State Threats: Understanding and responding to the new landscape of hostile state activity 

Project Live

PROJECT TEAM

 

Matthew Redhead

Royal United Services Institute

Matthew Redhead is a senior associate fellow at RUSI. He is a former civil servant, management consultant and senior leader in financial crime intelligence in the private sector.

He has served as a government official at the Ministry of Defence (MoD), and on secondment at the Office of Security and Counter-Terrorism (OSCT) at the Home Office. He also has extensive experience in financial services, having trained as a ‘front office’ banker for HSBC in the 1990s, and worked for seven years in various senior roles in that same bank’s financial crime risk function, leaving as Global Head of Strategic Intelligence in April 2018. He is currently a freelance writer and consultant on issues relating to national security, intelligence and economic and financial crime and security.

Eliza Lockhart

Royal United Services Institute

Eliza Lockhart is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Finance and Security at RUSI. Her research examines matters at the intersection of law, finance, and global security; with a particular focus on how evidence-based policy can promote democratic resilience and protect the rule of law against foreign interference. Eliza’s current projects include whistleblowing, state threats and economic security.

Eliza is a lawyer and legal policy expert. She previously worked in Australia for Linklaters and has experience with international financial crime investigations, whistleblower investigations and high-profile litigation. Prior to joining RUSI, Eliza was Associate to The Hon. Justice Kenny AM, a senior judge of the Federal Court of Australia and Chairperson of the Australian Electoral Commission.

Eliza holds a Master of Laws (LL.M.) and an MPhil in Public Policy, both with Distinction from the University of Cambridge.


PROJECT SUMMARY

Over the last decade, states have faced a rising tide of hostile activities perpetrated by state actors and their partners using hybrid or unusual methods as vectors of attack which sit in the ‘grey’ zone between peace and war . This body of activities has become known by a variety of terms, such as ‘state threats’, ‘hostile state activity’ and ‘hostile activity by states’. Despite the growing importance of state threats as a specific policy challenge, current research on this topic has been limited. 

 Through a series of workshops with experts and practitioners, the need for a more precise definition of state threats and a clearer understanding of their scale, scope and character became apparent. In addition, as the issue of state threats has risen on the agenda, there is increasing interest in understanding the policy responses deployed against these threats and their perceived effectiveness. This research project addresses these needs. 

 Phase one of this research critically examined the language used to describe state threats and related concepts, including ‘hybrid’ and ‘grey zone’ activity, to develop a more robust conceptual framework to map their defining characteristics and operational patterns. Key findings, presented in the research paper ‘Old wine, new bottles?’ and a series of synthesis papers reviewing state threat actions of revisionist states, demonstrate that:

  • Covert and clandestine activities largely define ‘state threats’ actions, but they are often used in concert with more overt means of coercion such as diplomatic coercion and economic threats.

  • Although espionage, repression, sabotage and subversion are not new phenomena, much is unprecedented about the current state threats landscape. The volume and range of hostile activities being deployed are at a scale never seen before, taking advantage of new vulnerabilities in society, such as social media and societal reliance on technology. 

  • The main perpetrators of hostile state activity are well-known - Russia, Iran, North Korea and China. However, a process of 'geopolitical climate change', driven by changing economic and political realities, has also encouraged several so-called ‘middle-powers’ to adopt similar methods. This development raises the risk that state threat type actions will proliferate in use, engendering instability in targeted states, and encouraging an escalatory cycle of tit-for-tat responses.  

The second phase of research, currently underway, focuses on how Western states are responding to the challenge of state threats. It seeks to provide a more detailed understanding of Western strategies and policies, map out how, when and why such responses are applied, and identify whether there are broad patterns and ‘styles’ in approaches to hostile actions. Through review of academic and grey literature, as well as first-hand interviews, the research will offer insights for policymakers and practitioners on the perceived effectiveness of the range of policy response options.     


PUBLICATIONS

MEDIA & EVENTS

UPTAKE & IMPACT


RELATED PROJECTS

Exploring the threat of Chinese Professional Money Laundering Organisations

Research by Kathryn Westmore exploring whether the threat posed by Chinese Professional Money Laundering Organisations should be considered alongside other state threats and whether existing policy responses need to change to reflect this. Read more…

An absence of peace, a rumour of war: The problem of defining state threats

In this synthesis paper, Matthew Redhead builds on his most recent research paper, Old wine, new bottles: The challenge of state threats, to produce a forensic and provocative discussion Read more…

Information Manipulation and Organised Crime

Research by Dr Tena Prelec looks at the nexus of organised crime and information manipulation against the relationship with the state, testing a new conceptual framework on five case studies in Central and Eastern Europe. Read more…

Previous
Previous

The centrality of the margins: Borderlands, illicit economies and uneven development

Next
Next

The evolution of SOC and Development: Interactions in policy and practice