There are three types of hybrid warfare.

The first, often labelled as an attack on governance, uses legal means to undermine democratic liberal societies by inserting foreign influence or trying to gain financial and economic leverage over our normal democratic processes. Examples of this type of influencing are all around us: Russian television stations or news agencies and China’s 10% ownership of EU ports as well as its assertive presence in the South China Sea. To successfully respond, we have no other choice than making sure that we are working hard to assert our own democratic values and economic models. We simply need to out-communicate and outbid our adversaries.

The second type of hybrid warfare consists of the more brazen, illegal attempts to undermine and polarise our societies by sowing fear and mistrust. This is achieved by carrying out orchestrated attacks against the core elements of our social cohesion: free and fair elections, critical infrastructure and IT networks, the credibility of news and information, and the integrity of our business and financial transactions.

The third – and the most dangerous – type of hybrid warfare means using the aforementioned strategies as preparation and prelude for a military attack. This happened in Ukraine in March 2014 when Russian Special Forces, posing as “little green men”, seized the institutions, transport links, ports and communication channels of Crimea, thus preventing a Ukrainian response. While conflicts of…Friends of Europe.org
The vital role of public-private partnerships in countering hybrid threats/ Nov 2019
HYBRID AND TRANSNATIONAL THREATS