The Enemies You Cannot See^[1]

Grey zone warfare, also known as grey zone conflict, refers to activities conducted by a state or non-state actor that, while coercive and aggressive, remain below the threshold of conventional war. These activities are designed to achieve national interests without triggering a full-scale military response from the opponent. The term grey zone itself signifies the ambiguity and uncertainty about the rules of engagement and the difficulty in categorising these activities strictly as either peace or war.

Seemingly a relic of the Cold War-era international order and with its origins in ancient times, conventional military campaigns have given way to hybrid warfare involving cyberattacks, information campaigns, and an array of other non-violent pressure^[2]. Grey zone tactics are often used to exploit the gaps in international law and norms and may include a variety of measures such as:

• Cyber Attacks: Disrupting critical infrastructure or stealing sensitive information without causing direct physical damage that would constitute an act of war.
• Information Warfare: Spreading disinformation or propaganda to influence public opinion or destabilise political systems.
• Economic Coercion: Using trade policies, sanctions, or other economic tools to pressure other countries without resorting to armed conflict.
• Political Warfare: Supporting political movements, influencing foreign elections, or funding non-governmental organisations to sway political outcomes in another country.
• Paramilitary Actions: Employing non-uniformed combatants (like private contractors or local militias) to engage in confrontational activities without formal declaration of hostilities.
• Proxy Warfare: Supporting insurgent groups or terrorists to fight against a target state indirectly.

These strategies are particularly appealing to countries that wish to make gains against their adversaries without crossing the line into overt warfare, which would require other nations or alliances like NATO or the UN to respond forcefully. Grey zone warfare is challenging for traditional military forces and international bodies to manage due to its elusive nature and the difficulty in attributing actions directly to a state actor.

In an age where international conflicts no longer solely unfold on battlefields, the realms of cyberspace, international trade, and global politics have become the frontlines of a new kind of warfare involving massive cyberattacks crippling essential infrastructure or covert operations influencing political outcomes. The use of tanks or planes in blitzkrieg-type warfare will make way for economic sanctions quietly squeezing the life out of national economies. This is the reality of grey zone warfare—a shadowy domain where state and non-state actors manoeuvre to gain strategic advantages without crossing the threshold into open warfare.

Grey zone warfare (also known as grey zone conflict) encompasses activities that are coercive and aggressive yet remain below the level of conventional war. These actions are designed to achieve national interests without triggering a full-scale military response from the opponent. The term itself signifies the ambiguity and uncertainty about the rules of engagement and the difficulty in categorising these activities strictly as either peace or war.

The tactics used in grey zone warfare exploit gaps in international law and norms and may include a variety of measures, such as:

• Cultural Leverage: Utilising cultural exchanges, educational programs, and historical narratives to influence another nation’s society and values cleverly and indirectly.
• Cyber Attacks: Disrupting critical infrastructure or stealing sensitive information without causing direct physical damage that would constitute an act of war.
• Diplomatic Pressure: Using diplomatic channels to isolate a nation internationally, create divisions among allies, or sway international opinion against a target nation. This may involve leveraging international organisations to censure or impose penalties on nations.
• Economic Coercion: Using trade policies, sanctions, or other economic tools to pressure other countries without resorting to armed conflict.
• Energy Weaponisation: Manipulating energy supplies, such as oil and gas, so as to apply political and economic pressure on nations dependent on such resources.
• Information Warfare: Spreading disinformation or propaganda to influence public opinion or destabilise political systems.
• Legal Warfare (Lawfare): Manipulating international laws and conventions to achieve national objectives, tying the hands of the opponent through legal and bureaucratic means.
• Paramilitary Actions: Employing non-uniformed combatants (like private contractors or local militias) to engage in confrontational activities without a formal declaration of hostilities.
• Political Warfare: Supporting political movements, influencing foreign elections, or funding non-governmental organisations to sway political outcomes in another country.
• Proxy Warfare: Supporting insurgent groups or terrorists to fight against a target state indirectly.
• Psychological Operations (PsyOps): Conducting operations to mislead, intimidate, or demoralise the enemy’s civilian population or military forces. This often involves the use of psychological tactics to create doubt, fear, and confusion among the opposition.
• Technological Disruption: Beyond cyberattacks, this includes the deployment of technologies to disrupt communication or logistics, such as the use of drones for surveillance and harassment or disabling GPS signals.

These strategies are particularly appealing to countries that wish to make gains against their adversaries without crossing the line into overt warfare, which would require other nations or alliances like NATO or the UN to respond more forcefully. Grey zone warfare is challenging for traditional military forces and international bodies to manage due to its elusive nature and the difficulty in attributing actions directly to a state actor.

Expanded Definitions and Context
Definition Clarification
Grey zone warfare often blurs the lines between conventional and unconventional tactics, exploiting the threshold where clear warfighting definitions and international laws become ambiguous. This ambiguity is strategic, aiming to achieve goals without escalating to a level that requires a traditional military response.

Historical Context
The concept, while seemingly modern, has historical precedents (see below), including Cold War espionage and propaganda efforts. What differentiates contemporary grey zone activities is the technology and the globalised context in which they occur, allowing for more significant impact and reach.

Examples of Grey Zone Warfare

• China’s Actions in the South China Sea: Building artificial islands and increasing military presence to assert territorial claims without overt aggression, challenging international law and norms.
• Russian Activities in Ukraine: The use of “little green men” (soldiers without insignias) during the Crimea annexation and ongoing support for separatists in Eastern Ukraine exemplify grey zone tactics where direct state involvement is obscured.
• Iran’s Use of Proxies: Supporting groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen to exert influence and destabilise regional adversaries without direct engagement.

A more detailed list of Contemporary Grey Zone activities is given later in this paper.

Truth
The First Casualty of War
The statement “The first casualty when war comes is truth” is attributed to Hiram Johnson, a progressive Republican senator from California. He reportedly made this remark in 1917, in the context of World War I, when speaking about the way governments often manipulate the truth to mobilise public opinion in favour of war efforts, obscure the full horrors of war, and maintain national morale. In the context of grey zone warfare, this adage highlights how truth and trust are undermined as states and non-state actors engage in covert, deceptive, or ambiguous actions that blur the lines between war and peace. The long-term consequences of these actions are profound, affecting everything from international stability and economic development to social cohesion and the rule of law. As grey zone warfare evolves with advancements in technology and shifts in global power, the international community faces significant challenges in addressing these hidden but impactful forms of conflict.

This observation reflects a common understanding that in times of conflict, propaganda, censorship, and disinformation become tools used by belligerents to achieve strategic objectives, manipulate public perception, and control the narrative surrounding the conflict. The phrase has since become a proverbial expression used to denote how truth is often manipulated or sidelined in the dissemination of information during wars and conflicts. It underscores the challenges of maintaining transparency and honesty in times of war, where strategic interests often overshadow the imperative for truthfulness.

Handling Truth
In the film “A Few Good Men,” Jack Nicholson’s character, Colonel Nathan R. Jessup, delivers the famous line, “You can’t handle the truth.” This line is a powerful statement about the complexities of military decisions and the harsh realities of national security that Jessup believes the general public, represented in the movie by the courtroom, is either unwilling or unable to confront.

This concept can be expanded to a broader discussion on whether the general public might prefer simpler narratives or even lies rather than confronting uncomfortable truths.

Psychological and Societal Aspects
Cognitive Dissonance: People often experience discomfort when confronted with information that conflicts with their existing beliefs or perceptions. This psychological phenomenon can lead individuals to reject the truth in favour of more comfortable lies that align with their preconceived notions.

• Simplicity over Complexity: Complex truths that involve nuanced explanations are often less appealing than straightforward, albeit misleading, narratives. Simplified or distorted versions of reality might be more readily accepted because they are easier to understand and digest.
• Protective Ignorance: In some cases, individuals might choose ignorance as a defence mechanism, preferring not to know the full extent of a situation if such knowledge is likely to cause distress or fear. This can apply to issues ranging from personal health to national security threats.
• Trust in Authorities: People often place trust in authoritative figures or institutions, which can lead to a preference for believing “official” accounts or statements, even when those may be biased or incomplete. This trust can be exploited to shape public opinion through controlled messages.

Media and Information Dissemination and Fake News

• Media Influence: The role of media in shaping perceptions cannot be underestimated. Media outlets often present information in a way that conforms to narrative biases or economic interests, which can distort the public’s understanding of the truth.
• Information Overload: With the advent of digital media, the public is bombarded with an overwhelming amount of information, making it difficult to discern truth from falsehood. This can lead to apathy or confusion, where simplified lies or biased narratives are more readily accepted.

The concept of “fake news,” involving deliberate misinformation or hoaxes spread via traditional news media or online social media, has historical roots that predate William Randolph Hearst^[3], the American businessman, newspaper publisher, and politician known for developing the nation’s largest newspaper chain and media company, Hearst Communications. However, Hearst’s approach to journalism in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries is often cited as a prominent early example of news that could be sensational or manipulative, contributing to what we might today call “fake news.” Hearst was famously associated with what’s known as “yellow journalism,” a style of newspaper reporting that emphasised sensationalism over facts. His rivalry with Joseph Pulitzer helped to popularise this approach. Newspapers under their control often published exaggerated or outright fabricated stories to increase sales and influence public opinion.

The term “fake news” gained widespread usage during and after the 2016 US Presidential election, where it was used to describe a significant amount of deliberately false information spread via social media platforms. The modern phenomenon is tied closely to the rise of digital media and the ease with which information (true or false) can spread globally.

Whilst Hearst’s style of journalism certainly contributed to the practices that could be seen as a precursor to modern fake news, the concept itself has deeper and more varied historical roots.

Ethical and Philosophical Considerations

• Moral Responsibility: There is an ethical debate about whether the public should be shielded from harsh realities for their own good or whether they have the right to be informed regardless of the consequences. This debate often plays out in political arenas, where decisions about transparency versus secrecy are made.
• Democratic Implications: In a democracy, informed citizenship is crucial for the functioning of society. If the public prefers lies to truth, it undermines the very basis of informed decision-making and accountability in governance.

Response Challenges
One of the biggest challenges with grey zone tactics is attributing actions to a perpetrator, especially with cyber intrusions and proxy warfare, complicating the response from nations or international bodies.

• Response Strategy: Developing effective responses requires a blend of military readiness, economic countermeasures, cyber capabilities, and international diplomatic efforts. The complexity increases as responses must be carefully calibrated so as to prevent escalating the situation into open conflict.
• Legal and Ethical Issues: Navigating the response also involves legal and ethical considerations, particularly in democracies where transparency and adherence to the rule of law are required but may be at odds with the secretive or deceptive nature of grey zone threats.

Strategic Importance

• Avoiding War: Grey zone warfare allows states to compete in what some theorists call “the competition phase” between peace and war, striving to achieve strategic objectives while technically remaining at peace, avoiding the costs and risks associated with traditional war.
• Future Trends: As technology evolves and international competition intensifies, grey zone tactics are likely to become more sophisticated and widespread. This will necessitate more robust and flexible strategic frameworks from global powers and alliances.

Grey Zone Welfare: A New Name for Deception in Conflict
The concept of grey zone warfare, while modern in name and application, traces its philosophical roots to ancient and traditional forms of warfare that emphasise deception, indirect approaches, and non-conventional methods. The actual term grey zone is relatively new and has been popularised in recent years as analysts and military strategists try to contextualise the blurred lines of conflict in the post-Cold War era.

Historical Roots and Philosophical Underpinnings

• Sun Tzu: As far back as the 5^th century BC, Sun Tzu’s The Art of War^[4] advocated the use of deception, espionage, and indirect methods in warfare, which can be seen as precursors to modern grey zone tactics.
• Byzantine Empire^[5]: Known for its complex diplomacy and use of non-military methods such as bribery, religious and ideological influence, and espionage, the Byzantine Empire exemplifies early state-level use of grey zone strategies.

The historical and contemporary use of pirates and privateers in naval warfare can be regarded as examples of grey zone warfare due to its reliance on ambiguity, deniability, and the use of non-state actors to achieve state goals without direct attribution. Exploring this concept in both historical and modern contexts, we find:

Pirates and Privateers Defined

• Privateers were privately owned ships whose owners were given the ‘letter of marque’ by their government, legally authorising them to attack and capture enemy ships. They were essentially part of a state’s unofficial navy.
• Pirates, on the other hand, operated independently of state sanction (though sometimes with covert support) and were involved in illegal activities at sea.

