THE NICARAGUAN CIVIL WAR (1981–1988) AND THE CONCEPT OF A HYBRID WARFARE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29038/2524-2679-2018-02-90-99Keywords:
hybrid war, civil war, the intervention in domestic affairs, Nicaragua v. United States case, The Nicaraguan Civil War, propagandaAbstract
The article has been dedicated to the question of hybrid warfare sunder the conditions of internalarmed conflicts between government and opposition. Taking into considerations hybrid threats the author has analyzed the interference of the USinthe Nicaraguan Civil War (1981–1988). The article considers the following tasks: the characteristics of historical and political circumstances of the conflict in Nicaragua, the proper justification of a hybrid war leading by the US and the examination of non-military components of the US aggression against Nicaragua. Materials on Nicaragua v. United States ICJ’s case (Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua) have played an important role in the course of the research. The author has shown that events in Nicaragua might be regarded as an example of a hybrid war regarding the conceptual features of hybrid wars. The participation of the US in the Nicaraguan Civil War in direct and indirect forms (influencing the rebel groups of contras) has been described. The author has explained multi-sided attack of the US, which was conducted in military, economic and information fields. Special attention has been drawn to non-military actions organized and fulfilled by the US, e.g. trade boycott, putting pressure on international banks, anti-Sandinista propaganda, the distribution of manuals for guerillas, taking control of printed mass-media. The state of a civil war has been considered as a favorable situation for hybrid threats to emerge. The article has provided reasoning for taking advantage of a hybrid war by a foreign state aimed at underminingstatepower.
References
From Revolutionary Movements to Political Parties: Cases from Latin America and Africa / K. Deonandan, D. Close, G. Prevost, Eds. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Timeline: Nicaragua. URL: https://web.stanford.edu/group/arts/nicaragua/ discovery_eng/timeline.
Kammerhofer J. The US Intervention in Nicaragua – 1981–88. The Use of Force in International Law: A Case-Based Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. P. 342–360.
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America). URL: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/ 70/judgments.
Blishchenko I. P., Solntseva М. М. Regional. Conflicts and International Law (the Second Half of the XX – the Beginning of the XXI Century). Moscow: Horodets, 2005.
Banasik M. How to Understand the Hybrid War. Securitologia. № 1. 2015. P. 19–34.
Big Interpretive Dictionary of Modern Ukrainian Language / Busel V.Т., Ed. Kyiv: Irpin: VTF «Perun», 2004.
Jacobs A., Lasconjarias G. NATO’s Hybrid Flanks: Handling Unconventional Warfare in the South and the East. Research Paper (NATO Defense College). № 112. 2015. P. 1–12.
CIA Helped To Mine Ports In Nicaragua. URL: https://www.washingtonpost. com/archive/politics/1984/04/07/cia-helped-to-mine-ports-in-nicaragua/762f775f-6733-4dd4-b692-8f03c8a0aef8/?utm_term=.d37a2ab0b8e2.
Militarv and Paramilitary Activities in und against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America). Merits, Judgment. I.C.J. Reports. 1986. P. 14.
Guzman T. A. The CIA’s Dirty War in Nicaragua. URL: https://www. globalresearch.ca/the-cias-dirty-war-in-nicaragua/5629008.
Linton A. Fair Trade from the Ground Up: New Markets for Social Justice. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2012.
Landis F. CIA Psychological Warfare Operations. Case Studies in Chile, Jamaica and Nicaragua. Science for the People. № 14. 1982. P. 6–11.
Metoyer C. C. Women and the State in Post-Sandinista Nicaragua. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2000.
