Journal sections
Archive and statistics
Log in

Печатный вестник PRINTED
Издательство МГОУ Publishing house the

Our address: 105005, Moscow, Radio street,10a, office 98.

+7 (495) 780-09-42 add. 1740,
+7 (495) 723-56-31


Work schedule: Monday to Thursday from 10-00 to 17-30,

Friday from 10:00 to 16-00,

lunch break from 13:00 to 14-00.



BK Facebook Telegram Twitter Instagram

Bulletin of the MRSU / Section "Politics" / 2021 № 3.


D.G. Evstafiev

HYBRID WARS PLATFORM AS AN INSTRUMENT FOR GEO-ECONOMIC TRANSFORMATION OF THE WORLD. In: Bulletin of the Moscow Region State University (electronic journal), 2021, no. 3.


UDC Index: 327.54; 355.01

Date of publication: 10.08.2021

The full text of the article

Downloads count Downloads count: 509


Aim. To define the place of the platform of the hybrid wars and the related instruments in the on-going global transformations that lead to the deep reshuffle of the international economic relations including the basic interrelationships of the economic interdependence that were formed in the era of mature globalization.
Methodology. Clusterization of the focus points of the transformations on the regional level in order to locate and define key instruments used to manage (stimulate and guide) the transformations. The transformations are analyzed through the prism of Thomas Shelling’s “theory of conflict” and its subsequent interpretations but with consideration of the new role of the information society.
Results. The conclusions were made about the increasing importance of the military and in general – force components in the spectrum of the “hybrid war” instruments since the current generation of informational manipulation means appeared to be insufficient to reach the geo-economic objectives that major global centers of power face. At the same time the platform of “hybrid wars” remains operationally the most secure one to manage safely the chains of conflicts aimed to geo-economically transform regions and macro-regions.
Research implications. The conclusion was made on the inevitability of the development of a new generation of the “hybrid wars” that would be based upon wider variety of instruments in the “transition zone” between the peacetime competition and “hot” conflict with military components.

Key words

hybrid war, theory of conflict, informational manipulations, economic interdependence, conflict management

List of references

1. Bartosh A. A. [“Grey areas” as the key element of today’s operational space of hybrid warfare]. In: Voennaya mysl’ [Military Thought], 2021, no. 2, pp. 6–19.
2. Gaddis J. L. On Grand Strategy (Russ. ed.: Filippova O., Shalomitskaya A., trans. O bol’shoi strategii. Moscow, Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gaidara, 2021. 424 p.)
3. Evstaf’ev D. G. [Eurasia in the era of power geoeconomics: features of transformations and opportunities for neutralizing risks]. In: Elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal «Evraziya.Ekspert» [Electronic scientific journal “Eurasia.Expert”], 2021, no. 1.]. Available at: DOI 10.18254/S271332140014382-7 (accessed: 15.03.2021).
4. Kaldor M. New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era (Russ. ed.: Appollonov A., Dondukovsky M., trans. Novye i starye voiny: organizovannoe nasilie v global’nuyu epokhu. Moscow, Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gaidara Publ., 2016. 416 p.)
5. Batyuk V. I., ed. Konflikty nizkoi intensivnosti v amerikanskoi voenno-politicheskoi strategii v nachale XXI veka [Low-intensity conflicts in the American military-political strategy at the beginning of the XXI century. Moscow, «Ves’ mir» Publ., 2018. 192 p.
6. Kremenyuk V. A. Mezhdunarodnye konflikty: problemy upravleniya i kontrolya [International conflicts: problems of management and control]. Moscow, ISKRAN Publ., 2006. 222 p.
7. Maksimenko I. A., Bogdanov A. S. [The present-day approaches to information-analytical activity aimed at discovering hybrid threats]. In: Voennaya mysl’ [Military Thought], 2021, no. 5, pp. 42–49.
8. Mozhegov V. I. Mirovaya grazhdanskaya voina [World civil war]. Moscow, Rodina Publ., 2021. 224 p.
9. Schelling T. The Strategy of Conflict (Russ. ed.: Kuznetsov Yu., ed., transl. Strategiya konflikta. Moscow, IRISEN, Sotsium, 2014. 367 p. (Series “International Relations”)).
10. Farrell H., Newman A. Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. In: International Security, 2019, vol. 44, iss. 1, pp. 42–79. DOI: 10.1162/isec_a_00351.
11. Haass R., Kupchan С. The New Concert of Powers How to Prevent Catastrophe and Promote Stability in a Multipolar World. In: Foreign Affairs. Available at: utm_medium=newsletters&utm_source=fatoday &utm_campaign=What%20the%20WHO%20Investigation%20Reveals% 20About%20the%20Origins%20of%20COVID-19&utm_content=20210331 &utm_term=FA%20Today%20-%20112017 (accessed: 15.03.2021).
12. Mazarr M. Rethinking Restraint: Why It Fails in Practice. In: The Washington Quarterly, 2020, vol. 43, iss. 2, pp. 7–32. DOI: 10.1080/0163660X.2020.1771042.
13. Moghadam A., Wyss M., The Political Power of Proxies: Why Nonstate Actors Use Local Surrogates. In: International Security, 2020, vol. 44, iss. 4, pp. 119–157. DOI: 10.1162/isec_a_00377.
14. Nye J. S. Jr. How Sharp Power Threatens Soft Power. The Right and Wrong Ways to Respond to Authoritarian Influence. In: Foreign Affairs. Available at: (accessed: 15.03.2021).
15. Ablon L., Binnendijk A., Hodgson Q. E., Lilly B., Romanosky S., Senty D., Thompson J. A. Operationalizing Cyberspace as a Domain: Lessons for NATO. In: RAND Corporation. Available at: (accessed: 15.03.2021). DOI: 10.7249/PE329.
16. The Secretary General’s Annual Report 2020, 16-Mar.-2021. In: NATO. Available at: (accessed: 15.03.2021).
17. Wigell M. Democratic Deterrence: How to Dissuade Hybrid Interference. In: The Washington Quarterly, 2021, vol. 44, iss. 1, pp. 49–67. DOI: 10.1080/0163660X.2021.1893027.

Лицензия Creative Commons