Grey Zone Characteristics

• Ambiguity and Deniability: Governments often used privateers to weaken their enemies without direct engagement. This allowed them to claim plausible deniability regarding any acts of aggression, as privateers were technically not part of the official naval force.
• Exploitation of International Norms: The use of privateers exploited the then-emerging international norms and laws of the sea, manoeuvring around definitions of lawful and unlawful combat and commerce raiding.

This use of privateers shows many parallels to modern grey zone tactics, especially in terms of leveraging non-state actors for state goals while maintaining a degree of separation and deniability.

Modern Context: Maritime Incidents in Strategic Waters

• Recent Incidents: Incidents like those involving Iran or its affiliated groups, who have been accused of attacking commercial vessels transiting through strategic waterways such as the Strait of Hormuz, reflect modern grey zone tactics at sea. These attacks are often carried out in a way that maintains ambiguity about the perpetrator.

Grey Zone Characteristics

• Deniability: Similar to the historical use of privateers, modern state actors or their proxies carry out actions that allow the state to deny direct involvement. For example, Iran has at times denied involvement in maritime attacks despite accusations and some evidence suggesting otherwise.
• Strategic Objectives: These actions are typically aimed at achieving broader strategic goals, such as pressuring other countries in diplomatic negotiations, controlling maritime trade routes, or demonstrating capabilities and influence without engaging in open warfare.
• Supporting Evidence: The attacks on oil tankers and commercial ships can be seen as efforts to influence global oil prices, insurance rates, and international shipping standards, all of which have significant economic and strategic impact.

The parallels between historical naval warfare involving pirates and privateers and the contemporary use of similar tactics in grey zone conflicts are clear. Both involve the strategic use of non-state actors or semi-state actors to achieve military and political objectives while avoiding the direct use of state military forces and minimising the risk of full-scale warfare.

Since 2019, a covert ‘Shadow War’ has unfolded between Israel and Iran in the maritime corridors near Bab el-Mandeb and the Strait of Hormuz. This conflict has featured a series of grey zone tactics, including the deployment of sea mines, missile strikes, and drone attacks targeting both commercial and naval vessels. Iran has faced accusations of launching attacks on Israeli commercial ships and container vessels. Conversely, Israel is reportedly engaging in grey zone operations against Iranian tankers destined for Syria. In 2021, an Israeli attack targeted an Iranian naval ship, which Israel claimed was assisting Houthi rebels, although Iran maintained that the vessel was engaged in anti-piracy efforts. While the primary conflict is between Iran and Israel, other nations such as the US, UK, and Syria are also implicated as Iran attempts to transport oil to Syria despite an oil embargo imposed by the US and EU. The strategic maritime routes through Bab el-Mandeb and the Suez Canal are crucial for Iran, whose tankers risk seizure by the UK when navigating near the Gibraltar Strait. This occurred in 2019 when the Iranian-flagged tanker Grace 1, carrying approximately 2 million barrels of oil to Syria, was detained by the UK in the Gibraltar Strait. The tanker was released a month later under the stipulation that it would not proceed to Syria.^[6]

Modern Conceptualisation and Use

• Cold War Era: The term grey zone wasn’t used, but the methods were. The US and the Soviet Union engaged in various indirect confrontations, including proxy wars, espionage, cultural influence, and economic measures during the Cold War. This period can be seen as the foundational era for what would later be explicitly called grey zone tactics.
• Post-Cold War: The formal framing of grey zone warfare emerged more prominently in the early 21^st century as analysts observed Russia and China employing tactics that exploited the thresholds of NATO and UN response criteria.

Contemporary Examples of Grey Zone Activities
Russian Hybrid Warfare in Ukraine

• Event: Beginning in 2014, Russia employed a combination of unmarked soldiers, known colloquially as “little green men,” alongside local pro-Russian separatists and provided deniable military support to destabilize Ukraine without initiating a full-scale war. This approach facilitated the annexation of Crimea and fuelled the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: Russia’s tactics are exemplary of grey zone warfare through their use of deniability and non-attribution, leveraging both military and non-military means to achieve strategic objectives without crossing the threshold into overt warfare.
• Impact: The conflict has led to significant political and territorial instability in Ukraine, altering European security dynamics and resulting in extensive international sanctions against Russia.

China in the South China Sea (Early 2000s-Present)

• Event: China has expanded its influence in the South China Sea through the militarisation of artificial islands and the aggressive assertion of territorial claims over disputed waters. This includes the construction of military bases on artificial islands and the use of maritime militia and Coast Guard vessels to enforce these claims.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: The tactics deployed by China encompass a broad range of grey zone activities, from military posturing and land reclamation to employing non-military forces like maritime militias. These forces often engage in activities such as harassing civilian and military vessels from other nations, which escalates the situation without crossing into overt warfare. Additionally, China leverages aggressive diplomacy and economic measures, including trade threats, to support its territorial ambitions.
• Impact: China’s actions have considerably heightened regional tensions, complicating diplomatic relations with ASEAN countries and prompting military and political responses from global powers, particularly the United States. These activities challenge international norms and laws, particularly with respect to freedom of navigation and national sovereignty, creating a complex security dilemma for the region and beyond.

Iran and Proxy Warfare in the Middle East (Late 20^th Century-Present)

• Event: Iran has strategically supported various proxy groups, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthi rebels in Yemen. This support is part of a broader strategy to influence regional politics and assert its presence as a dominant regional power, counteracting rivals like Saudi Arabia and Israel.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: Iran’s use of proxy forces exemplifies grey zone warfare through its indirect engagement in regional conflicts. This approach allows Iran to exert influence and extend its geopolitical reach without direct state-to-state warfare, maintaining a level of deniability and minimising direct retaliation.
• Impact: Iran’s tactics have significantly destabilised the region, leading to prolonged conflicts in countries like Syria and Yemen and escalating tensions with Israel and Saudi Arabia. This strategy has reshaped power dynamics in the Middle East, contributing to ongoing conflicts and regional instability while enabling Iran to navigate international sanctions and diplomatic pressures.

Estonia’s Cyber Attacks (2007)

• Event: In 2007, Estonia faced a massive coordinated cyber-attack that crippled its government, media, and financial sectors. This occurred shortly after a dispute with Russia over the relocation of a Soviet-era war memorial.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: The attacks were sophisticated and extensive, using distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) tactics, yet no direct link to the Russian government could be definitively proven. This allowed plausible deniability, a hallmark of grey zone tactics.
• Impact: The cyber-attacks effectively paralysed key digital services in one of the world’s most digitally advanced societies, showcasing the vulnerability of national infrastructure to cyber warfare.

Salisbury Poisonings (2018)

• Event: The poisoning of Sergei Skripal, a former Russian military officer and double agent, and his daughter in Salisbury, England, was carried out using a Novichok nerve agent.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: The use of a military-grade chemical weapon on foreign soil was a brazen action, but the Russian government denied any involvement, exemplifying the use of non-attributable actions that create ambiguity and prevent clear retaliation.
• Impact: The incident led to significant diplomatic fallout, including expulsions of diplomats and sanctions, highlighting how grey zone tactics can strain international relations without crossing into overt warfare.

Russian Involvement in the Syrian Conflict

• Event: Russia’s military intervention in the Syrian civil war, under the guise of fighting ISIS, also strategically bolstered the Assad regime against various opposition groups.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: Russia used private military companies (PMCs), such as the Wagner Group, to conduct ground operations. This use of PMCs provides deniability and lowers the political cost of casualties.
• Impact: The intervention has not only helped to turn the tide in favour of Assad but also allowed Russia to test new weapons and tactics and secure its military presence and economic interests in the Middle East.

North Korean Cyber Heists:

• Event: North Korea, through units like Lazarus Group, has been implicated in numerous international cyber incidents, including the WannaCry ransomware attack and thefts from global financial institutions.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: These cyber operations help fund North Korea’s sanctioned economy while being difficult to directly attribute to the government.
• Impact: These acts have significant implications for international security and economic stability, highlighting the financial dimensions of grey zone conflict.

US-China Trade War and Economic Coercion

• Event: The ongoing trade disputes and imposition of tariffs by the US and China began escalating significantly in 2018.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: Economic coercion is used as a tool to influence national policy and assert geopolitical dominance without crossing into direct military confrontation.
• Impact: These economic measures have affected global markets, disrupted supply chains, and pressured other nations to reconsider their economic alignments and policies.

Russian Electoral Interference

• Event: Allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 United States Presidential election, primarily through cyber-attacks on political organisations and a coordinated disinformation campaign on social media platforms.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: The use of cyber tools and information warfare to influence the electoral process and public opinion in another sovereign nation, with plausible deniability of direct government involvement.
• Impact: This interference has led to significant political discord within the US, affecting public trust in electoral integrity and escalating tensions between the US and Russia.

Turkey’s Role in Libya and the Eastern Mediterranean

• Event: Turkey’s military and economic intervention in Libya, supporting the Government of National Accord and its exploratory drilling activities in disputed waters in the Eastern Mediterranean.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: Utilising military advisors, drones, and naval forces to influence outcomes in Libya, coupled with aggressive energy exploration tactics that skirt direct confrontation with neighbouring countries.
• Impact: These actions have escalated regional tensions, particularly with Greece, Cyprus, and Egypt, over energy resources and maritime boundaries.

Venezuela’s Use of Cryptocurrencies to Circumvent Sanctions

• Event: In response to international sanctions, the Venezuelan government launched the Petro, a cryptocurrency, to access international finance and stabilize its economy.
• Grey Zone Characteristics: By creating a state-backed digital currency, Venezuela seeks to evade economic sanctions imposed by the US and other countries, blurring the lines between legitimate state finance operations and evasion tactics.
• Impact: While the effectiveness of the Petro remains questionable, the move represents a novel approach to sidestepping the traditional financial systems and sanctions.

These examples demonstrate different tools and tactics employed in grey zone warfare, from cyber-attacks and covert poisonings to the use of non-military vessels and private military companies in contested areas. They illustrate how such tools and tactics are not confined to one domain but span across military, economic, cyber, and political spheres. Each instance shows how the perpetrating nations employ these strategies to pursue their interests under the threshold of conventional war, complicating the global security environment and challenging existing international norms and laws.

The employment of grey zone tactics is often characterised by the strategic goal of achieving objectives without crossing thresholds that would trigger a conventional military response from international bodies or powerful nation-states. The effectiveness of grey zone warfare lies in its ability to operate within the ambiguity of international law and the constraints of modern geopolitical norms.

The future likely holds more instances of grey zone conflict as nations increasingly see the benefit of achieving strategic military, political, and economic objectives while avoiding the costs and risks associated with declared warfare. As such, understanding and responding to grey zone threats is becoming a crucial component of national security strategies worldwide.

What Warfare is Categorised as ‘Grey Zone’
For warfare to be categorised as a Grey Zone, several defining characteristics or constituent elements are typically present. These elements distinguish Grey Zone warfare from conventional conflict and other forms of hostility, highlighting its unique strategy and execution. Here are the key elements:

Ambiguity and Deniability

• Ambiguity: Actions are intentionally ambiguous, making it difficult for opponents and international observers to determine whether what they are witnessing is aggressive or merely assertive, peaceful, or normal state behaviour. This ambiguity extends to the legal and ethical dimensions of the actions.
• Deniability: There is plausible deniability for the state or actor conducting operations, often using proxies, cyber-attacks, or unmarked agents to ensure that activities cannot be conclusively linked to them. This complicates diplomatic responses and international condemnation.

Non-Military and Military Tools

• Hybrid Tactics: Combining military and non-military tools, including propaganda, cyber attacks, economic measures, legal strategies, and cultural influence. This blend makes the approach multifaceted and harder to counter with traditional military means alone.
• Low Intensity: Typically, the military component, if present, is of low intensity and below the threshold of war. The use of unmarked troops, covert operations, and small-scale engagements are characteristic.

Sub-Threshold of Armed Conflict

• Actions taken are deliberately kept below the threshold that would normally provoke a traditional military response from other states or international coalitions. This threshold is carefully managed to avoid triggering a full-scale war or broad sanctions.

