Context:  

In the Raisina Dialogue 2024, the Chief of Defense staff Of India discussed the emergence of Grey Zone warfare in modern warfare.  

About Grey Zone Warfare

• Definition: Grey Zone Warfare has emerged as a battlefield-centric concept and is defined as the use of coercive measures to exploit the operational space between peace and war, that deliberately stay below a threshold so as not to prompt a conventional military response to alter the status quo which otherwise would have been attracted.
  • In grey zone warfare the dividend of the action is available only after a long time. The origin of this lies in a historical dispute that the aggressor nation justifies with their modern revisionist claims. 

• Methods: Grey Zone Warfare is characterized by sub-threshold activities including kinetic and non-kinetic methods  by conventional military force and irregular proxies. 
  • Kinetic: It is the use of proxies for on-ground action or change of territorial status quo through coercion or militarisation of disputed features.
    • Example: China’s action in the South China Sea or Russia’s invasion of Crimea 
  • Non-kinetic: These are provocative actions such as cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, election meddling, weaponisation of migrants,  coercive use of trade and economic levers

• Characteristics Of Grey Zone Warfare

• • Below the threshold of armed conflict: The grey zone activities remain below the threshold of igniting a full-fledged military offensive as a justified response,  often through the use of non-military tools.
    • Example: Russia attack on Crimea and China’s action in South China sea is  example of grey zone warfare
  • Progressive  unfolding of aggressive moves: The strategy followed here is aggressive-passive resistance being dragged over decades to keep the dispute alive on the one hand while also providing a false narrative of engaging in talks to resolve the dispute, thus deterring a decisive response.
    • Example: China’s use of the Salami Slicing tactics to change territorial status quo with its neighbours
  • Risk  of escalation: Grey zone aggression uses the risk of escalation as a source of coercive leverage and deter a decisive response.
    • Example: Chinese and Pakistan  Incursion in the northern Himalayan borders of India.  
  • Lack of attributability: The aggressor country can simply deny their involvement and deflect response  in most of the grey zone campaign which obstruct the potential for successful deterrence as it can simply shake of their  responsibility.
    • Example: Cyberattacks or disinformation campaigns or the use of proxy forces, election meddling ( Russia in USA elections)
  • Targeting specific vulnerabilities: The grey zone campaigns target specific vulnerabilities in the targeted countries with targeted campaigns aimed at creating chaos.
    • Example: Funding terrorism and insurgency in other countries by arming splinter groups.
  • Strategic ambiguity: Strong responses appears to be counterproductive as the aggressive country takes advantage of the strategic ambiguity in relations whereby there is a competing  strategic, economic and domestic political reasons to not engage in full fledged conflict.
    • Example: India’s ban of Chinese applications in the wake of Doklam stand off is not considered a strong response by India.

News Source: The Hindu