Lably
Skip to content

Grey-zone (international relations)

State between peace and war

  • 18 min read
  • 3 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Peace, War and Information technology

Definition

Use of the term grey-zone is widespread in national security circles, but there is no universal agreement on the definition of grey-zone, or even whether it is a useful term, with views about the term ranging from "faddish" or "vague", to "useful" or "brilliant".

The grey-zone is defined as "competitive interactions among and within state and non-state actors that fall between the traditional war and peace duality." by the United States Special Operations Command. A key element of operations within the grey-zone is that they remain below the threshold of an attack which could have a legitimate conventional military response (jus ad bellum). One paper defined it as "coercive statecraft actions short of war", and a "mainly non-military domain of human activity in which states use national resources to deliberately coerce other states". The Center for Strategic and International Studies defines the grey-zone as "the contested arena somewhere between routine statecraft and open warfare." British Defence Secretary Ben Wallace called the grey-zone "that limbo land between peace and war."

Grey zone warfare generally means a middle, unclear space that exists between direct conflict and peace in international relations.

According to Vincent Cable, examples of grey-zone activities include undermining industrial value chains or oil and gas supplies, money laundering, and the use of espionage and sabotage. According to Lee Hsi-ming "gray zone conflict is characterized by using the threat of force to create fear and intimidation." US Navy admiral Samuel Paparo has termed gray zone activities "illegal, coercive, aggressive and deceptive" (ICAP) following the preferred term of Romeo Brawner Jr.

Sign in to keep reading

2 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Politics and economics