Psychological and Information Warfare

• Psychological Impact: Efforts are aimed at affecting the psychological state of the adversary, inducing fear, confusion, fatigue, and a sense of helplessness. This is often achieved through sustained misinformation, disinformation, and psychological operations.
• Information Control: Control or manipulation of information is crucial, whether it’s through media, cyber activities, or influencing the narrative via social and conventional media channels. The goal is to shape public perception and political responses.

Economic and Political Coercion

• Economic Measures: Using economic pressure such as sanctions, embargoes, and trade restrictions or offering economic incentives to influence the decisions of other nations.
• Political Influence: Engaging in actions designed to influence the political landscape of a target country. This could include supporting particular political parties or movements, corruption, or exploiting political divisions.

Exploitation of International Norms and Law

• Legal Warfare (Lawfare): Using international law and norms to constrain the actions of the opponent or to justify one’s own actions. This might involve contesting territories, using maritime and air law ambiguities, or other legal frameworks to push a strategic agenda.
• Normative Battles: Contesting the norms and moral high ground within international forums to isolate opponents or to build legitimacy for one’s own position.

Incrementalism

• Salami Tactics: Implementing actions in a gradual, step-by-step approach that aims to achieve the end goals without triggering significant opposition at any single step. Each action is too minor to warrant a strong response, but collectively, they achieve significant strategic objectives.

These elements combine to form a complex and often effective approach to achieving strategic goals without engaging in open warfare. As such, Grey Zone warfare represents a sophisticated spectrum of conflict that requires equally nuanced responses from those looking to counteract its effects.

Other Names for the Grey Zone
The concept of Grey Zone warfare is often referred to by various terms that highlight different aspects of its nature and strategy. Some of these alternative names and methods include:

• Ambiguous Warfare: This name underscores the intentional use of ambiguity to make it difficult to define acts as aggressive or merely assertive, exploiting the “fog of war” in political and public perceptions.
• Asymmetric Warfare: This term is used to describe conflict between parties of unequal strength, where the weaker party uses non-traditional tactics and strategies to exploit the vulnerabilities of the stronger opponent.
• Cognitive Warfare: Cognitive Warfare targets the minds of opponents—much like psychological warfare—but with a broader and more technologically sophisticated approach. It aims to change the way people think, perceive, and make decisions by exploiting cognitive biases, creating disinformation, and manipulating perceptions. This type of warfare seeks to undermine trust, sow discord, and disrupt the decision-making processes of individuals, organisations, and governments, ultimately aiming to weaken an adversary from the inside.
• Covert Operations: Although this can be a subset of Grey Zone warfare, it often describes actions taken secretly to influence political, military, or economic conditions abroad, where the role of the sponsoring government is not apparent to the public.
• Hybrid Warfare: This term emphasises the blending of conventional and unconventional military and non-military tactics used simultaneously. It highlights the multifaceted nature of modern conflicts where combatants employ a combination of forces and tactics like cyberattacks, misinformation, and the use of proxies alongside regular military operations. See the next section below for a comparison with Grey Zone warfare.
• Irregular Warfare: Focusing on the asymmetrical and non-traditional aspects, this term is used to describe warfare that includes guerrilla tactics, insurgency, terrorism, and other methods that do not fit the norms of traditional state-to-state armed conflict.
• Low-Intensity Conflict: Emphasises conflicts that fall below the threshold of conventional war but involve prolonged struggles of a political and social nature. This term is often used to describe conflicts that are more intense than routine, peaceful competition but less than full-scale war.
• New Generation Warfare: This term, often associated with Russian military doctrine, describes a strategy that combines military, technological, information, diplomatic, economic, cultural, and other tactics for achieving strategic goals in ways that do not necessarily involve open warfare.
• Political Warfare: This highlights the use of political instruments to achieve strategic objectives, which can include covert actions, influence operations, and the use of media and propaganda to affect the political composition or decision-making within another sovereign state.

Each of these terms can overlap with others, but they each emphasise different elements or strategic priorities of Grey Zone strategies. Understanding these nuances is important for analysing the complex nature of contemporary conflicts and the evolving landscape of global security challenges.

“Grey Zone Warfare” and “Hybrid Warfare” Compared^[7]
The terms “grey zone warfare” and “hybrid warfare” are often used interchangeably, but they refer to subtly different concepts and strategies in the context of modern conflict and military theory. Here’s how they differ:

Grey Zone Warfare
Definition:
Grey zone warfare encompasses a range of activities conducted by states or non-state actors that are coercive and aggressive but remain below the threshold of conventional war. These activities aim to achieve strategic objectives without escalating to open conflict, thus avoiding international military response or full-scale war.

Characteristics:

• Ambiguity and Deniability: Actions in the grey zone are designed to be ambiguous, making it difficult to attribute them directly to an actor, thus maintaining deniability.
• Sub-Threshold Actions: Activities do not cross the threshold that would trigger a traditional military response. They exploit the “grey areas” of international law and norms.
• Psychological and Influence Operations: A significant component involves shaping perceptions and decision-making processes through misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda.
• Use of Non-Military Means: Economic coercion, political influence, legal strategies, and cultural engagements are typical, often complemented by limited military tactics.

Hybrid Warfare
Definition:
Hybrid warfare refers to a strategy that blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare, and cyber warfare with other influencing methods such as economic pressure, diplomatic efforts, and legal tools. It is about using multiple means of warfare simultaneously to achieve strategic objectives, typically in a highly integrated and coordinated manner.

Characteristics:

• Integration of Military and Non-Military Tactics: Hybrid warfare involves a seamless combination of kinetic operations (traditional military force) with subversive efforts. The military component is more pronounced than in grey zone warfare.
• Simultaneity and Multidimensionality: Actions occur simultaneously across multiple domains—land, sea, air, cyber, and space—to overwhelm the adversary.
• High Level of Coordination: The tactics are highly coordinated across different branches of government and military to maximise their impact.
• Visibility and Attribution: Unlike grey zone tactics, hybrid warfare can involve openly aggressive actions that are attributable but executed in a manner that complicates the victim’s response.

Key Differences

• Visibility and Attribution: Hybrid warfare is often more visible and attributable than grey zone warfare, which thrives on ambiguity and deniability.
• Role of Military Force: In hybrid warfare, the use of conventional military force is more evident and integrated with other forms of warfare. Grey zone warfare tends to emphasise non-military methods and keeps military actions covert or minimal to avoid crossing the threshold of war.
• Strategic Objectives and Execution: Grey zone warfare is primarily about achieving goals without full-scale war, using a gradual, opportunistic, and often long-term approach. Hybrid warfare seeks to use all available means for a more immediate and decisive impact, potentially including overwhelming force.

Understanding these distinctions is crucial for analysing international conflicts and responses, as the appropriate counter-strategies for grey zone and hybrid warfare differ significantly due to their unique challenges and operational tactics.

Key Aspects of Cognitive Warfare

• Information Manipulation: Using data, information, and disinformation campaigns to influence public opinion and decision-making processes.
• Psychological Operations (PSYOPS): These are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and, ultimately, the behaviour of governments, organisations, groups, and individuals.
• Media Manipulation: Involves the strategic use of traditional media and social media platforms to disseminate propaganda or false information to create confusion and distrust or to steer public discourse in a favourable direction.
• Cyber Influence: Deploying cyber tools to manipulate or disrupt the cognitive environment. This includes the use of bots and algorithms to amplify specific narratives or misinformation on a large scale across networked platforms.
• Neuroscientific Techniques: The exploration and application of findings from neuroscience to develop techniques that can have a direct impact on human cognition. These advanced methods can be leveraged to enhance the effects of propaganda and misinformation or to develop new methods of influence.

Connection to Grey Zone Warfare
Cognitive warfare fits within the broader scope of Grey Zone warfare because it represents the non-kinetic, non-traditional aspects of conflict that aim to achieve strategic objectives without crossing the threshold into open armed conflict. It is part of the arsenal used to exploit the seams between peace and war, influencing adversaries in ways that traditional military power might not be able to, and without the risks associated with direct military engagement.

As technologies advance and information becomes more central to the function of societies, Cognitive Warfare is likely to become an increasingly significant aspect of international relations and conflict, necessitating sophisticated countermeasures and ethical considerations in both national security strategies and international law.

Countries that have Used Grey Zone Warfare Tactics
Several countries have employed grey zone warfare tactics over the years for various strategic objectives, including extending influence, coercing neighbours, or destabilising rivals without triggering outright warfare. Here are some prominent examples:

Russia

• When and Why: Especially evident since the early 2000s, Russia’s grey zone activities have been motivated by a desire to reassert its influence over former Soviet states and counter Western influence in Eastern Europe and beyond.

Examples include:

• Ukraine (2014-Present): The annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in Eastern Ukraine using unmarked soldiers and covert operations, alongside cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns.
• Election Interference: Alleged interference in the 2016 United States presidential elections and other Western democratic processes, primarily through cyberattacks and disinformation, to sow discord and influence political outcomes.

China

• When and Why: Over the past two decades, China has used grey zone tactics to assert its territorial claims in the South China Sea and along its borders and to extend its geopolitical and economic influence without provoking direct military confrontations.

Examples include:

• South China Sea: Building artificial islands and militarising them, conducting naval patrols, and using maritime militia to harass other nations’ fishing and military vessels, all while avoiding overt military engagement.
• Belt and Road Initiative: While primarily economic, this strategy has elements of grey zone tactics through debt diplomacy, where countries are drawn into economic dependence, which is then used for political leverage.

Iran

• When and Why: Iran has engaged in grey zone warfare to expand its regional influence and counter adversaries like the United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, especially given its conventional military disadvantages.

Examples include:

• Proxy Warfare: Supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthi rebels in Yemen, and various militia groups in Iraq and Syria.
• Cyber Operations: Alleged involvement in cyber espionage and sabotage against regional and Western targets.

United States

• When and Why: The US has employed elements of grey zone tactics primarily to counter terrorism and influence foreign governments without deploying large conventional forces.

Examples include:

• Cyber Operations: Covert cyber operations against Iran’s nuclear program (e.g., Stuxnet) and ongoing cyber espionage as part of global intelligence-gathering efforts.
• Political Influence and Economic Sanctions: Use of economic sanctions, support for opposition groups, and covert operations to influence regimes and political outcomes.

North Korea

• When and Why: North Korea uses grey zone tactics to exert pressure on South Korea and the international community to extract economic concessions and to solidify its regime’s legitimacy and survival.

Examples include:

• Cyber Warfare: Hacking attacks on international banks and cryptocurrencies to generate revenue for the regime.
• Military Posturing: Short-range missile tests and naval skirmishes along the Northern Limit Line with South Korea.

United Kingdom
The United Kingdom has engaged in activities that can be classified as grey zone warfare, leveraging a mix of military and non-military tactics to achieve strategic objectives without triggering outright warfare. These operations have often involved psychological operations, cyber activities, and economic measures, reflecting the broad toolkit of grey zone strategies.

Historical and contemporary examples include:

• During World War II – Political and Psychological Warfare
  – Who: Led by individuals like Sefton Delmer (see below) and under the auspices of the Political Warfare Executive (PWE).
  – Why: To undermine the morale of the Axis forces and their civilian populations and to bolster resistance movements across Europe.
  – When: Throughout World War II, particularly from 1941 to 1945.
  – Methods: Broadcasts of misleading information and propaganda, support for resistance groups, and the use of subversive literature.
• The Cold War – Covert Operations and Propaganda
  – Who: MI6 and the BBC World Service, among other entities.
  – Why: To counter Soviet influence globally and to support pro-Western elements in various regions during the ideological and geopolitical contest between the West and the Soviet bloc.
  – When: From the late 1940s through the 1980s.
  – Methods: Funding and logistical support for dissident groups, covert actions against communist regimes, and extensive propaganda campaigns.
• The Troubles in Northern Ireland – Counterinsurgency and Covert Surveillance
  – Who: British Army and the Royal Ulster Constabulary.
  – Why: To maintain control and stability in Northern Ireland and counteract IRA paramilitary operations.
  – When: Late 1960s through the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.
  – Methods: Surveillance, infiltration of terrorist groups, and psychological operations to influence public opinion and reduce support for the IRA.
• Modern Cyber Operations
  – Who: Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and related cyber units.
  – Why: To protect national security by preempting cyber threats and to exert influence or respond to actions by state and non-state actors.
  – When: Ongoing, particularly noted in the 2010s to present.
  – Methods: Cyber espionage, defensive and offensive cyber operations, and the use of cyber capabilities to expose or disrupt adversarial activities.
• Economic and Diplomatic Pressure
  – Who: The British government, in coordination with international bodies like the EU and NATO.
  – Why: To respond to international crises and conflicts, such as the Russian annexation of Crimea, without escalating to direct military confrontation.
  – When: Ongoing, with notable increases during specific crises.
  – Methods: Implementation of economic sanctions, diplomatic isolation measures, and legal manoeuvres within international courts and organisations.

