Perception For Fighting HW - BD Perspective
Background
BDAF is likely to fight any future war under HW environment. BDAF is organized and trained to fight a CW though it has indoctrinated few of the components of HW like UCW, EW, PsyW, etc along with CW. The gradual capacity building in IW domain is likely to continue through Forces Goal 2030. These components are yet to achieve desired capability to be effective in HW scenario. However, the effort is ongoing to enhance the capabilities in future. A combined approach to enhance the HW capabilities of Armed Forces is needed in future. Effective use of media to wage PsyW against enemy, integration of IT experts for IW and strengthening of existing platforms can enhance cyber warfare capability for BDAF.
HW Entail Hybrid Response
When NATO was reviewing its strategy to deal with Russian HW they realised that, when a country is attacked by conventional land, sea or air forces, it is usually clear how best to respond. But what happens when it is attacked by a mixture of Special Forces, information campaigns, and backdoor proxies? What’s the best response? In HW it is difficult to identify its footprints and signatures during the early stages. The major problems for BD will be the lack of an intellectual appreciation to identify the footprints and signatures of threats and challenges posed by HW. The intelligence agencies should have experts who can demystify the contours of HW, basing on that the defensive and offensive measures as part of national strategy need to be instituted in a synergised manner.
HW in the Military Context
In case of any future war with potential adversary, BD will have to fight a HW. As the fighting power of the two countries differ significantly and that will demand a greater understanding and a comprehensive national power to respond to it. Military as the sole responder of the hybrid threat is a bad strategy, because lines of conflict/engagements are blurring. Simultaneous engagement on multiple fronts should be the norm and not an exception. Military operations are, therefore, part of a larger comprehensive, whole of government approach. HW Demands New Doctrine for Integrated Action Strategies for war are conceptualised during peace time. HW is complex and the military needs to define its strategy, doctrine, concept of operations, force restructuring, special equipment, and special training. It would require combatants and non-combatants as part of the force, to deal with every element of hybrid war.
Extra Vigilant Intelligence Agencies are Essential
At first HW is initiated in the minds of the masses and then it manifests in the physical world. Therefore, it is very important to understand the stresses and strains created by religion, society, culture, radicals, and criminals. Intelligence agencies are required to carry out the mapping of the human terrain and the social, economic, and cultural fault lines. The ‘mapping of human terrain’ requires intellectuals, social scientists, cyber experts, information warriors, and professionals to understand and unravel any uneven behaviour by individuals and groups of people. Hence, the first responders should be the intelligence agencies, law enforcing agencies, and state administration. The terrorists/insurgents live among the people, terrorist attacks occur before the eyes of the people, and terrorism threatens the lives of the people. So the people have an unparalleled advantage compared with uniformed, specialised security forces. Therefore, engagement with the people to fight HW is vital since they are the centre of gravity.
Importance of Conventional Capabilities in HW
BDAF are equipped, trained, and structured to fight conventional wars. Often the question, that is raised, is that BD is unlikely to fight a conventional war then why so much focus on conventional capabilities. The simple answer is that if BD does not maintain its conventional capabilities it will be engaged in sub-conventional and HW at multiple levels. Therefore conventional deterrence will have to be maintained. However, one should not also assume that all state-based warfare will be entirely conventional. Moreover the organization and composition of BDAF should be such that it can accommodate other components of HW.
HW is Multi-Dimensional Integrated Conflict and Need Integrated Efforts
HW compels the opponent’s military and civil population to support the attacker, to the detriment of their own government and country. Thus, HW requires the whole of the government approach to deal with it. The response should be based on the principle of unity of efforts, simultaneity, integrated approach, synergised and synchronised efforts. Execution plan should be coordinated at the highest level to achieve effect-based response. The defining principle of dealing with HW is ‘unified effort’— simultaneous application of tools of war, ‘mixed tactics’ conducted across the enemy’s territory, and more importantly, within its ‘spheres of influence’. While military operations are on-going, diplomatic lines of operations, dialogue, discussion, analysis, and post-operation actions are important at every stage.
Conclusion
Over last few decades, with the development of technologies the warfare has undergone lot of changes. Previously, superior forces had their success almost guaranteed. History of recent wars revealed that synergistic application of CW, UCW and IW enhances the scope for inferior forces to defeat superior adversary. BDAF is reviewing its war fighting strategy. It has already indoctrinated the blending of conventional and unconventional warfare. A hybrid threat reflects more than a blend of regular and irregular tactics. Over a decade ago, this mode of conflict was defined as an adversary that “simultaneously and adaptively employs a fused mix of conventional weapons, irregular tactics, catastrophic terrorism, and criminal behaviour in the battle space to obtain desired political objectives.”
Conventionally it is difficult for BDAF to fight and win against superior adversary. BD should not become a victim of HW or casualty, because of its own neglect. There is a need to introspect, analyse and formulate the doctrine and strategies to have an effective mechanism to deal with it. HW will be a defining feature of the future security environment and thus a fragmented approach will be detrimental to the national interests. The debate of ethics and rules does not apply to hybrid war; what is important is the impact of own response to a borderless war. As Frank Hoffman states, ‘Tomorrow’s conflicts will not be easily categorised into conventional or irregular, the emerging character of conflict is more complicated than what it appears. A binary choice of big and conventional versus small or irregular is too simplistic. ’
Sun Tzu recognized that “Hence to fight and conquer in all your battle is not supreme excellence, supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting. ” This should be the current strategic thinking for BD. Hence BD needs to develop an understanding of HW and the contours of conflict suggest that the future wars will not be completely conventional, nor should it be assumed that state-based conflict has passed into the dustbin of history. Many have made that mistake before. State-based conflict is less likely, but it is not extinct. HW has emerged from the theory to the reality and it is here to stay.
