US mainland ultra-vulnerable to China, Russia hybrid attacks

The US Army’s recent Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) report warns that near-peer adversaries China and Russia are gearing up for unprecedented hybrid warfare tactics targeting the US homeland.

The report says the US homeland, traditionally considered a sanctuary, is now vulnerable to its near-peer adversaries’ conventional, hybrid and irregular warfare tactics.

The TRADOC report emphasizes that these adversaries are heavily investing in capabilities designed to disrupt and attack soft targets within US territory, leveraging information and cyber operations to create significant effects with minimal risk of escalation compared to kinetic strikes.

The TRADOC report suggests that China and Russia are likely to transition from subtle, non-attributable cyber and information operations to more overt and destructive physical actions in the event of a conflict.

It mentions the potential use of ultra-long-range systems with conventional payloads, asymmetric platforms and commercial off-the-shelf unmanned aerial systems (UAS) to target critical infrastructure and military operations.

The report also notes the adversaries’ readiness to escalate their actions using these capabilities, which could threaten vital infrastructure and operations essential to US military readiness and deployment.

Furthermore, the report details how increased transparency of the modern battlefield, due to the proliferation of advanced technologies and global communications, makes it increasingly challenging to conceal movements and operations from the enemy.

This transparency and adversaries’ focus on anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) efforts could significantly hinder the US Army’s ability to project force and sustain operations during large-scale combat operations (LSCO).

The concept of hybrid warfare lacks a universally agreed definition and has been criticized for its lack of conceptual clarity. However, it provides valuable insights into modern security and defense challenges.

Hybrid warfare involves combining conventional and unconventional power methods in a coordinated way to exploit an opponent’s vulnerabilities and achieve synergistic effects.

China and Russia pose a conventional threat to the US homeland through their investment in long-range conventional-strike capabilities such as strategic bombers, submarines and even hypersonic weapons.

In a 2021 article for the Texas National Security Review (TNSR), Bruce Sugden says that China and Russia are investing in long-range conventional-strike capabilities that could threaten the US homeland. Sugden says Russia has already deployed systems capable of striking the continental US while China is developing similar capabilities.

He mentions that Russia has deployed Kalibr and Kh-101 conventional cruise missiles capable of striking targets within the continental US from submarines and long-range bombers.

Likewise, he says China is enhancing its multi-domain conventional precision-strike capabilities, developing a long-range bomber and the Type 093B nuclear-powered guided missile submarine (SSGN), which could threaten Alaska, Hawaii and possibly the US West Coast.

Sugden notes that China and Russia may deploy intercontinental-range hypersonic missiles to threaten the US homeland. He points out that these investments reflect a broader trend of both nations improving their long-range conventional precision-strike capabilities, which includes advancements in command, control, communications, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) systems to support these operations.

He points out that the risk of nuclear conflict escalation due to conventional strikes against a nuclear adversary’s homeland is increased by strategic uncertainty stemming from unclear Chinese and Russian perspectives on nuclear thresholds and escalation in response to conventional attacks.

While the distinction between China and Russia’s hybrid and irregular warfare lines of effort against the US homeland is conceptually unclear with significant overlaps, they have common features such as cyber espionage, disruptive cyberattacks on critical infrastructure and disinformation campaigns to weaken the US without direct military confrontation.

In a July 2020 report for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Anthony Cordesman and Grace Hwang mention that Chinese hybrid warfare against the US could involve multi-domain operations integrating military, economic, technological and informational tactics. Key strategies include economic coercion through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), extensive cyber espionage and disruptive cyberattacks targeting critical infrastructure.

Cordesman and Hwang state that China has used conspiracy theories during the Covid-19 pandemic, data theft from US agencies, influence campaigns via social media and economic warfare to weaken the US without open conflict​.

Likewise, Cordesman and Hwang mention in a December 2020 CSIS report that Russian hybrid warfare involves a combination of conventional military actions, irregular tactics, cyber operations and psychological warfare. They state that, as with China, Russia’s hybrid warfare operations aim to achieve political objectives while avoiding direct military confrontation with the US.

They describe Russian hybrid warfare efforts as featuring disinformation, cyberattacks, political subversion, economic coercion and manipulation of social media to sow discord and influence political outcomes in the US.

Cordesman and Hwang mention several examples of Russian hybrid warfare efforts, including election interference such as the 2016 Democratic National Committee (DNC) hack and manipulation of social media to influence political outcomes.

They add that it involves continuous cyberattacks on US infrastructure and political entities and a broader active measures campaign utilizing disinformation and espionage. Additionally, Cordesman and Hwang say Russia leverages its role as a primary energy supplier and engages in economic manipulation to achieve strategic advantages​.

Meanwhile, Seth Jones mentions in a February 2021 CSIS article that Russia has conducted significant cyberattacks against US government agencies and companies, exemplified by Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service’s (SVR) 2021 cyberattack, which affected up to 250 US federal agencies and businesses.  

Jones says China and Russia employ information operations to influence public opinion and political processes in the US. He mentions that Russia has attempted to exacerbate social and political tensions through disinformation campaigns on issues like Black Lives Matter and Covid-19.

He notes that China uses economic strategies such as the BRI to expand its global influence and economic power, indirectly affecting the US’s position in international politics. In addition, Jones says China conducts operations on US university campuses to steal sensitive technologies and monitor Chinese students.

At the same time, he states Russia leverages organizations like the Internet Research Agency to conduct information operations and cyberattacks.

In contrasting Chinese and Russian approaches to hybrid warfare, J Matthew McInnis mentions in a September 2023 Institute for the Study of War (ISW) report that Russia views hybrid warfare as a means to achieve strategic objectives before the adversary realizes war has begun, blurring the lines between internal and interstate conflict, peace and war.

In contrast, McInnis says that China sees warfare as increasingly civilianized. He says China relies on non-military means to neutralize threats and gain advantages and encompasses a wide range of issues within its concept of comprehensive national power.

He notes that China and Russia view great power competition as an ongoing process, escalating and declining in intensity but remaining under the threshold of combat. McInnis contrasts that approach with the US event-based approach to conflicts.

He points out that the US tends to employ elements of national power episodically and often segregated among various agencies, lacking its near-peer adversaries’ continuous, combined approach.