The UK’s use of grey zone tactics reflects a strategic approach that emphasises the use of non-traditional means to manage conflicts and exert influence. These methods allow the UK to engage on the international stage in ways that avoid the costs and risks associated with overt military action, maintaining a level of ambiguity and deniability that is characteristic of grey zone warfare.

As with other nations, the UK’s engagement in these activities is tailored to specific contexts and goals, ranging from global geopolitical manoeuvring to regional stability operations. These countries employ grey zone tactics as part of their broader strategic goals, leveraging the ambiguity and deniability these methods provide to achieve objectives while managing risk and avoiding the costs of open warfare. This approach is particularly favoured in the modern geopolitical landscape, where direct military confrontation is often impracticable or too costly due to nuclear deterrence and the globalised, interconnected nature of the world.

Japan and Germany in World War II
Tokyo Rose and Lord Haw-Haw represent notable instances from history where grey zone tactics, particularly in the form of propaganda and psychological warfare, were employed during World War II. These individuals were used to broadcast misinformation and propaganda aimed at demoralising enemy troops and civilian populations, similar to the efforts of Sefton Delmer that are mentioned below.

• Who: William Brooke Joyce^[8], better known by his nickname Lord Haw-Haw, was an American-born British fascist who defected to Nazi Germany. Joyce was one of the main English-language broadcasters of Nazi propaganda.
• Why: The broadcasts were intended to demoralise Allied troops and the British public, to disrupt the morale of Allied forces, and to spread misinformation and propaganda as part of the Nazi psychological warfare effort.
• When: He was most active from 1939, at the start of World War II, until late 1945, when the war ended.
• Methods: Lord Haw-Haw broadcasted misleading reports and Nazi propaganda via radio from Germany to audiences in the United Kingdom and other Allied countries. His broadcasts included threats of bombing, false reports of military failures, and other news designed to weaken the morale of the Allies.

Tokyo Rose

• Who: Tokyo Rose^[9] was a name given by Allied troops in the South Pacific during World War II to all female English-speaking radio broadcasters of Japanese propaganda. The name is most strongly associated with Iva Toguri D’Aquino, an American-born Japanese who participated in English-language broadcasting.
• Why: The broadcasts aimed to make Allied forces feel homesick and doubtful about the moral justifications for the war, seeking to weaken their fighting spirit and create distrust among Allied forces.
• When: Tokyo Rose broadcasts were particularly prominent during World War II, alongside other similar efforts by Axis powers.
• Methods: Using English-language broadcasts, these radio programs featured popular American music interspersed with subtle propaganda messages that highlighted the costs of war, reported false military setbacks, and emphasised the isolation of troops and the infidelity of their partners at home.

Mildred Elizabeth Gillars
Mildred Elizabeth Gillars was nicknamed ‘Axis Sally’. She was an American broadcaster employed by the Third Reich in Nazi Germany to disseminate propaganda during World War II. She was convicted of treason by the United States in 1949 following her capture in post-war Berlin. In 1940, she obtained work as an announcer with the German State Radio. Gillars’ broadcasts initially were largely apolitical, but this changed in 1942 when she was cast in a new show called Home Sweet Home, acquiring several derogatory names amongst her GI audience, including The Berlin Bitch, Berlin Babe, Olga, and Sally, but the one most common used was Axis Sally.

Relevance to Grey Zone Tactics
Lord Haw-Haw, Tokyo Rose and Mildred Gillars exemplify the use of media and communications as tools in grey zone warfare. By targeting the psychological well-being and morale of enemy populations and soldiers, these broadcasters employed classic grey zone tactics long before the term was coined. These operations utilised ambiguity (the sources of the broadcasts were not always clear to listeners), exploited vulnerabilities (such as loneliness and fear among troops), and aimed to achieve strategic goals without direct military confrontation.

In mentioning these figures alongside modern cyber operations and historical examples like Sefton Delmer, we can see a continuity in the use of psychological operations and propaganda from World War II through to the present day. Each of these cases highlights different facets of grey zone warfare and the strategic use of non-military means to influence, disrupt, or coerce adversaries.

Sefton Delmer
Denis Sefton Delmer was a British journalist of Australian heritage and propagandist for the British government during World War II. Born in Berlin and fluent in German^[10], he became friendly with Ernst Röhm, who arranged for him to interview Adolf Hitler in 1931. As an announcer for the BBC German service in 1939, his provocative on-air reaction to Hitler’s offer of peace caused the German authorities to add his name to the Special Search List for arrest after they had invaded Britain. During the war, he led a black propaganda campaign against Hitler by radio from England.

Delmer is a fascinating figure to discuss in the context of grey zone warfare, particularly because of his pioneering work in psychological warfare and propaganda during World War II. Delmer led the British black propaganda operations against Nazi Germany. His efforts were designed to sow disinformation, demoralise the enemy, and manipulate public opinion—tactics that resonate with modern grey zone warfare concepts.

About Sefton Delmer
Sefton Delmer’s work included setting up radio stations that ostensibly were German radio stations, which broadcast misleading information, rumours, and fake news stories intended to deceive, disorient, and demoralise both German soldiers and civilians. These activities aimed to undermine trust in the Nazi regime and create confusion and dissent within the German ranks:

• Use of Non-Kinetic Means: Delmer’s strategies emphasised psychological impact over physical military engagement, aligning with the core principle of grey zone warfare, which often prioritises non-military methods to achieve strategic goals.
• Ambiguity and Deniability: The operations Delmer orchestrated were cloaked in secrecy and designed to appear as originating from within Germany, providing the British with plausible deniability and keeping the operations covert.
• Influence and Information Warfare: Delmer’s work can be seen as a form of early information warfare, where the weapon used was information manipulation—key to modern grey zone and hybrid warfare tactics.

While one could argue that Delmer helped lay foundational tactics that resemble today’s grey zone warfare, it’s also important to remember the context:

• Specific Historical Context: Delmer’s operations were specific to the psychological warfare needs and strategic environment of World War II, which was characterised by total war and clear, defined enemies.
• Evolution of Tactics: Grey zone warfare, as it is understood today, involves a broader set of tools, including cyber operations, economic pressure, legal strategies, and more integrated use of military and non-military means. Delmer’s tactics were primarily focused on psychological and information operations.

Sefton Delmer can be considered a precursor to modern grey zone tactics in terms of the psychological and informational aspects of these strategies. He demonstrated early on how powerful and effective non-traditional methods of warfare could be when integrated into a broader strategic framework. Delmer’s legacy should be seen within the lineage of psychological warfare and strategic communications, which are integral to but not solely definitive of contemporary grey zone warfare.

Technological Aspects and Cyber Warfare
In the 21^st century, technology has become a critical frontier in grey zone warfare, with states and non-state actors increasingly turning to cyber operations as key instruments of national strategy. The integration of cyber warfare tactics into grey zone strategies reflects a sophisticated evolution in how conflict and competition are conducted on the global stage.

Cyber Warfare Tactics

• Disruption of Critical Infrastructure: Cyber operations aimed at critical infrastructure are designed to sow chaos and undermine public confidence. These can range from temporarily disabling national power grids to disrupting water treatment facilities. For example, in 2015, hackers allegedly associated with the Russian government managed to temporarily disrupt the power supply in parts of Ukraine, affecting thousands of citizens.
• Data Theft and Espionage: Stealing sensitive information remains a cornerstone of cyber warfare. By infiltrating government networks, hackers can gain access to national security secrets, intellectual property, and personal data of key government officials, which can be used to manipulate political and economic landscapes. The 2014 cyber attack on the US Office of Personnel Management, attributed to Chinese state-sponsored hackers, resulted in the theft of personal data of over 22 million current and former federal employees.
• Influence and Disinformation Campaigns: States use cyber tools to influence public opinion and political processes in other nations. A notable instance is the Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election, where cyber tactics were combined with an extensive disinformation campaign to sway public opinion and amplify political divisions.

Impact on National Security
The rise of cyber warfare tactics in grey zone conflicts poses profound challenges for national security:

• Resilience of Critical Systems: The vulnerability of critical infrastructure to cyber-attacks necessitates significant upgrades in cybersecurity measures to protect national assets.
• Integrity of Information Ecosystems: With the capability to alter perceptions through disinformation, states must ensure the resilience of their information environments to maintain public trust and social stability.
• Policy and Legal Frameworks: The elusive nature of cyber warfare complicates the attribution of attacks and inhibits the formulation of appropriate legal and retaliatory responses.

Examples of Recent Cyber-Attacks

• SolarWinds Hack (2020): Attributed to Russian state-sponsored hackers, this sophisticated supply chain attack compromised the software development process of the SolarWinds Orion platform, leading to the breach of several US government agencies and numerous private sector companies. This incident highlighted the complexity and stealth of modern cyber operations in grey zone warfare.
• Microsoft Exchange Server Hacks (2021): Attributed to Chinese state-sponsored actors, these attacks exploited vulnerabilities in Microsoft Exchange servers to access email accounts and install further malware for long-term access to victim networks. This operation affected tens of thousands of organisations globally, demonstrating the scale and aggressive nature of state-sponsored cyber espionage.

The technological dimension of grey zone warfare, particularly through cyber operations, has redefined the boundaries and methods of conflict in the modern era. As technology continues to evolve, so too will the tactics of grey zone warfare, requiring ongoing adaptations in national security strategies to mitigate these pervasive threats.

Future Trends in Grey Zone Warfare
As the digital landscape evolves, so too does the nature of conflict. Grey zone warfare, already deeply entwined with the realms of cyber tactics and information warfare, is set to become even more sophisticated with the integration of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). These technologies are poised to dramatically shift the strategies employed in grey zone confrontations.

Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

• Enhanced Cyber Operations: AI and ML can automate the process of identifying vulnerabilities in software and networks, leading to more effective and adaptive cyber-attacks. For instance, AI-driven cyber tools can continuously learn from ongoing cybersecurity measures and adjust their strategies to exploit new vulnerabilities faster than human operators could identify and patch them. This capability could lead to an increase in successful cyber intrusions without clear attribution, a hallmark of grey zone tactics.
• Sophisticated Information Campaigns: AI technologies are already being used to create and spread disinformation at a scale and sophistication previously unattainable. Deepfakes—videos and audio recordings that look and sound like real people saying or doing things they never did—present a potent tool for undermining political stability. As these technologies become more accessible and difficult to detect, the potential for their use in grey zone activities, such as influencing elections or inciting social unrest, is significant.
• Autonomous Drones and Robotics: AI-enhanced unmanned systems can be used for surveillance, targeted attacks, or even sabotage missions without risking human lives. These systems could operate semi-autonomously to gather intelligence or conduct attacks, complicating the attribution of aggressive actions and allowing states to deny involvement more plausibly.

Expert Opinions and Predictions
Experts in security and technology are voicing concerns about these trends. According to a recent report from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the use of AI in national defence and security strategies is increasing, with over 50 countries exploring military AI applications.^[11] This widespread adoption signals a potential arms race in AI-driven defence technologies, further blurring the lines between conventional and grey zone warfare.

Furthermore, scholars like Dr. James R. Fitzgerald from the Center for Strategic and International Studies argue that as AI and cyber capabilities merge, the distinction between cybercrime and state-sponsored cyber operations will become more ambiguous, making international governance and regulation more challenging.

Challenges and Considerations
The evolution of grey zone warfare raises critical ethical and legal questions, such as:

• Regulation and Oversight: There is a pressing need for international agreements on the use and limits of AI in warfare. Without them, the risk of an unchecked escalation in grey zone conflicts grows.
• Defensive Strategies: Nations must invest in AI-driven defence mechanisms not just to protect against traditional cyber threats but to anticipate and counter AI-driven disinformation and autonomous attacks.
• Transparency and Accountability: Balancing the benefits of AI in national security with the need for transparency will be crucial to maintaining public trust and international cooperation.

