【英文】美国大西洋理事会报告：北约如何打击中国和俄罗斯的政治战（36页）

Hybrid warfare generally assumes that military instruments  of national power will be utilized in some form or fashion.17 As Frank G. Hofman maintains, “instead of separate challengers with fundamentally diferent approaches  (conventional, irregular, or terrorist), we can expect to face  competitors who will employ all forms of war and tactics,  perhaps simultaneously.”18 By contrast, “political warfare” refers to the exercise of actions short of war that are part of a coercive statecraft strategy. The phrase was coined by George Kennan who wrote: “Political warfare is the logical application of  Clausewitz’s doctrine in time of peace. In broadest defnition, political warfare is the employment  of all the means at a nation’s command, short of  war, to achieve its national objectives. Such operations are both overt and covert. 

They range from  such overt actions as political alliances, economic  measures… and ‘white’ propaganda to such covert  operations as clandestine support of ‘friendly’ foreign elements, ‘black’ psychological warfare and  even encouragement of underground resistance  in hostile states.”The concept of conducting synchronized activities short of  overt warfare to achieve strategic ends has subsequently  been expressed by policy makers through terms such as  “gray zone competition” and “comprehensive coercion.”20 Hybrid warfare is conceptually distinct but related to political warfare and authoritarian coercion as it describes the  application of these hostile activities and strategies across  the confict spectrum during times of war and peace.21 Political warfare refers to these coercive activities outside  the context of overt hostilities. In the strategic calculations  of both Moscow and Beijing, political warfare appears to  be a critical—if not decisive—line of efort in hybrid warfare  campaigns.