Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management: The emerging practices of the EU and NATO

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management : The emerging practices of the EU and NATO. / Mälksoo, Maria.

In: European Security, Vol. 27, No. 3, 03.07.2018, p. 374-392.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Mälksoo, M 2018, 'Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management: The emerging practices of the EU and NATO', European Security, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 374-392. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2018.1497984

APA

Mälksoo, M. (2018). Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management: The emerging practices of the EU and NATO. European Security, 27(3), 374-392. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2018.1497984

Vancouver

Mälksoo M. Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management: The emerging practices of the EU and NATO. European Security. 2018 Jul 3;27(3):374-392. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2018.1497984

Author

Mälksoo, Maria. / Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management : The emerging practices of the EU and NATO. In: European Security. 2018 ; Vol. 27, No. 3. pp. 374-392.

Bibtex

@article{1ed079aeb8714972a829ffe23b990c36,
title = "Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management: The emerging practices of the EU and NATO",
abstract = "What are the ethical pitfalls of countering hybrid warfare? This article proposes an ontological security-inspired reading of the EU and NATO{\textquoteright}s engagement with hybrid threats. It illustrates how hybrid threat management collapses their daily security struggles into ontological security management exercise. This has major consequences for defining the threshold of an Article 5 attack and the related response for NATO, and the maintenance of a particular symbolic order and identity narrative for the EU. The institutionalisation of hybrid threat counteraction emerges as a routinisation strategy to cope with the “known unknowns”. Fostering resilience points at the problematic prospect of compromising the fuzzy distinction between politics and war: the logic of hybrid conflicts presumes that all politics could be reduced to a potential build-up phase for a full-blown confrontation. Efficient hybrid threat management faces the central paradox of militant democracy whereby the very attempt to defend democracy might harm it.",
keywords = "Faculty of Social Sciences, hybrid warfare, ontological security, resilience, EUROPEAN UNION, NATO, International Relations theory",
author = "Maria M{\"a}lksoo",
year = "2018",
month = jul,
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/09662839.2018.1497984",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "374--392",
journal = "European Security",
issn = "0966-2839",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Countering hybrid warfare as ontological security management

T2 - The emerging practices of the EU and NATO

AU - Mälksoo, Maria

PY - 2018/7/3

Y1 - 2018/7/3

N2 - What are the ethical pitfalls of countering hybrid warfare? This article proposes an ontological security-inspired reading of the EU and NATO’s engagement with hybrid threats. It illustrates how hybrid threat management collapses their daily security struggles into ontological security management exercise. This has major consequences for defining the threshold of an Article 5 attack and the related response for NATO, and the maintenance of a particular symbolic order and identity narrative for the EU. The institutionalisation of hybrid threat counteraction emerges as a routinisation strategy to cope with the “known unknowns”. Fostering resilience points at the problematic prospect of compromising the fuzzy distinction between politics and war: the logic of hybrid conflicts presumes that all politics could be reduced to a potential build-up phase for a full-blown confrontation. Efficient hybrid threat management faces the central paradox of militant democracy whereby the very attempt to defend democracy might harm it.

AB - What are the ethical pitfalls of countering hybrid warfare? This article proposes an ontological security-inspired reading of the EU and NATO’s engagement with hybrid threats. It illustrates how hybrid threat management collapses their daily security struggles into ontological security management exercise. This has major consequences for defining the threshold of an Article 5 attack and the related response for NATO, and the maintenance of a particular symbolic order and identity narrative for the EU. The institutionalisation of hybrid threat counteraction emerges as a routinisation strategy to cope with the “known unknowns”. Fostering resilience points at the problematic prospect of compromising the fuzzy distinction between politics and war: the logic of hybrid conflicts presumes that all politics could be reduced to a potential build-up phase for a full-blown confrontation. Efficient hybrid threat management faces the central paradox of militant democracy whereby the very attempt to defend democracy might harm it.

KW - Faculty of Social Sciences

KW - hybrid warfare

KW - ontological security

KW - resilience

KW - EUROPEAN UNION

KW - NATO

KW - International Relations theory

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2018.1497984

U2 - 10.1080/09662839.2018.1497984

DO - 10.1080/09662839.2018.1497984

M3 - Journal article

VL - 27

SP - 374

EP - 392

JO - European Security

JF - European Security

SN - 0966-2839

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 284504813