The future of grey zone warfare is likely to be defined by the rapid integration of emerging technologies. As AI and ML redefine what is possible, both tactically and strategically, nations must navigate the twin challenges of leveraging these tools for national security while ensuring they do not destabilise global peace. The evolution of these technologies will require adaptive strategies and new frameworks of international law and cooperation.

Disinformation and Political Warfare
Disinformation and political warfare have a long and intricate history, spanning decades and continents:

Active Measures and Historical Context:

• Active measures refer to covert operations aimed at influencing public opinion, sowing discord, and manipulating information. These tactics have been employed by various actors across different eras.
• Thomas Rid, in his comprehensive work, Active Measures: The Secret History of Disinformation and Political Warfare, traces four waves of disinformation from the 1920s to the present day^[12].

Key Lessons:

• Nothing Is New: The current disinformation landscape is not novel; historical precedents exist. Technological advancements, from newspapers to deep fakes, have long been exploited to shape strategic narratives.
• Complex Active Measures: Over almost a century, active measures have included efforts by the Bolshevik security agency (Cheka), CIA balloon leaflets during East Germany’s elections, and KGB-forged materials designed to exploit societal fractures.
• Timeless Tools: Forgeries, close enough to a desired truth, have been used to drive wedges within societies. Examples range from KKK leaflets distributed to UN delegations to the fiction that AIDS/HIV was developed at Fort Detrick, Maryland, USA.^[13]

Hybrid Warfare and Disinformation:

• Hybrid warfare combines conventional military tactics with non-kinetic means, including disinformation.
• Countries like Russia and China employ disinformation campaigns domestically and internationally. Their goal is to manipulate emotions, sow mistrust, and create chaos to influence public and political opinion.^[14]

Information Disorder and Grey Zone Operations:

• Misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation play crucial roles in the information warfare domain.
• These tactics are associated with grey zone operations, where adversaries use non-kinetic means to harm democratic societies while staying below the threshold of war.^[15]

In summary, disinformation and political warfare are deeply intertwined, with historical roots and contemporary relevance. Understanding their dynamics is essential in navigating the complex information landscape of our times.

Long Terms Outcomes
The roots of grey zone tactics stretch back to antiquity, evolving dramatically alongside advancements in technology and shifts in the global political landscape.

The long-term outcomes of grey zone warfare are complex and multifaceted, often extending beyond immediate geopolitical gains to influence global norms, international relations, and domestic politics within the involved countries. Here’s a breakdown of potential long-term impacts based on the types of grey zone tactics and strategies I have mentioned:

Erosion of Trust and Norms

• Examples: Cyber warfare, disinformation campaigns, electoral interference.
• Impact: These actions erode trust among nations and within societies, undermining the credibility of institutions and the integrity of information environments. As trust diminishes, the ability of international organisations to foster cooperation diminishes, potentially leading to a more fragmented international system.

The Shift in Power Balances

• Examples: Economic coercion and support for proxy wars.
• Impact: Sustained grey zone conflicts can shift regional and global power balances. For instance, Iran’s support for proxy groups helps extend its influence in the Middle East, which challenges the status quo and the influence of Western powers and their regional allies. Similarly, economic tactics like those seen in the US-China trade war can reshape global economic relationships and supply chains.

Militarisation and Arms Races

• Examples: Militarisation of the South China Sea and use of advanced technologies in conflicts.
• Impact: Actions that include the militarisation of contested areas or the development and deployment of new military technologies can lead to arms races and increased military spending among adversaries. This not only escalates tensions but also diverts resources from domestic development to defence budgets.

Legal and Normative Ambiguity

• Examples: Use of cryptocurrencies to circumvent sanctions and ambiguous maritime claims.
• Impact: Grey zone activities that exploit loopholes in international law contribute to a lack of clarity that can destabilise international norms. For example, Venezuela’s use of a state-backed cryptocurrency to avoid sanctions might encourage other states to follow suit, complicating international efforts to enforce sanctions and regulate global finance.

Humanitarian Consequences

• Examples: Proxy warfare and economic sanctions.
• Impact: Often, the civilian population suffers the most from grey zone tactics. Sanctions can lead to economic hardships, while proxy wars prolong conflict and misery for populations caught in the crossfire, leading to humanitarian crises and refugee flows.

Strengthening of Authoritarian Practices

• Examples: Tightened control over information and increased surveillance.
• Impact: In response to threats perceived as originating from grey zone tactics (like disinformation or cyber-attacks), governments might tighten control over information spaces and increase surveillance. This can lead to a reduction in civil liberties and the strengthening of authoritarian practices, even in democratic societies.

Cultural and Ideological Polarisation

• Examples: Disinformation campaigns and political manipulation.
• Impact: Prolonged exposure to grey zone tactics like disinformation can lead to societal polarisation, where public opinion is increasingly divided along ideological lines, weakening societal cohesion and making coherent policy responses more challenging.

Countermeasures
Earlier in this paper, I mentioned countermeasures to thwart grey zone warfare. These are diverse and need to be multifaceted, reflecting the complex and ambiguous nature of the conflicts involved. They often involve a blend of military preparedness, diplomatic efforts, economic policies, legal tools, and informational strategies to address the specific tactics used in grey zone warfare. Here are several effective countermeasures that may be used:

Enhanced Intelligence and Surveillance

• Capabilities: Developing advanced intelligence capabilities to detect and attribute grey zone activities promptly. This includes cyber surveillance, human intelligence, and signals intelligence.
• Sharing Information: Strengthening information-sharing agreements between allies to improve collective response capabilities and situational awareness.

Legal and Regulatory Frameworks

• International Law: Advocating for clearer international legal norms and frameworks that can close the gaps exploited by grey zone tactics. This involves defining cyber aggression and other non-conventional acts more clearly under international law.
• National Laws: Implementing stricter national laws to protect critical infrastructure and counter foreign influence operations, such as stricter controls over foreign investments in sensitive sectors.

Strategic Communication and Information Warfare

• Counter-Propaganda: Developing robust mechanisms to counter disinformation and propaganda. This could involve the establishment of government or multilateral agencies tasked with identifying and debunking fake news and disinformation campaigns.
• Public Awareness: Enhancing public awareness and resilience against misinformation through education campaigns and the promotion of media literacy.

Diplomatic Engagement and Soft Power

• Diplomacy: Leveraging diplomatic channels to build international consensus against the covert and deceptive tactics used in grey zone conflicts.
• Soft Power: Investing in cultural and educational programs abroad to build positive national images and counteract adversarial narratives.

Economic Measures

• Sanctions and Trade Policies: Employing economic tools like sanctions and trade policies to punish entities or countries that engage in grey zone tactics.
• Economic Resilience: Building economic resilience by diversifying supply chains and reducing dependency on potentially hostile states.

Military Preparedness and Hybrid Defence Strategies

• Hybrid Defence: Preparing military and security forces to deal with hybrid threats that blend conventional and unconventional warfare tactics.
• Special Operations Forces: Enhancing the capabilities of special operations forces to operate in complex environments typical of grey zone conflicts.

Technological Innovation and Cyber Defence

• Cyber Defence: Strengthening cyber defence mechanisms to protect against cyberattacks and cyber espionage. This includes investing in advanced cybersecurity technologies and skilled personnel.
• AI and Machine Learning: Using artificial intelligence and machine learning to detect patterns and anomalies that may indicate covert operations or cyberattacks.

Multilateral Cooperation and Alliances

• International Cooperation: Enhancing cooperation with international bodies like the United Nations, NATO, and regional security organisations to coordinate responses to grey zone tactics.
• Joint Exercises: Conducting joint military and civilian exercises designed to simulate grey zone scenarios, improving readiness and interoperability among allies.

Continuous Monitoring and Adaptation

• Dynamic Risk Assessment: Establishing frameworks for continuous assessment of national security risks posed by grey zone tactics. This includes monitoring geopolitical trends and technological advancements that might alter the landscape of grey zone conflicts.
• Adaptive Strategies: Developing flexible and adaptive strategies that can quickly pivot as adversaries adjust their tactics, ensuring that responses remain effective over time.

Building Resilience in Civil Society

• Community Engagement: Increasing engagement with local communities to build grassroots resilience against divisive tactics, such as those aimed at inciting racial or social strife.
• Alliance Between Public and Private Sectors: Encouraging alliances between government and private sector entities, particularly in critical infrastructure sectors, to enhance resilience and response capabilities.

Enhancing International Norms and Cooperation

• Norm Development: Playing a proactive role in international forums to develop norms and rules that govern state behaviour in domains exploited by grey zone tactics, such as cyberspace and international waters.
• Capacity Building: Assisting weaker states in building their capacities to resist grey zone pressures, thereby strengthening global stability and reducing vulnerabilities that adversaries might exploit.

Use of Advanced Technology

• Predictive Analytics: Leveraging big data and predictive analytics to foresee and mitigate potential grey zone threats before they can have a strategic impact.
• Blockchain Technology: Using blockchain and other secure technologies to safeguard election systems, intellectual property, and critical data from manipulation or theft.

Psychological and Cognitive Defences

• Cognitive Security: Investing in research and practices that bolster cognitive security, protecting public opinion and decision-making processes from manipulation.
• Counter-Psychological Operations: Developing capabilities to counteract psychological operations employed by adversaries, which may involve direct communication strategies and engagement with at-risk populations.

Legal and Ethical Boundaries

• Ethical Guidelines: Formulating ethical guidelines for the use of technologies and tactics that might be employed in countering grey zone threats, ensuring that defensive measures do not undermine democratic values or human rights.
• Legal Responses: Crafting legal responses that are quick and effective yet maintain the rule of law, especially in handling non-state actors and proxies used in grey zone warfare.

Strategic Uncertainty

• Creating Strategic Uncertainty for Adversaries: Implementing policies and tactics that create uncertainty for potential adversaries, making it difficult for them to predict responses and outcomes from their grey zone activities. This could involve ambiguous yet controlled signalling about red lines^[16] and consequences.

Each of these countermeasures requires a coordinated approach that involves multiple sectors of government and society, reflecting the comprehensive nature of grey zone threats. Effective response strategies must be adaptive and resilient, capable of evolving as adversaries refine or change their tactics. Integrating these measures effectively requires ongoing commitment, innovation, and collaboration at multiple levels, from local to global.

Final Words
While there might be instances where the public appears to prefer simpler or more comforting lies, it is a complex issue that involves psychological, societal, media, and ethical dimensions. The preference for lies over truth can have serious implications for individual decision-making and societal health. Encouraging critical thinking, promoting media literacy, and fostering a culture of transparency and accountability are essential steps in addressing these challenges.

Looking ahead, the integration of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning with grey zone tactics is poised to further transform the nature of covert and indirect conflict. These technologies have the potential to automate and refine disinformation campaigns, cyber espionage, and the strategic manipulation of political and economic landscapes. The ensuing challenge for nation-states will be not only to anticipate these evolutions but also to develop innovative countermeasures that safeguard national security and uphold international stability.

In response, there is a critical need for robust policy frameworks that can adapt to the rapid pace of technological change and the cunning nature of grey zone conflicts. Such policies should prioritise the development of advanced cybersecurity measures, enhanced intelligence capabilities, and stronger international law enforcement cooperation. Additionally, ethical considerations must guide the deployment of new technologies in surveillance and information warfare to prevent escalations that could lead to greater instability.

As grey zone warfare continues to evolve, so too must global governance and defence mechanisms. This demands a sustained commitment to international cooperation and a proactive approach to policy-making. By fostering a deep understanding of grey zone tactics and their implications, the international community can better prepare for and mitigate the risks associated with this new age of conflict, ensuring a secure and stable global environment.

The UK’s Perspective ^[17]
The announcement of a significant increase in the UK’s defence budget marks a pivotal change in military operations and highlights the need to reassess military conduct under international law. Operations in the ‘grey zone,’ where state and non-state actors engage below the threshold of war, have always been complex due to unclear protocols. Despite the perception, the grey zone is not without rules.

Asymmetric activities^[18] in the grey zone increasingly threaten UK interests and global security. The fast-paced technological advancements and rise in activities like cyberattacks underscore the urgency for operational changes in the UK.

