The generations of warfare have evolved according to the development of the weapons used and the techniques applied, from primitive to traditional warfare, through the five generations of warfare, and finally reaching hybrid warfare.
In this article, we attempt to trace these developments, leading up to the Russian-Ukrainian war.
Traditional Wars and the Birth of the Modern Regular Army
Wars began in primitive ages using primitive weapons like spears and swords, where two armies, teams, or opponents would meet on the battlefield. The victor and the defeated would be determined at the end of the battle.
In primitive wars, the target was the enemy’s army, with the aim of weakening it and preventing it from engaging in future wars. The war depended on direct confrontation and physical contact. The distance between fighters was as close as the length of a sword or the reach of a spear.
Weapons remained primitive until the invention of gunpowder and the rifle in the 14th century.
Technological advancements later allowed for the invention of artillery, with the Ottomans being the first to use it to besiege enemy cities.
Until this point, wars were still primitive, as strategic thinking was limited to the engagement of the army led by the king, prince, or sultan.
However, in the 16th century, King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden introduced a new concept of war. Adolphus was the first to establish a regular army, giving great importance to infantry as the decisive force.
The Swedish king based his idea on Machiavelli’s thoughts about the necessity of the entire state being involved in the war effort. He emphasized that war should continue until its objectives are achieved, rather than ending merely with a defeat in battle. Thus, the concept of imposing a strategic decision replaced the idea of merely gaining ground.
Generations of Warfare
Colonel William S. Lind divided wars into four generations.
Lind, an American theorist and military officer, is known for his theory of the four generations of warfare.
First Generation:
This began with the emergence of nation-states in Europe, marked by the signing of the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, and continued until around 1680. These wars were characterized by the presence of two regular armies representing different states.
The organized armies would confront each other in lines and ranks on the battlefield, adhering to strict discipline, distinguished from civilians by their uniforms, salutes, hierarchy, and obedience to superior ranks.
However, with the development of weapons and the introduction of firepower, particularly artillery, the method of lines and ranks became suicidal due to the heavy loss of life. This led to the emergence of:
Second Generation:
This emerged with the French army during World War I, based on the doctrine of “artillery fire defeats the enemy, and infantry occupies the land.”
This generation solved the problem of heavy casualties seen in the first generation. The tactic here required tanks to move in the first row, preparing the ground for infantry to occupy and control the land.
During this period, around the mid-19th century, aerial firepower emerged, changing the balance and enhancing the strength of those who possessed air power. Fighter planes would bomb enemy positions, while tanks and infantry would penetrate and control the land with minimal losses.
Third Generation:
While the difference between the first and second generations lay in the development of weapons, the third generation resulted from a tactical shift. Whereas obedience to higher authority was paramount in previous generations, in third-generation wars, initiative could be prioritized over obedience if it provided an advantage over the enemy.
Initiative means that the army begins the fight, thus giving it an advantage in controlling the enemy and the element of surprise, potentially paralyzing the enemy’s strength.
This generation emerged with the German army during World War II, in what was termed “maneuver warfare,” which relies on speed, surprise, and mental distraction of the enemy army, followed by penetration to paralyze it.
Fourth Generation:
This generation is characterized by the absence of hierarchy and relies on insurgency, guerrilla warfare, and psychological warfare. It involves civil society organizations, political opposition, and intelligence operations. The enemy becomes an active player without being clearly visible.
Media plays a central role in this type of warfare. Notable examples include the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the early 2000s following September 11. Many analyses and leaks by American officials suggest that the events of September 11 were nothing more than a cinematic production, with the media being mobilized to justify wars against these two countries.
Similarly, in the so-called “Arab Spring,” the media was heavily relied upon to topple regimes in Syria and Libya through a Hollywood-style scenario, filmed in closed studios and broadcast via media outlets, including a major Arab channel, to deceive the targeted regime into believing that the enemy had reached an unstoppable point.
The toppling of Muammar Gaddafi’s regime and the storming of the Aziziya Palace were filmed in a studio and broadcast on television channels, leading to a collapse in resistance morale and the subsequent fall of the regime.
Fifth Generation or Hybrid Warfare
The fifth generation is the most advanced form of fourth-generation warfare. Military weapons are no longer as important, and regular soldiers no longer play a central role. These wars focus on destroying the enemy with their own weapons.
In these wars, traditional battlefields are no longer important. The battlefield is the internet, social media, YouTube, and other virtual spaces, allowing for widespread influence on the enemy. These wars target both soldiers and civilians.
They involve forming an internal enemy and creating opposition to the regime, leading to a war between the opposition, often using guerrilla tactics and organizing into small groups, and the state’s regular army.
In this type of warfare, the beneficiary is the third party, known as the “three-sided chess” theory, where this party observes the conflict between the other two sides, exhausting the opponent and then reaping the benefits of victory.
These wars are also characterized by their long duration. A clear example of this strategy is what has been happening in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Yemen, under the label of “Arab Spring revolutions.”
Another feature of these wars is that they use all means: traditional weapons, psychological warfare, guerrilla tactics, media, opposition, information technology, and advanced technology.
The Russian-Ukrainian War
The Russian-Ukrainian war is a vivid example of hybrid warfare. It is a war in which all the methods mentioned above are used, and it is also a proxy war, with Russia on one side and the West, led by the United States, on the other.
In this war, we have seen how both sides used electronic, informational, and media warfare to tarnish the opponent’s image and manage the war, alongside the use of traditional weapons.
