Hybrid is sometimes described by Israeli analysts as ‘the campaign between the wars’.
By Hezy Laing
Hybrid warfare is a modern strategy that blends conventional military force with non‑military tools—cyberattacks, psychological operations, diplomacy, economic pressure, proxy militias, and information campaigns—to shape the battlefield without necessarily triggering a full‑scale war.
It’s designed to blur the line between war and peace, allowing a state or organization to weaken an adversary while maintaining plausible deniability.
Russia’s actions in Crimea, Iran’s regional proxy network, and China’s gray‑zone tactics in the South China Sea are often cited as classic examples.
Israel practices its own distinct form of hybrid warfare, shaped by its geography, threat environment, and technological edge. Rather than relying solely on large‑scale ground operations, Israel integrates intelligence, cyber capabilities, precision airpower, and covert action to disrupt enemy networks long before they reach Israel’s borders.
This approach is sometimes described by Israeli analysts as “campaign between the wars,” a long‑term effort to prevent adversaries from building the capabilities that would make a future conflict more dangerous.
A central pillar of Israel’s hybrid strategy is intelligence dominance. Satellites, drones, SIGINT units, and human sources feed real‑time information to operational units, allowing Israel to strike surgically rather than broadly.
This intelligence‑driven model enables Israel to hit weapons convoys in Syria, disrupt Iranian entrenchment, or target rocket engineers in Gaza without escalating into a full war.
Cyber operations are another key component. Israel has used cyber tools to disrupt missile programs, sabotage infrastructure used by hostile groups, and counter online recruitment and propaganda.
Covert action also plays a major role. Operations attributed to Israel—such as targeted strikes on weapons depots, sabotage of Iranian facilities, or the recent capture of high‑value operatives in Lebanon—are designed to degrade enemy capabilities while avoiding the political cost of open conflict.
These actions are often paired with diplomatic messaging, economic pressure, and information campaigns that shape regional perceptions.
Hybrid warfare allows Israel to manage multiple fronts simultaneously: Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iranian forces in Syria, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza, and cyber threats from afar.
By combining military precision with intelligence, technology, and psychological pressure, Israel aims to keep its adversaries off balance and prevent them from achieving strategic breakthroughs, all while delaying or avoiding the outbreak of a full‑scale regional war.
Hybrid warfare has become the defining style of conflict in the 21st century, and watching how it has evolved makes it clear why Israel and Iran—two regional rivals with very different toolkits—approach it in such contrasting ways.
The concept itself isn’t new, but the last two decades have transformed it from a theoretical idea into the dominant operating model for states and non‑state actors.
Hybrid warfare blends military force with non‑military pressure: cyberattacks, proxy militias, psychological operations, economic leverage, disinformation, and deniable strikes.
The goal is to shape the battlefield without triggering a conventional war. What has changed since the early 2000s is the sophistication and integration of these tools. Cyber operations have moved from website defacement to infrastructure disruption.
Proxy groups have evolved from loosely affiliated militias into disciplined, well‑armed armies. Information warfare has shifted from pamphlets and broadcasts to real‑time social media manipulation and AI‑generated content. Modern hybrid warfare is no longer a side tactic; it is the main arena.
Israel’s approach is shaped by its technological edge and its need to manage multiple fronts simultaneously. Rather than relying on massed ground forces, Israel uses intelligence dominance, precision airpower, cyber capabilities, and covert action to disrupt threats before they mature.
The “campaign between the wars” doctrine—continuous, low‑visibility operations against Iranian entrenchment in Syria, weapons transfers, and terror infrastructure—is a textbook example of hybrid strategy.
Israel integrates satellites, drones, SIGINT, and cyber tools to strike surgically, often without claiming responsibility. Its strength lies in speed, intelligence fusion, and the ability to hit far beyond its borders while keeping escalation contained.
Iran’s hybrid warfare model is almost the mirror opposite. Instead of technology‑driven precision, Iran relies on a vast network of proxies: Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Houthis, and various Iraqi and Syrian militias.
These groups give Iran reach from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea, allowing it to pressure adversaries without exposing itself directly. Iran excels at long‑term political infiltration, ideological mobilization, and asymmetric attrition.
Its hybrid power comes from depth and deniability rather than precision.
Comparing the two, Israel is stronger in intelligence, cyber operations, and surgical strikes. Iran is stronger in proxy warfare, regional entrenchment, and strategic patience. Both are highly capable, but they operate in fundamentally different styles—one high‑tech and fast, the other decentralized and persistent.