A key strategy in the grey zone involves creating doubt about the legitimacy of established legal and ethical principles. The UK must remain cautious in its response to avoid undermining these principles. International norms such as non-intervention and the prohibition of force are effective tools against grey zone challenges, as the UK acknowledged in 2018 regarding cyber operations.

The 2021 announcement of the ‘Integrated Operating Concept 25’ by the UK’s chief of defence staff is significant, aiming to integrate military efforts across all levels to address threats. However, it also suggests updates to the UK’s legal and ethical framework to prevent adversaries from undermining UK values. This broad statement needs clarity to avoid impacting existing legal norms and to maintain the UK’s long-standing role as a champion of international law.^[19]

The suggestion that the legal and ethical framework needs updating could be exploited by adversaries to weaken the UK’s position. Clarity and a firm stance on legal boundaries are essential to maintain acceptable state conduct and effective international collaboration.

The UK should continue to uphold and promote existing international law. This not only counters grey zone threats but also strengthens the UK’s long-term strategic position by setting a precedent for other nations and reinforcing norms for responsible state behaviour. Any changes to the UK’s legal framework should be approached with caution to avoid a detrimental ‘race to the bottom’ and to preserve the integrity of long-standing values.

A Recap in Simple Terms

Imagine you’re playing a game where the goal is to capture the other team’s flag without being tagged. Now, suppose there’s a rule that you can’t run or shout during the game. Grey zone warfare is a bit like playing this game very cleverly. Instead of running straight to grab the flag—which would easily get you tagged—you might try to distract the other team or find a sneaky way to get closer to the flag without them noticing.

In the real world, some countries want to get advantages over others but don’t want to start a big fight or war. So, they do sneaky things, like spreading rumours, using computers to cause confusion, or helping other people to cause trouble without doing it directly themselves. They use these tricks to try to get what they want without actually breaking the biggest rules and starting a war.

Just like in the game, where you might whisper to teammates to distract the other team or hide behind trees, these countries are using their brains and some sneaky tactics to try to win without a big fight.

APPENDIX (1): Glossary of Terms
Here is an extensive list of terms relevant to grey zone warfare, including various tactics, strategies, and concepts, further enhancing the glossary. Some of the terms may be defined in the end notes to this paper:

• Active Defence: A proactive approach to military or cybersecurity in which actions are taken to thwart threats before they can fully manifest as attacks.
• Ambiguity: The deliberate use of vague or indeterminate language or actions to create confusion or doubt in the minds of adversaries about one’s capabilities or intentions.
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Warfare: The use of AI technologies to enhance decision-making, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and combat operations. AI automates complex processes to improve speed and efficiency, enabling faster responses and more accurate assessments in various military applications.
• Asymmetric Warfare: Conflict between parties of unequal strength where the weaker party uses unconventional methods to exploit the vulnerabilities of a more powerful opponent.
• Autonomous Drones and Robotics: The use of drones and robotic systems capable of operating independently to perform surveillance, targeting, or attack missions, often in contexts where human intervention is limited or absent.
• Biosecurity and Biodefense: Strategies to protect against malicious or inadvertent spreading of biological pathogens or biotechnological risks, especially relevant in the context of grey zone tactics that might include threats to public health or agriculture.
• Blockchain Technology: A decentralised digital ledger technology used primarily for securing transactions and enabling trust without a central authority. In grey zone conflicts, it can be employed for secure communications, logistics, or financial transactions that evade traditional oversight.
• Cognitive Warfare: A strategy aimed at targeting the minds of adversaries, manipulating perceptions and decision-making processes to create doubt, fear, and dysfunction within their cognitive space.
• Competitive Strategies: Long-term strategies designed to systematically challenge competitors by leveraging all elements of national power, focusing on economic, technological, and informational advantages.
• Countering Hybrid Threats: Measures and strategies developed to counteract the combined conventional and non-conventional threats that comprise hybrid warfare.
• Counterinsurgency: Strategies and tactics used by governments to combat insurgency, typically involving a combination of military, political, economic, and social actions.
• Covert Operations: Secret activities aimed at influencing situations without revealing the sponsor’s identity, typically involving intelligence agencies.
• Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP): Strategies and measures for protecting systems, networks, and assets whose incapacitation or destruction would have a debilitating effect on security, national economic security, national public health or safety.
• Cyber Deterrence: Strategies intended to deter adversaries in cyberspace by credibly demonstrating capabilities and resolve to impose costs or deny benefits.
• Cyber Influence: Efforts to use cyber tools to shape public or foreign opinion on specific issues. This can include online propaganda, social media manipulation, or targeted misinformation campaigns.
• Cyber Warfare: Digital attacks against an adversary’s information systems to disrupt, disable, or manipulate critical infrastructure and strategic operations.
• Cyber-Physical Systems Attacks: Targeted attacks on infrastructure that blend cyber and physical elements, such as hacking into industrial control systems to cause physical damage.
• Decentralisation: The distribution of operational, command, or organisational activities away from a central authority or location, often to enhance manoeuvrability, reduce vulnerability, and complicate adversarial responses. In military and conflict contexts, this can involve the use of autonomous cells, proxy groups, or technology-based solutions like blockchain to conduct operations. Decentralisation allows actors to obfuscate their involvement, enhance the resilience of their operations, and operate effectively under conditions of uncertainty and risk, making it harder for opponents to attribute actions and respond effectively.
• Deception Operations: Deliberate operations designed to mislead adversary intelligence gathering, creating ambiguity and misinformation to mask actual operations or capabilities.
• Deniability: The ability of a state or actor to deny responsibility for actions, maintaining uncertainty and avoiding direct attribution.
• Diplomatic Pressure: The use of diplomatic channels to coerce, persuade, or influence another government’s decisions, often involving threats or incentives.
• Economic Coercion: Using economic tools like sanctions, tariffs, and trade restrictions to compel a change in another country’s policies or actions.
• Election Interference: Efforts to manipulate or influence electoral outcomes using cyber tactics, disinformation, or political influence operations.
• Electronic Warfare (EW): The use of the electromagnetic spectrum to intercept, disrupt, or manipulate enemy electronic systems while protecting friendly electronic systems from similar attacks.
• Fake News: Intentionally fabricated news stories or misinformation spread through traditional media or online platforms to deceive, mislead, and influence public opinion or disrupt societal trust.
• Fourth Generation Warfare: Warfare that is characterised by a blurring of the lines between war and politics, combatants and civilians, where state actors employ non-state actors or insurgent tactics to achieve their objectives.
• Geopolitical Engineering: Efforts to shape geopolitical landscapes to favour certain strategic outcomes, often involving the manipulation of borders, governance structures, or alliances.
• Grey Zone Deterrence: The application of measures to prevent adversaries from achieving their objectives through grey zone tactics, often involving strategic, economic, and cyber components.
• Grey Zone Warfare: Activities that are aggressive and coercive but do not reach the threshold of conventional war, aimed at achieving political or military goals.
• Hybrid Warfare: A blend of conventional, irregular, and cyber tactics along with other methods like disinformation to achieve strategic objectives.
• Information Operations (IO): Operations aimed at affecting adversary information and information systems while defending one’s own information and information systems. This includes psychological operations, cyber operations, military deception, and operations security.
• Information Warfare: Efforts to control or manipulate information to gain a competitive advantage, including the spread of propaganda and disinformation.
• Irregular Warfare: Warfare employing unconventional tactics is more often associated with guerrilla warfare, insurgency, and terrorism rather than traditional battlefield engagements.
• Lawfare: The strategic use of legal instruments or international law to achieve a military or political objective, often to constrain the actions of an adversary.
• Lazarus Group: A notorious cybercrime group believed to be associated with North Korea, known for sophisticated cyber-attacks aimed at theft, espionage, and disruption.
• Low-Intensity Conflict: A conflict characterised by small-scale, prolonged contestation involving conventional military forces, insurgent attacks, terrorist activities, and other forms of irregular warfare.
• Maritime Militia: Civilian vessels used for military purposes, particularly in disputed waters, to assert claims without overt military engagement.
• Media Manipulation: The act of influencing the media to propagate specific narratives, suppress information, or influence public perception and opinion to achieve strategic objectives.
• Military Deception: Actions executed to deliberately mislead adversary decision-makers as to friendly military capabilities, intentions, and operations, thereby causing the adversary to take specific actions (or inactions) that will contribute to the accomplishment of the friendly mission.
• Multi-Domain Operations (MDO): Military operations that integrate various warfare domains—land, sea, air, space, cyber—to achieve strategic objectives more effectively and efficiently.
• Neuroscientific Techniques: Methods derived from neuroscience, such as brain stimulation or manipulation, potentially used in warfare to influence, degrade, or control human cognition.
• New Generation Warfare: Advanced forms of hybrid warfare that blend military, technological, and information warfare tactics that are seamlessly integrated across multiple domains.
• Non-Kinetic Acts (NKAs): Actions in military and strategic contexts that do not involve direct physical force but aim to achieve objectives through other means of influence and disruption. These acts target the adversary’s decision-making capabilities, infrastructure, and morale without engaging in physical destruction. Common forms include cyber attacks, electronic warfare, psychological operations, economic sanctions, and lawfare. NKAs are crucial for conducting operations that require subtlety and minimal physical escalation, allowing states or actors to achieve strategic goals while maintaining a lower profile and avoiding open conflict.
• Normative Warfare: Efforts to shape international norms and standards in a way that favours one nation’s strategic interests, often through diplomacy, international bodies, or global public opinion.
• Paramilitary Actions: Activities by organised groups that are not official armed forces but resemble military operations in structure and function, often used for internal security, enforcement, or covert operations.
• Pirates and Privateers in Naval Warfare: Individuals or ships authorised in the past by a government to attack foreign vessels during wartime or criminal entities engaging in maritime piracy without state sanction.
• Plausible Deniability: Plausible deniability is a concept used in politics, law, and various other fields to describe situations where a person can deny knowledge of or responsibility for any wrongful actions committed by others because there is no clear evidence to prove involvement. The idea is that the deniability is “plausible” because it cannot be conclusively disproven. This can be achieved by deliberately keeping certain people out of the loop on certain actions or by setting up conditions where those responsible can claim they were unaware of the specifics of the illegal or unethical actions being taken. For example, a government official might maintain plausible deniability by not being directly involved in a controversial decision or action, thus being able to deny any knowledge or responsibility if it becomes public and is criticised. This allows higher-ups to distance themselves from the direct implications of any potentially scandalous behaviour. Originally CIA jargon from the 1950s, it was popularised during the Watergate scandal (1970s)^[20].
• Political Warfare: The use of political means to compel, coerce, or undermine the will or decision-making of an adversary, including subversion and influence operations.
• Proxy Warfare: Engaging indirectly in conflicts through third parties, such as supporting, arming, and training non-state actors or weaker states.
• Psychological Operations (PsyOps): Designed to influence, deceive, or intimidate opponents, affecting the perceptions and behaviours of foreign audiences.
• Quantum Computing in Cybersecurity: The application of quantum technology to enhance cybersecurity measures. Quantum computing introduces the potential to develop systems that are extremely difficult to hack, utilising quantum encryption methods. It also poses significant implications for breaking traditional cybersecurity protections, offering both opportunities and challenges in maintaining data security.
• Red Lines: Defined limits or conditions set by a country, the crossing of which triggers a pre-determined response or action.
• Shadow War: Covert operations conducted by states or their proxies to achieve strategic objectives without triggering open conflict, often involving espionage, sabotage, and targeted assassinations.
• Social Engineering in Cybersecurity: The psychological manipulation of people into performing actions or divulging confidential information. This is often a key component in cyber influence and cyber warfare tactics.
• Soft Power: The ability to shape preferences and influence others through appeal and attraction rather than coercion, often involving cultural and diplomatic tools.
• Space Warfare: The use of satellite and orbital systems in military operations, which can include disabling or hijacking satellites to gain a strategic advantage in communications and surveillance.
• State-sponsored Cyber Espionage: Cyber operations conducted by or on behalf of a government to covertly steal sensitive information from other nations, organisations, or individuals for strategic advantages.
• Strategic Autonomy: The ability of a state to pursue its national interests and adopt independent positions in international affairs without being influenced or controlled by external forces.
• Strategic Communication: Deliberate use of communication to fulfil strategic goals, managing perceptions and narratives to influence attitudes and behaviours.
• Strategic Influence Operations: Campaigns designed to influence the policy decisions or public sentiment of another nation without resorting to direct military action.
• Sub-Threshold of Armed Conflict: Activities that are hostile or aggressive but do not meet the conventional definitions or legal standards of armed conflict, often used to achieve strategic aims without overt warfare.
• Subversion: Efforts to undermine the power and authority of an established system or institution from within, often covert and deceitful.
• Supply Chain Attacks: Attacks that target less-secure elements in the supply network to compromise the security of the final product, often used in cyber warfare to undermine an adversary’s capabilities subtly.
• Unconventional Warfare: Military and non-military methods used to achieve military objectives without traditional force-on-force combat.
• Wagner Group: A Russian private military company that is known for its involvement in conflicts where Russia has interests but prefers deniability. The group often operates in conflict zones, providing personnel and military expertise. Their operations are characterised by secrecy and the strategic use of force in support of Russian national interests without direct, official engagement by Russian state military forces^[21].
• WannaCry Ransomware Attacks: A major global cyberattack in 2017 that used ransomware to lock out users from their systems and demand cryptocurrency payments, widely attributed to state-sponsored actors.

