Author: Lt. Col. (Ret.) Maciej Korowaj
Introduction
Russia is waging a balanced war – a systemic, multi-domain model of political, informational and military pressure that breaks down the enemy’s resistance before the first shot is fired.
Balanced warfare is a contemporary model of conflict used by the Russian Federation as a tool of a new type of power politics. It is not based on a single, massive military strike, but on a systemic, long-term impact across multiple domains – political, informational, economic and military.
In this context, kinetic operations are only one element of pressure, activated when other measures have achieved the desired effect of eroding the opponent’s resistance.
Russia is currently conducting activities that are difficult to clearly classify as either peace or war. The goal is not a quick military victory, but to break the political and social will of the opponent and shape an operational space conducive to its own strategic interests.
The origins and assumptions of the concept
Balanced warfare was developed based on the experiences of Russian and Chinese strategic doctrines developed after the end of the Cold War. Their common denominator is the belief that conflict in the modern world is permanent and takes place in the informational, economic and psychological dimensions — often long before military action begins.
The Russian approach to war assumes that military instruments are intended to complement earlier destabilisation activities, not replace them. Conflict is therefore a process, not an event. The key is to shape the strategic environment over the long term — weakening, disintegrating and demoralising the opponent’s structures until open intervention becomes a mere formality.
Pillar I – Political and economic influence
The first dimension of balanced warfare is political and economic pressure. Here, Russia uses the full spectrum of state and non-state means: from covert operations and diplomatic blackmail to embargoes, control over key infrastructure, manipulation of commodity prices and financing of pro-Russian circles.
The goal is to create dependency and destabilisation – to generate internal pressure and external tensions that limit the decision-making capacity of the enemy state.
Pillar II – Intelligence and information superiority
In terms of information, Russia focuses on reconnaissance and systematic perception shaping. Psychological, disinformation and influence operations are conducted continuously, often many years before the outbreak of open conflict.
In the so-called zero phase (the preparatory period, as defined by the Institute for the Study of War, among others), Moscow’s main goal is to gain narrative dominance and break the enemy’s information coherence. In this sense, the information space becomes a full-fledged battlefield where the battle for perception, morale and legitimacy of actions is fought.
Pillar III – Hybrid and sub-threshold operations
The next level of balanced warfare involves operations of an ambiguous nature – cyberattacks, sabotage, support for irregular forces, border provocations, the use of so-called ‘little green men’ or the incitement of riots. Their task is to blur the threshold of war and make it difficult to clearly identify the aggressor.
Such actions plunge the enemy into uncertainty and decision-making paralysis, forcing them to react in conditions of information chaos.
Pillar IV – Use of armed forces
From Russia’s perspective, military action is not the beginning of war, but its final stage. The use of force is selective, limited and often masked by special operations. Only when the opponent’s resistance has been sufficiently weakened can the Kremlin move on to a short, concentrated military campaign to enforce acceptance of the new strategic realities.
In this model, the political effect is more important than the military effect.
Stages and dynamics of balanced warfare
Balanced warfare develops in a cycle, the first and key stage of which is the systematic weakening of the resilience of state, social and psychological structures. At this level, the conflict is primarily played out in the information, economic and cyber spheres.
When the opponent’s level of resilience declines, Russia intensifies its destabilising activities, seeking to break the will to defend internally. Only when a ‘breaking point’ is reached is the military component activated — a short operation aimed at forcing political capitulation or imposing its own terms.
The result is a model of permanent conflict in which the line between war and peace is blurred and pressure is constant, regardless of the use of force.
Practical applications and conclusions
The first visible testing ground for this concept was the campaign against Ukraine in 2014. It combined information, cyber, sabotage and military actions, which enabled the annexation of Crimea with minimal resistance and costs.
Similar elements can be seen in actions against NATO countries – from disinformation campaigns and interference in electoral processes to attacks on critical and energy infrastructure. Each of these cases is part of a broader process – the long-term shaping of the strategic environment in the spirit of sustainable warfare.
Sustainable warfare is a systemic tool for destroying the enemy, based on the synchronisation of military and non-military actions. Its primary goal is not a quick victory on the battlefield, but the long-term erosion of political, social and psychological resilience.
It is this mechanism — spread out over time, difficult to identify unequivocally and unpredictable in its dynamics — that makes sustainable warfare such an effective tool of the Russian Federation’s contemporary power politics.
In practice, it is a form of continuous warfare, waged on many levels simultaneously, in which the boundary between war and peace ceases to have any real meaning.
Summary
Balanced warfare is the essence of Russia’s approach to conflict in the 21st century — a combination of political, economic, informational, intelligence and military pressure in a single, integrated system of influence.
Its strength lies in its flexibility and longevity — it allows Russia to engage in confrontation without formally declaring war, minimising the risk of escalation while maximising strategic effects.
It is a model that is permanently changing the security landscape in Europe and poses a challenge not only to defence structures, but also to the psychological and social resilience of Western countries.
