Hybrid warfare is no longer a theoretical concept discussed only in military academies. It is a lived reality across Europe, shaping security policy, elections, infrastructure protection, and public trust.
The difficulty in countering hybrid warfare arises not from a singular tactic, but from the intentional amalgamation of numerous strategies, executed consistently, ambiguously, and frequently without explicit declaration of hostilities.
This is warfare designed to remain deniable, legally grey, and politically destabilising, long before tanks ever cross a border. And these actions have intensified on the continent since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
What hybrid warfare actually means today
Hybrid warfare refers to the coordinated use of military and non-military means to influence, coerce, or destabilise a target state while avoiding open war. These activities operate below the traditional threshold of armed conflict, exploiting legal gaps, social tensions, and technological dependencies.
Modern doctrine, reflected in assessments by organisations such as NATO and the European Union, emphasises that hybrid threats are cumulative. Individually, each action may appear manageable or even dismissible. Together, they erode resilience, decision-making, and trust.
Core activities of hybrid warfare
Hybrid warfare is best understood as a toolbox rather than a single strategy. The most persistent activities observed in Europe over recent years include the following.
Information warfare and disinformation operations
Information manipulation remains the most visible hybrid activity. Disinformation campaigns amplify polarisation, undermine trust in institutions, and distort public debate.
These operations often mix state propaganda media, proxy outlets, anonymous social media accounts, and opportunistic local actors (often called “useful idiots”).
Narratives are adapted to local contexts. In Europe, recent campaigns have targeted elections, support for Ukraine, energy prices, migration, and public health. The goal is not always persuasion; it is confusion, cynicism, and fatigue.
Analysts increasingly describe the process as “cognitive warfare”, shaping how societies interpret reality itself.
Cyber operations and digital sabotage
Cyber activity forms a central pillar of hybrid warfare. Attacks against government networks, transport systems, healthcare providers, and energy operators are used to gather intelligence, signal capability, or cause disruption without kinetic force.
Recent European cases include ransomware and destructive malware incidents affecting public services, satellite communications interference, and attempts to access electoral infrastructure.
These operations are often calibrated to stay below escalation thresholds, disruptive enough to create uncertainty, but limited enough to avoid unified retaliation.
Economic pressure and energy coercion
Economic instruments are a quieter but highly effective hybrid tool. Trade restrictions, targeted sanctions evasion, market manipulation, and strategic investments in critical sectors can all be weaponised.
Energy has been a prominent vector in Europe. Supply disruptions, price volatility, and infrastructure pressure have been used to test political cohesion and public tolerance. Energy coercion works precisely because it affects everyday life, heating, transport, and cost of living, turning strategic pressure into domestic political strain.
Political interference and elite capture
Hybrid warfare also targets governance directly. This includes interference in democratic processes, support for extremist or anti-system actors, covert financing, and influence over political elites, media owners, or business leaders.
Investigations across several European states have highlighted concerns around foreign funding, opaque lobbying networks, and information laundering through seemingly legitimate institutions.
The objective is not always to install friendly governments but to weaken consensus and slow decision-making.
Grey-zone physical actions and intimidation
Beyond the digital realm, hybrid warfare includes sabotage, espionage, and intimidation that stops short of overt violence. Damage to undersea cables, GPS jamming, suspicious fires near infrastructure, and pressure on diaspora communities have all been cited by European security services as part of hostile hybrid activity.
These actions rely on ambiguity. The need for proof often delays responses, contests attribution, and leaves legal thresholds unclear.
Recent examples of hybrid warfare in Europe
Since 2022, Europe has seen an increase in hybrid activities related to the war in Ukraine. Russian hybrid operations, in particular, have combined disinformation, cyber activity, energy pressure, and diplomatic coercion to influence European policy and public opinion.
Countries such as Poland, the Baltic states, Germany, France, and the Nordic region have reported sustained information operations and cyber probing. Satellite interference affecting civil aviation and emergency services, as well as coordinated disinformation campaigns around elections and protests, illustrate how hybrid warfare adapts to national vulnerabilities.
Importantly, these activities are not isolated to one actor or region. Global research and replication of hybrid tactics is a growing concern in European security assessments, as it lowers the barriers for both state and non-state actors.
Why hybrid warfare is hard to deter
Traditional deterrence relies on clear red lines and visible consequences. Hybrid warfare avoids both. Attribution takes time. Legal responses are fragmented. Political costs of overreaction can outweigh those of inaction.
Hybrid actors exploit this hesitation. Each individual incident is framed as accidental, criminal, or unrelated. Over time, however, the strategic effect accumulates. Institutions are distracted, societies polarised, and alliances tested.
This is why resilience, rather than pure deterrence, has become central to European security thinking.
Building resilience against hybrid threats
Countering hybrid warfare requires whole-of-society approaches. Governments strengthen intelligence sharing, cyberdefense, and counter-disinformation capabilities. Media literacy and information security awareness become national security concerns. Infrastructure protection extends beyond fences to include supply chains and digital dependencies.
Organisations and businesses also play a role. Hybrid warfare often targets private infrastructure and information environments. Preparedness, reporting, and coordination with authorities are essential to reduce impact and prevent escalation.
Hybrid warfare is not a future threat. It is the environment Europe already operates in.
If your organisation is assessing exposure to hybrid threats, disinformation, or grey-zone activity, get in touch with us. We help decision-makers understand hybrid risk landscapes and build practical resilience across information, cyber, and organisational domains.
Frequently asked questions
What is hybrid warfare in simple terms?
Hybrid warfare combines military and non-military tactics to destabilise a state without open war.
Is hybrid warfare happening in Europe now?
Yes, European states report ongoing disinformation, cyber operations, and economic pressure linked to hybrid threats.
Who uses hybrid warfare tactics?
Primarily states, but some non-state actors also adopt hybrid methods.
Why is hybrid warfare hard to stop?
Because it operates below legal and military thresholds and relies on ambiguity.
How can organisations protect themselves from hybrid threats?
By improving cyber security, information awareness, and coordination with public authorities.