APPENDIX (2): Statistics
Providing specific statistics for grey zone warfare can be challenging due to the covert and ambiguous nature of such activities, which are often not openly acknowledged or recorded in detail by governments. However, I have put together the following list to provide some general insights into trends and data points that highlight the prevalence and impact of grey zone tactics:

• Cyber Attacks: An estimated 60% of cyber-attacks have potential links to state-sponsored actors, demonstrating the prevalence of cyber operations in grey zone strategies. These attacks target critical national infrastructure, political campaigns, and commercial secrets.
• Economic Sanctions: Over 30 countries are currently under some form of economic sanctions by the United States alone. Economic coercion remains a key tool in grey zone warfare, affecting national economies and influencing political decisions.
• Disinformation Reach: Studies suggest that disinformation campaigns on social media can reach hundreds of millions of users. For instance, during election periods, foreign state-led disinformation operations can target millions of voters to influence election outcomes subtly.
• Proxy Conflicts: It is estimated that over 40% of contemporary conflicts involve some form of proxy warfare, where major powers support local groups without direct involvement, demonstrating the strategic preference for indirect engagement.
• Military Spending on Unconventional Warfare: Some nations allocate up to 10-20% of their military budget to special operations and unconventional warfare units, which are key players in grey zone tactics.
• Maritime Militia: In contested areas like the South China Sea, up to 70% of fishing vessels might be part of state-controlled maritime militias. These vessels carry out sovereignty patrols and harass foreign vessels under the guise of fishing activities.
• Foreign Direct Investments: Strategic investments, especially those in critical infrastructure abroad, have increased by over 50% in the last decade. These investments can be used to gain leverage or influence in host countries.
• Legal Warfare: In various international forums, some countries use what is called “lawfare”—the use of legal systems to achieve strategic military or political objectives. The number of international legal disputes involving state parties has risen by approximately 15% over the past five years.
• Non-military Personnel Engagement: Estimates suggest that several countries have employed thousands of non-military personnel abroad under diplomatic cover or in non-governmental roles to conduct espionage, influence operations, and gather intelligence.
• Cultural Influence Operations: States spend millions annually on cultural and educational programs designed to enhance their soft power and influence foreign publics subtly. For instance, Confucius Institutes funded by China are present in over 100 countries to promote cultural ties and favourable perceptions of China.

These statistics and estimates provide a glimpse into the scale and variety of grey zone tactics used globally, reflecting their importance in modern international relations and conflict.

Sources and Further Reading

Web Resources

• https://academic.oup.com/ia/article-abstract/97/1/244/6041478
• https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1000749.pdf
• https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1000749.pdf
• https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/09/17/global-expansion-of-ai-surveillance-pub-79847
• https://digital.nls.uk/propaganda/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_Sally
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey-zone_(international_relations)
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_warfare
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sefton_Delmer
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Basic_Principles_of_War_Propaganda
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_You_Don%27t_See
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Rose
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Joyce
• https://esmt.berlin/faculty-research/dsi/blog/disinformation-hybrid-warfare
• https://natolibguides.info/hybridwarfare/books
• https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1758-5899.13257https://tdhj.org/blog/post/disinformation-cognitive-warfare-hybrid/
• https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/937/
• https://stratcommand.blog.gov.uk/2021/04/26/getting-to-grips-with-grey-zone-conflict/
• https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/todays-wars-are-fought-in-the-gray-zone-heres-everything-you-need-to-know-about-it/
• https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Scoping-the-Gray-Zone_Strategic-Insights-Memo.pdf
• https://www.britannica.com/topic/psychological-warfare
• https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/sites/default/files/research/subject-guides/pdf/propaganda-psychological-warfare.pdf
• https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-archives/gi-roundtable-series/pamphlets/em-2-what-is-propaganda-(1944)/war-propaganda
• https://www.jstor.org/stable/26999974
• https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/goebbels-propaganda/
• https://www.potomacinstitute.org/images/stories/publications/potomac_hybridwar_0108.pdf
• https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA594-1.html
• https://www.rand.org/topics/psychological-warfare.html
• https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-between-Grey-Zone-and-Hybrid-Warfare-Characteristics_tbl1_334959464.
• https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/war-propaganda
• https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00396338.2020.1763618
• https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/cdan20
• https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/fjss20

Books

• Active Measures: The Secret History of Disinformation and Political Warfare, by Thomas Rid, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Active-Measures-History-Disinformation-Political/dp/1788160754/
• Afghanistan & The Troubled Future of Unconventional Warfare, by Hy S. Rothstein (Author), Seymour Hersh (Foreword), available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/AFGHANISTAN-Troubled-Future-Unconventional-Warfare/dp/159114745X
• Army of None – Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War, by Paul Scharre (Author), available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Army-None-Autonomous-Weapons-Future/dp/0393356582/
• A Whole-of-Government Approach to Gray Zone Warfare, by Strategic Studies Institute (Author), Ms. Elizabeth G. Troeder (Author), available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Whole-Government-Approach-Gray-Warfare/dp/107654326X
• Bitskrieg: The New Challenge of Cyberwarfare, by John Arquilla (Author), available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bitskrieg-Challenge-Cyberwarfare-John-Arquilla/dp/1509543627
• Burn-In: A Novel of the Real Robotic Revolution, by P.W. Singer and August Cole (While fictional, this book explores the future of technology and security), available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Burn-Novel-Real-Robotic-Revolution/dp/0358508614/
• Convergence: Illicit Networks and National Security in the Age of Globalization, by Michael Miklaucic and Jacqueline Brewer, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Convergence-Networks-National-Security-Globalization/dp/1782663738
• Countdown to Zero Day: Stuxnet and the Launch of the World’s First Digital Weapon, by Kim Zetter, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Countdown-Zero-Day-Stuxnet-Digital/dp/0770436196
• Countering the New Terrorism, by Ian Lesser, Bruce Hoffman, John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Countering-Terrorism-Arquilla-Ronfeldt-Paperback/dp/B010WI70KW/
• Cyber Dragon: Inside China’s Information Warfare and Cyber Operations, by Dean Cheng, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyber-Dragon-Information-Operations-International/dp/1440835640
• Cyber Mercenaries: The State, Hackers, and Power, by Tim Maurer, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyber-Mercenaries-State-Hackers-Power/dp/110756686X
• Cyber War: The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It, by Richard A. Clarke and Robert Knake, available from, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyber-War-Threat-National-Security/dp/0061962244
• Cyberpower and National Security, by Franklin D. Kramer, Stuart H. Starr, and Larry K. Wentz, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyberpower-National-Security-Defense-University/dp/1597974234
• Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know, by P.W. Singer and Allan Friedman, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cybersecurity-Cyberwar-What-Everyone-Needs/dp/0199918112
• Cyber-Warfare and the New World Order: World War III Series, by James Scott, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyber-Warfare-New-World-Order-War/dp/1957634235/
• Dark Territory: The Secret History of Cyber War, by Fred Kaplan, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dark-Territory-Secret-History-Cyber/dp/1476763267
• Digital World War: Islamists, Extremists, and the Fight for Cyber Supremacy, by Haroon Ullah, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Digital-World-War-Islamists-Extremists/dp/0300231105
• Diplomacy and War at NATO: The Secretary General and Military Action After the Cold War, by Ryan C. Hendrickson, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Diplomacy-War-NATO-Secretary-Military/dp/0826216358
• Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control, by Medea Benjamin, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Drone-Warfare-Killing-Remote-Control/dp/1781680779
• Electronic Warfare: From the Battle of Tsushima to the Falklands and Lebanon Conflicts, by Mario De Arcangelis, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Electronic-Warfare-Falklands-Conflicts-Arcangelis/dp/B011SKX430/
• Ghost Fleet: A Novel of the Next World War, by P. W. Singer and August Cole, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ghost-Fleet-W-P-Singer/dp/054470505X
• Grey Wars: A Contemporary History of U.S. Special Operations, by N. E. Robinson, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Grey-Wars-Contemporary-History-Operations/dp/0300198418/
• Grey-Zone Warfare opens the Russia-Ukraine conflict, by Mark Galeotti (Author) and Irene Cano Rodríguez (Illustrator), available from https://www.ospreypublishing.com/uk/putin-takes-crimea-2014-9781472853844/
• Hoax: Donald Trump, Fox News, and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth, by Brian Stelter (Author), available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hoax-Donald-Trump-Dangerous-Distortion/dp/1982142456/
• How to Win an Information War: The Propagandist Who Outwitted Hitler, by Peter Pomerantsev (Author), available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/057136635X
• Hybrid Warfare: Fighting Complex Opponents from the Ancient World to the Present, by Williamson Murray and Peter R. Mansoor, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hybrid-Warfare-Fighting-Complex-Opponents/dp/1107643333
• Hybrid Warfare and the Gray Zone Threat, by Douglas C. Lovelace, available from https://search.worldcat.org/title/hybrid-warfare-and-the-gray-zone-threat/oclc/933273832
• Information Strategy and Warfare: A Guide to Theory and Practice (Contemporary Security Studies), by John Arquilla (Editor), Douglas A. Borer, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Information-Strategy-Warfare-Contemporary-Security/dp/0415545145/
• Information Wars: How We Lost the Global Battle Against Disinformation and What We Can Do About It, by Richard Stengel, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Information-Wars-Global-Against-Disinformation/dp/0802149421/
• Invisible Armies: An Epic History of Guerrilla Warfare from Ancient Times to the Present, by Max Boot, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Invisible-Armies-History-Guerrilla-Warfare/dp/0871406888
• Irregular Warfare: The Future Military Strategy For Small States, by Sándor Fabian (Author), available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Irregular-Warfare-Future-Military-Strategy/dp/150849052X/
• LikeWar: The Weaponization of Social Media, by P. W. Singer and Emerson T. Brooking, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Likewar-Weaponization-Social-Media-Singer/dp/0358108470/
• Manipulating Globalization: The Influence of Bureaucrats on Business in China, by Ling Chen, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Manipulating-Globalization-Bureaucrats-Shorenstein-Asia-Pacific/dp/1503604799/
• Out of the Mountains: The Coming Age of the Urban Guerrilla, by David Kilcullen, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Mountains-Coming-Urban-Guerrilla/dp/1849045119/
• Russian ‘Hybrid Warfare’: Resurgence and Politicisation, by Ofer Fridman, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Russian-Hybrid-Warfare-Resurgence-Politicisation/dp/1787388239/
• Sandworm: A New Era of Cyberwar and the Hunt for the Kremlin’s Most Dangerous Hackers, by Andy Greenberg, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sandworm-Cyberwar-Kremlins-Dangerous-Hackers/dp/0525564632/
• Soft War: The Ethics of Unarmed Conflict, by Michael L. Gross and Tamar Meisels, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Soft-War-Ethics-Unarmed-Conflict/dp/1107584787/
• The Accidental Guerrilla: Fighting Small Wars in the Midst of a Big One, by David Kilcullen, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Accidental-Guerrilla-Fighting-Small-Midst/dp/1849040257
• The Art of Intelligence: Lessons from a Life in the CIA’s Clandestine Service, by Henry A. Crumpton, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-Intelligence-Lessons-Clandestine-Service/dp/0143123378
• The Art of War in an Age of Peace: U.S. Grand Strategy and Resolute Restraint, by Michael E. O’Hanlon, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-War-Age-Peace-Restraint/dp/0300268114/
• The Big Stick: The Limits of Soft Power and the Necessity of Military Force, by Eliot A. Cohen, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Big-Stick-Limits-Necessity-Military/dp/0465044727/
• The Cyber Effect: A Pioneering Cyberpsychologist Explains How Human Behavior Changes Online, by Mary Aiken, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyber-Effect-Pioneering-Cyberpsychologist-Behaviour/dp/1473610257/
• The Darkening Web: The War for Cyberspace, by Alexander Klimburg, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Darkening-Web-Alexander-Klimburg/dp/0735222835/
• The Dragons and the Snakes: How the Rest Learned to Fight the West, by David Kilcullen, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dragons-Snakes-Rest-Learned-Fight/dp/1787387216/
• The Drone Memos: Targeted Killing, Secrecy, and the Law, by Jameel Jaffer, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Drone-Memos-Targeted-Killing-Secrecy/dp/162097259X
• The Fifth Domain: Defending Our Country, Our Companies, and Ourselves in the Age of Cyber Threats, by Richard A. Clarke and Robert K. Knake, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fifth-Domain-Defending-Companies-Ourselves/dp/0525561986/
• The Future of War: A History, by Lawrence Freedman, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Future-War-Sir-Lawrence-Freedman/dp/0141975601/
• The Hacked World Order: How Nations Fight, Trade, Maneuver, and Manipulate in the Digital Age, by Adam Segal, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hacked-World-Order-Maneuver-Manipulate/dp/1610394151/
• The Invisible Hook: The Hidden Economics of Pirates, by Peter T. Leeson, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Invisible-Hook-Hidden-Economics-Pirates/dp/0691150095/
• The Kill Chain: Defending America in the Future of High-Tech Warfare, by Christian Brose, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Kill-Chain-Defending-America-High-Tech/dp/031653367X/
• The New Rules of War: Victory in the Age of Durable Disorder, by Sean McFate, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Rules-War-Victory-Disorder/dp/0062843583/
• The Perfect Weapon: War, Sabotage, and Fear in the Cyber Age, by David E. Sanger, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Perfect-Weapon-sabotage-fear-cyber/dp/1911617729/
• The Shadow War: Inside Russia’s and China’s Secret Operations to Defeat America, by Jim Sciutto, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Shadow-War-Russias-Operations-America/dp/006285366X/
• The Sovereignty Wars: Reconciling America with the World, by Stewart Patrick, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sovereignty-Wars-Stewart-Patrick-author/dp/0815737815/
• The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World, by Rupert Smith, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Utility-Force-Art-Modern-World/dp/014102044X
• Unmanned: Drones, Data, and the Illusion of Perfect Warfare, by William M. Arkin, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Unmanned-Drones-Illusion-Perfect-Warfare/dp/0316323357
• Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America, by Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Unrestricted-Warfare-Chinas-Destroy-America/dp/1946963429/
• Waging Insurgent Warfare: Lessons from the Vietcong to the Islamic State, by Seth G. Jones, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Waging-Insurgent-Warfare-Lessons-Vietcong/dp/0190931833/
• War and the Art of Governance: Consolidating Combat Success into Political Victory, by Nadia Schadlow, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/War-Art-Governance-Consolidating-Political/dp/162616410X
• War by Other Means: Geoeconomics and Statecraft, by Robert D. Blackwill and Jennifer M. Harris, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/War-Other-Means-Geoeconomics-Statecraft/dp/0674979796/
• War in 140 Characters: How Social Media Is Reshaping Conflict in the Twenty-First Century, by David Patrikarakos, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/War-140-Characters-Reshaping-Twenty-First/dp/046509614X
• Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century, by P.W. Singer, available from https://www.amazon.co.uk/Wired-War-Robotics-Revolution-Conflict/dp/0143116843

