervention Instruments in Armed Conflict; Conflict Resolution Is the Only Solution? In Peace, Security and Development in an Era of Globalization; A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Process of Peace Building After Armed Conflict, ed. G. Molier and E. Nieuwenhuys, 99–128. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
- EU Commission. 2016. Security: EU Strengthens Response to Hybrid Threats. [Press Release]. Available from: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-1227_en.htm. 7 Feb 2017.
- Gerasimov, V. 2016. The Value of Science Is in the Foresight: New Challenges Demand Rethinking the Forms and Methods of Carrying Out Combat Operations. Military Review 96 (1): 23–29.Google Scholar
- Giles, K. 2016. Russia’s ‘New’ Tools for Confronting the West Continuity and Innovation in Moscow’s Exercise of Power. Chatham House Research Paper. [Online]. Available from: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/publications/2016-03-russia-new-tools-giles.pdf. Accessed 7 Feb 2017.
- Hoffman, F.G. 2007. Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars. Arlington: Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.Google Scholar
- ———. 2009. Hybrid Warfare and Challenges. Joint Force Quarterly 52: 34–39.Google Scholar
- ———. 2010. ‘Hybrid Threats’: Neither Omnipotent Nor Unbeatable. Orbis (Summer): 441–455.Google Scholar
- Johnson, D. 2015. Russia’s Approach to Conflict: Implications for NATO’s Deterrence and Defence. In NATO’s Response to Hybrid Threats, ed. G. Lasconjarias and J.A. Larsen, 137–160. Rome: NATO Defense College.Google Scholar
- Lasconjarias, G., and J.A. Larsen. 2015. Introduction: A New Way of Warfare. In NATO’s Response to Hybrid Threats, ed. G. Lasconjarias and J.A. Larsen, 1–13. Rome: NATO Defense College.Google Scholar
- Luttwak, E. 1987. Strategy: The Logic of War and Peace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Murray, W. 2012. Conclusion: What the Past Suggests. In Hybrid Warfare: Fighting Complex Opponents from the Ancient World to the Present, ed. W. Murray and P.R. Mansoor, 289–307. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Murray, W., and P.R. Mansoor, eds. 2012. Hybrid Warfare: Fighting Complex Opponents from the Ancient World to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- NATO. 2010. BI-SC Input to a New NATO Capstone Concept for the Military Contribution to Countering Hybrid Threats. [Online]. Available from: http://www.act.nato.int/images/stories/events/2010/20100826_bi-sc_cht.pdf. Accessed 7 Feb 2017.
- ———. 2012. BI-SC Civil-Military Co-Operation Functional Planning Guide. [Online]. Available from: http://www.cimic-coe.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Civil-Military_Co-Operation_Functional_Planning_Guide.pdf. Accessed 7 Feb 2017.
- ———. 2013. AJP-3.4.9(A) Allied Joint Doctrine for Civil-Military Cooperation. [Online]. Available from: http://www.cimic-coe.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/AJP-3.4.9-EDA-V1-E1.pdf. Accessed 7 Feb 2017.
- ———. 2014a. Hybrid War – Hybrid Response. [Online]. Available from: http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2014/Russia-Ukraine-Nato-crisis/Russia-Ukraine-crisis-war/EN/index.htm. Accessed 7 Feb 2017.
- ———. 2014b. MC 0411/2: NATO Military Policy on Civil-Military Cooperation (CIMIC) and Civil-Military Interaction (CMI). Brussels: North Atlantic Military Committee.Google Scholar
- ———. 2016. NATO Countering the Hybrid Threat. [Press Release]. Available from: http://www.act.nato.int/nato-countering-the-hybrid-threat. Accessed 17 Feb 2017.
- Nemeth, W. 2002. Future War and Chechnya: A Case for Hybrid Warfare. Master’s Thesis, US Naval Postgraduate School. [Online]. Available from: http://calhoun.nps.edu/handle/10945/5865. Accessed 15 Jan 2017.
- Reisinger, H., and A. Golts. 2015. Russia’s Hybrid Warfare: Waging War Below the Radar of Traditional Collective Defence. In NATO’s Response to Hybrid Threats, ed. G. Lasconjarias and J.A. Larsen, 113–136. Rome: NATO Defense College.Google Scholar
- Rietjens, S., and G. Lucius. 2016. Getting Better at Civil-Military Interaction. In Effective Civil-Military Interaction in Peace Operations: Theory and Practice, ed. G. Lucius and S. Rietjens, 1–10. Unknown: Springer.Google Scholar
- Rosaldo, R. 2005. Foreword. In Hybrid Cultures: Strategies for Entering and Leaving Modernity, ed. N.G. Canclini, xi–xvii. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
- Schuller, K. 2016. Wer bricht den Waffenstillstand im Donbass? Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. [Online]. Available from: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/europa/krieg-in-der-ostukraine-wer-bricht-den-waffenstillstand-14375280.html. Accessed 14 Aug 2016.
- Spear, J., and P. Williams, eds. 2012. Security and Development in Global Politics: A Critical Comparison. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
- Tenenbaum, E. 2015. Hybrid Warfare in the Strategic Spectrum: An Historical Assessment. In NATO’s Response to Hybrid Threats, ed. G. Lasconjarias and J.A. Larsen, 95–112. Rome: NATO Defense College.Google Scholar
- Utas, M. 2012. Introduction: Bigmanity and Network Governance in African Conflicts. In African Conflicts and Informal Power, ed. M. Utas, 1–31. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar