Home » Misc » Encourage in a sentence

Encourage in a sentence


Encourage Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

en·​cour·​age in-ˈkər-ij 

-ˈkə-rij,

en-

transitive verb

1

a

: to inspire with courage, spirit, or hope : hearten

she was encouraged to continue by her early success

b

: to attempt to persuade : urge

they encouraged him to go back to school

2

: to spur on : stimulate

warm weather encourages plant growth

3

: to give help or patronage to : foster

government grants designed to encourage conservation

encourager noun

Synonyms

  • bear up
  • buck up
  • buoy (up)
  • cheer (up)
  • chirk (up)
  • embolden
  • hearten
  • inspire
  • inspirit
  • steel

See all Synonyms & Antonyms in Thesaurus 

Example Sentences

They encouraged us in our work. Encourage each other with kind words. The program is meant to encourage savings. Warm weather encourages plant growth. He claims the new regulations will encourage investment. He claims the new regulations will encourage people to invest. We want to encourage students to read more. My parents encouraged me to go back to college. They encouraged her to go. See More

Recent Examples on the Web Relying on professionals to provide day-to-day care can work very well, because they are trained to do it best and will encourage independence — something families can be afraid to do. —Carolyn Hax, Washington Post, 27 Feb. 2023 Organizers hope to encourage people to take steps in their own life to reduce their carbon footprint. —Alan Taylor, The Atlantic, 27 Feb. 2023 Then encourage guests to save them after the festivities as a reminder of your love and appreciation. —Alesandra Dubin, Good Housekeeping, 23 Feb. 2023 That relative simplicity could encourage companies to adopt PBDF. —Byluis Melecio-zambrano, science.org, 23 Feb. 2023 Maryland legislators have proposed a bill (House Bill 181) that will encourage qualifying businesses that have at least 30 employees to implement a 4-day work week (without reduction in pay), as part of a 5-year pilot program. —Laura Baisas, Popular Science, 21 Feb. 2023 In July 2021, singer Olivia Rodrigo visited the White House as part of a campaign to encourage young people to get vaccinated. —WIRED, 14 Feb. 2023 The practice was originally started to encourage people to mingle and talk to those outside of your social circle. —Rebecca Shinners, Country Living, 13 Feb. 2023 These bracelets feature inspiring words that can also be customized and aim to inspire and encourage people to be kind to themselves. —ABC News, 8 Feb. 2023 See More

These example sentences are selected automatically from various online news sources to reflect current usage of the word 'encourage. ' Views expressed in the examples do not represent the opinion of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback.

Word History

Etymology

Middle English encoragen, from Anglo-French encorager, from en- + curage courage

First Known Use

15th century, in the meaning defined at sense 1a

Time Traveler

The first known use of encourage was in the 15th century

See more words from the same century

Dictionary Entries Near

encourage

encounter group

encourage

encouragement

See More Nearby Entries 

Cite this Entry

Style

MLAChicagoAPAMerriam-Webster

“Encourage. ” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/encourage. Accessed 13 Mar. 2023.

Copy Citation

Kids Definition

encourage

verb

en·​cour·​age in-ˈkər-ij 

-ˈkə-rij

1

a

: to cause to feel courage, spirit, or hope

encouraged by her kind words

b

: to try to persuade

encouraged him to go back to school

2

: to spur on : stimulate

3

: to give help to : foster

government grants to encourage young artists

warm weather encourages plant growth

encouragement

noun

encouragingly

-ij-iŋ-lē

-rij-

adverb

More from Merriam-Webster on

encourage

Nglish: Translation of encourage for Spanish Speakers

Britannica English: Translation of encourage for Arabic Speakers

Last Updated: - Updated example sentences

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Merriam-Webster unabridged

apotheosis

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Challenging Standardized Test Words

  • Despite the cacophony, the student tried to study.
  • Low lighting Difficult subject
  • Loud sounds Late hour

You know what it looks like… but what is it called?

TAKE THE QUIZ

Can you make 12 words with 7 letters?

PLAY

Encourage Definition & Meaning | Britannica Dictionary

encourage /ɪnˈkɚrɪʤ/ verb

encourages; encouraged; encouraging

encourage

/ɪnˈkɚrɪʤ/

verb

encourages; encouraged; encouraging

Britannica Dictionary definition of ENCOURAGE

[+ object]

1 

:

to make (someone) more determined, hopeful, or confident

  • They encouraged us in our work.

  • Encourage each other with kind words.

[+] more examples [-] hide examples [+] Example sentences [-] Hide examples

— often used as (be) encouraged

  • We were encouraged by their enthusiasm.

  • Researchers are encouraged by the findings.

  • I am encouraged that the project seems to be moving ahead.

[+] more examples [-] hide examples [+] Example sentences [-] Hide examples

— sometimes followed by to + verb

[+] more examples [-] hide examples [+] Example sentences [-] Hide examples

— opposite discourage

2 

a 

:

to make (something) more appealing or more likely to happen

  • The program is meant to encourage savings.

  • Warm weather encourages plant growth.

  • He claims the new regulations will encourage investment.