End Notes and Explanations

1. Source: Compiled from my research using information available at the sources stated throughout the text, together with information provided by machine-generated artificial intelligence at: bing.com [chat] and https://chat.openai.com. Text used includes that on Wikipedia websites is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using those websites, I have agreed to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organisation. ↑
2. Source: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/todays-wars-are-fought-in-the-gray-zone-heres-everything-you-need-to-know-about-it/ ↑
3. Source and Further Information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst ↑
4. Explanation: The Art of War is an ancient Chinese military treatise dating from the late Spring and Autumn Period (roughly 5^th century BC). The work, which is attributed to the ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu (“Master Sun”), is composed of 13 chapters. Each one is devoted to a different set of skills or art related to warfare and how it applies to military strategy and tactics. See more at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War ↑
5. Explanation: The Byzantine Empire, also referred to as the Eastern Roman Empire, was the continuation of the Roman Empire centered in Constantinople during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. The eastern half of the Empire survived the conditions that caused the fall of the West in the 5^th century AD, and continued to exist until the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Empire in 1453. During most of its existence, the empire remained the most powerful economic, cultural, and military force in the Mediterranean world. The term “Byzantine Empire” was only coined following the empire’s demise; its citizens referred to the polity as the “Roman Empire” and to themselves as “Romans”. Due to the imperial seat’s move from Rome to Byzantium, the adoption of state Christianity, and the predominance of Greek instead of Latin, modern historians continue to make a distinction between the earlier “Roman Empire” and the later “Byzantine Empire”. See more at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire ↑
6. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey-zone_(international_relations) ↑
7. Sources: The distinctions and definitions provided between grey zone warfare and hybrid warfare are synthesised from general knowledge in security studies and international relations, reflecting common themes and concepts discussed in military and strategic analyses. These concepts are not sourced from a single document or author but are rather common in the discourse surrounding modern warfare strategies. Here’s a breakdown of typical sources and frameworks that inform these understandings:
   • Academic and Military Studies: Institutions like the National Defense University, RAND Corporation, and various military academies often publish studies and papers that discuss and refine these concepts. For example, Frank G. Hoffman’s work on Hybrid Warfare (for example, see https://www.potomacinstitute.org/images/stories/publications/potomac_hybridwar_0108.pdf) and various RAND studies on grey zone conflicts (for example, see https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA594-1.html.
   • Security and Defence Journals: Articles and analyses in journals such as the Journal of Strategic Studies (see https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/fjss20) and Defense and Security Analysis (see https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/cdan20) explore these types of warfare in depth, often drawing on real-world conflicts to illustrate the theoretical frameworks.
   • Government and Defence Publications: The US Department of Defense and similar entities in other countries sometimes release white papers and strategy documents that address the challenges posed by hybrid and grey zone warfare.
   • Books on Military Strategy: Authors like Hy Rothstein and John Arquilla have written extensively on unconventional and hybrid warfare, discussing historical precedents and future implications.
   • International Relations Theory: The broader field of international relations often discusses the implications of these warfare strategies in the context of global politics, law, and order.

   While specific citations from these types of sources were not directly used, the information in this paper reflects a synthesis of accepted concepts and definitions widely discussed in these forums. ↑

8. Explanation: William Brooke Joyce (24 April 1906 – 3 January 1946), nicknamed Lord Haw-Haw, was an American-born fascist and Nazi propaganda broadcaster during the Second World War. After moving from New York to Ireland and subsequently to England, Joyce became a member of Oswald Mosley‘s British Union of Fascists (BUF) from 1932, before finally moving to Germany at the outset of the war where he took German citizenship in 1940. At the end of the war, after capture, Joyce was convicted in the United Kingdom of high treason in 1945 and sentenced to death, with the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords both upholding his conviction. He was hanged in Wandsworth Prison by Albert Pierrepoint on 3 January 1946, making him the last person to be executed for treason in the United Kingdom. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Joyce ↑
9. Explanation: Tokyo Rose (alternative spelling Tokio Rose) was a name given by Allied troops in the South Pacific during World War II to all female English-speaking radio broadcasters of Japanese propaganda. The programs were broadcast in the South Pacific and North America to demoralise Allied forces abroad and their families at home by emphasising troops’ wartime difficulties and military losses. Several female broadcasters operated using different aliases and in different cities throughout the territories occupied by the Japanese Empire, including Tokyo, Manila, and Shanghai. The name “Tokyo Rose” was never actually used by any Japanese broadcaster, but it first appeared in US newspapers in the context of these radio programs during 1943. During the war, Tokyo Rose was not any one individual, but rather a group of largely unassociated women working for the same propagandist effort throughout the Japanese Empire. In the years soon after the war, the character “Tokyo Rose” – whom the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) now avers to be “mythical” – became an important symbol of Japanese villainy for the United States. American cartoons, films, and propaganda videos between 1945 and 1960 tend to portray her as sexualised, manipulative, and deadly to American interests in the South Pacific, particularly by revealing intelligence of American losses in radio broadcasts. Similar accusations concern the propaganda broadcasts of Lord Haw-Haw and Axis Sally, and in 1949 the San Francisco Chronicle described Tokyo Rose as the “Mata Hari of radio”. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Rose ↑
10. Explanation: Denis Sefton Delmer, known familiarly as “Tom”, was born in Berlin as a British subject, as a son of Australian parents living in Germany. His father, Frederick Sefton Delmer, was British of Australian heritage, born in Hobart, Tasmania, who became Professor of English Literature at Berlin University and author of a standard textbook for German schools. On the outbreak of the First World War his father was interned in Ruhleben internment camp, near Berlin, as an enemy alien. In 1917, the Delmer family was repatriated to England in a prisoner exchange between the British and German governments. He was brought up to speak only German until the age of five, and as late as 1939 spoke English with a slight accent. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sefton_Delmer ↑
11. Further Information: https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/09/17/global-expansion-of-ai-surveillance-pub-79847 ↑
12. Source: https://academic.oup.com/ia/article-abstract/97/1/244/6041478 ↑
13. Ibid ↑
14. Sources: https://esmt.berlin/faculty-research/dsi/blog/disinformation-hybrid-warfare and https://tdhj.org/blog/post/disinformation-cognitive-warfare-hybrid/ ↑
15. Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1758-5899.13257 ↑
16. Explanation: “Red lines” refer to boundaries or limits set by a country or organisation that must not be crossed without triggering serious consequences. These are essentially non-negotiable points or critical conditions which, if violated, prompt a predetermined response, often involving diplomatic, economic, or military actions. Red lines are meant to serve as clear warnings to other parties about the limits of acceptable behaviour. The “consequences” in this context are the actions or reactions that will follow if the red lines are crossed. These could range from formal protests and economic sanctions to military interventions or other forms of retaliatory measures. The consequences are intended to deter undesirable actions by making it clear that crossing these established red lines will lead to significant and often unfavourable outcomes for the offending party. The signalling of these red lines and consequences is typically controlled and deliberate, aimed at managing conflict and maintaining stability by making these policies clear to all relevant actors. ↑
17. Source: Article by Juliet Skingsley, Former Army Chief of the General Staff Research Fellow, International Security Programme, at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2020/12/countering-threats-below-threshold-war. See also: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_156338.htm and https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c8141e2e5274a2a51ac0b34/concepts_mcdc_countering_hybrid_warfare.pdf ↑
18. Explanation: Asymmetric activities refer to strategies and actions where participants use unconventional methods to exploit the weaknesses of a more powerful opponent. Typically, these activities are employed by smaller or less technologically advanced forces against larger, conventionally superior adversaries. The goal is to level the playing field by not directly confronting an opponent’s strengths, but instead focusing on vulnerabilities that can be exploited using surprise, deception, or unconventional tactics. These activities can include guerrilla warfare, cyber attacks, terrorism, economic disruption, and the use of proxy fighters. Asymmetric warfare is often characterised by a significant imbalance in power, resources, and technology, prompting the weaker side to adopt these unconventional methods as a means to achieve their objectives. ↑
19. Further Information: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/612f91b28fa8f50328e2c8f5/Integrated_Operating_Concept_2025.pdf ↑
20. Source: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/plausible_deniability ↑
21. Note: This definition provides insight into how private military companies contribute to grey zone tactics by extending state influence under the cover of plausible deniability. The Wagner Group has been active in various conflicts around the world, making it a relevant and significant term in discussions about modern conflict and grey zone warfare. ↑