The hybrid warefare: blurring the principal of distinction and protection of civilians in the conflict zone

Abstract

While the orthodox war tactics were highly reliant on the traditional means; entailing huge armed human resource, the contemporary models of conduct of hostilities have transformed the entire methodology and adopted more obscure means, with negligible use of conventional weapons but equally vicious consequences. This paradigm shift has raised a debate on the applicability of IHL, absolutely meant for application during the armed conflicts. The 21st century wars are not essentially fought in the battlefield but on the other avenues, such as cyber space, outer space, media, social media, artificial intelligence, populous lanes and stock markets. Scope of conflict, zone of hostilities, source of aggression and identity of the actual perpetrators have become absurd, eventually undermining the capacity of states to articulate their defense strategies. Lack of a comprehensive legal framework for regulating the hybrid warfare is the root cause of disorder, around the globe in general and in the under developed countries in particular. This study encompasses an attempt to break down the concept of hybrid warfare into its various aspects, factual and legal, and determine whether this form of warfare would qualify the essentials of war, in terms of its operational tactics, consequential impacts and the existing legal framework. The experts are yet to develop a consensus on whether the established IL and IHL instruments would apply to the hybrid war. Seemingly, the answer is in negative, as extracted from discussion with many IHL experts during the conduct of this study. Law, nevertheless, is an evolving substance, partaking the inherent convenience for orientation with the diverse situations.