There is no universally-accepted definition of hybrid warfare that leads to some debate whether the term is useful at all. Some argue that the term is too abstract and only the latest term to refer to irregular methods to counter a conventionally superior force. The abstractness of the term means that it is often used as a catch all term for all non-linear threats. Hybrid warfare is warfare with the following aspects:
Hybrid warfare is not new; the means of waging it have evolved and simply expanded into all dimensions of state and society. Hence, the compulsion to deal with hybrid warfare holistically. That is a task that goes beyond the mere military dimensions of war and beyond the scope of military decision-making. If we want to strengthen our hybrid warfare capabilities then we need to recognise the need to redefine war and strategy. The centre of gravity of warfare has shifted; what is needed is a holistic shift in the centre of gravity of decision-making. Never was civilian supremacy more relevant in the conduct of war than it is in the context of hybrid warfare, including within the overarching nuclear framework. Hybrid warfare is a military strategy that blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare and cyber warfare. Hybrid warfare can be used to describe the flexible and complex dynamics of the battle space requiring a highly adaptable and resilient response. There are a variety of terms used to refer to the hybrid war concept: hybrid war, hybrid warfare, hybrid threat, or hybrid adversary (as well as non-linear war, non-traditional war or special war). The centre of gravity in a counterinsurgency is the protection of the population that hosts it.The result of the center of gravity analysis provides input for what objectives and decisive points that should be accomplished and how to use the forces in order to reach the desired end-state.