Strategic movement of forces and their sustainment often depend on civilian infrastructure (ports, airports, railways, and road networks). During developing crises, potential adversaries could exploit seams between military and civilian authorities and use civilians to restrict, delay, or completely prevent the movement of forces and disrupt supply chains. This can be achieved indirectly, by exploiting the information environment, or directly, for instance, by inserting agitators into crowds. Many civilians, especially vulnerable groups, appear susceptible to disinformation and manipulation, creating opportunities for adversaries to use them in pursuit of specific interests. However, civilians’ legal rights and entitlements, particularly those enshrined under international humanitarian law, impose restrictions on Western militaries in coping with such situations. From NATO’s perspective, this could further encourage adversaries to exploit these approaches.
The article provides several case studies from different countries where civilians have disrupted military power projection. It then outlines seven hypothetical scenarios in which adversaries exploit civilians to counter the logistics and mobility of military forces. The methodological framework for developing plausible future scenarios involves drawing on past events while also leveraging creativity in future considerations, including technological advances combined with human inventiveness. This approach enabled the authors to consider possible future developments and threats in terms of weaponizing civilians to contest military mobility. The findings presented in this article provide incentives for testing military resilience in wargame scenarios and exercises simulating disruptions to strategic mobility and logistics.
Strategic movement of forces and their sustainment often depend on civilian infrastructure (ports, airports, railways, and road networks). During developing crises, potential adversaries could exploit seams between military and civilian authorities and use civilians to restrict, delay, or completely prevent the movement of forces and disrupt supply chains. This can be achieved indirectly, by exploiting the information environment, or directly, for instance, by inserting agitators into crowds. Many civilians, especially vulnerable groups, appear susceptible to disinformation and manipulation, creating opportunities for adversaries to use them in pursuit of specific interests. However, civilians’ legal rights and entitlements, particularly those enshrined under international humanitarian law, impose restrictions on Western militaries in coping with such situations. From NATO’s perspective, this could further encourage adversaries to exploit these approaches.
The article provides several case studies from different countries where civilians have disrupted military power projection. It then outlines seven hypothetical scenarios in which adversaries exploit civilians to counter the logistics and mobility of military forces. The methodological framework for developing plausible future scenarios involves drawing on past events while also leveraging creativity in future considerations, including technological advances combined with human inventiveness. This approach enabled the authors to consider possible future developments and threats in terms of weaponizing civilians to contest military mobility. The findings presented in this article provide incentives for testing military resilience in wargame scenarios and exercises simulating disruptions to strategic mobility and logistics.