[+] more examples [-] hide examples [+] Example sentences [-] Hide examples

b 

:

to make (someone) more likely to do something

  • He claims the new regulations will encourage people to invest.

  • We want to encourage students to read more.

[+] more examples [-] hide examples [+] Example sentences [-] Hide examples

:

to tell or advise (someone) to do something

  • My parents encouraged me to go back to college.

  • They encouraged her to go.

[+] more examples [-] hide examples [+] Example sentences [-] Hide examples

— opposite discourage

adjective [more encouraged; most encouraged]

[+] more examples [-] hide examples [+] Example sentences [-] Hide examples

Reward and punishment: combine reasonably

    1:30 14. 07.2010

    Articles

    Reward and punishment, stick and carrot, kick or beckon. These two movers, two means of managing people have been known since time immemorial. And still, almost every leader periodically faces a choice - what to bow to, how to most effectively combine these two such different methods of influence. In some firms they prefer to punish more, in others they prefer to encourage more. Somewhere they don’t use one of the types of influence at all, somewhere they found a really golden mean ...

    Punish with love

    Let's look at what is punishment for an employee in general. For some, a fleeting remark from the boss is enough, others can only be offended by material sanctions, hit with a ruble (or dollar). The level of punishment depends, first of all, on the goals of the impact. What do we achieve by punishing an employee? By the way, let's think about the phrase "punish the employee." What do we do when we punish? Do we punish the employee, or punish his wrong action or unacceptable inaction? Let's decide on the purpose of the impact, and this will help us in choosing a punishment.
    It is not necessary to give here the entire list of disciplinary measures, each company has its own list. But if we choose to punish the employee, rather than their action, then it may be easier and cheaper to simply part with them. But how to punish actions without punishing the employee, and is it possible? And what is punishment for anyway?

    The main purpose of punishment is to prevent actions that could harm the company. In other words, if there are several paths for the development of situations, by punishments we cut off the use of unwanted routes in the future. That is, punishment is not valuable in itself, as “revenge” for the wrong actions of a subordinate, but as a barrier that will not allow this person to repeat these actions in the future and will serve as an orientation for the entire workforce, a kind of red light. For one beaten they give two unbeaten.

    In a serious Western company, the commercial director lost a contract worth twenty million dollars due to his wrong actions. Arriving the next day in the office of the general manager of the company, he asked when he should pack his things. “You are crazy!” the general answered him, “We have just invested twenty million dollars in your training!” Is there a punishment here? And what is the effectiveness of the impact!

    Punishment is effective when it is based on the needs of the future, focused on exerting a psychological impact on the employee and the entire team. At the same time, by punishing undesirable actions, we in a certain way encourage those employees who work in the permitted direction.

    And what will happen if you don't punish at all? Those employees who are loyal to the rules will feel like fools to a certain extent, and they will definitely be tempted to break these rules as well. From this follows another principle of punishment - inevitability.

    When punishing an employee, an explanation is required why and why are you punishing him. The latter is especially important, but very often forgotten, and the punished person really perceives the punishment as revenge. The employee should learn about the punishment from his immediate superior or, if the punishment comes from a more senior manager, then personally from him. The use of impersonal punishments, such as the appearance of a punishment order on a bulletin board, is unacceptable. In this case, the offense is automatically transferred to the firm.

    It is even worse when an employee finds out about financial punishment while receiving a salary. Generally, You have to be very careful with material punishments. The material punishment imposed on the salary part of the income generally leads to the employee's aversion to work in this organization.

    In one of the well-known firms in Yerevan, there are rather high salaries for employees, higher than the average for the city, but they are constantly looking for staff, as constant automatic fines for the slightest offense lead to employees feeling resentment, which accumulates and leads employees to leave the organization.

    The punishment must necessarily correspond to the offense . Financial punishment is permissible in the case when the actions of the employee caused real direct material damage that can be measured and calculated. And in this case, it should not look like revenge, but as compensation for the damage caused and be formulated in appropriate terms. In many cases of misconduct by a subordinate, it is enough for the boss to simply talk to him, and the issue is closed. When talking about a misconduct (of course, one on one), it is desirable to create an understanding in the subordinate of how his undesirable action affected or could affect the results of the organization's work, to receive informal regret about his misconduct, and confidence that in the future the employee will act according to -other. At the same time, the motives of the misconduct (the answer to the question why this happened) are taken out of the brackets, since, in general, from the point of view of achieving the result, they are completely unimportant, and are of interest only for understanding the mechanism of committing the misconduct.

    A conversation with a superior about a wrongdoing should not make the subordinate feel guilty. In general, the feeling of guilt is not at all positive and does not motivate a person to positive changes. Why this is so is a separate and very large discussion. Any punishment should be justified not by a formal ban on certain actions, but by the understanding that these actions really harm the organization.

    So, what is the best way to punish a subordinate? Think about these words: "it is better to punish." A good punishment (sounds good too) should be unique to both the punisher and the punisher. What to do? Imagine that some actions of a loved one make you dissatisfied. What words would you use to request that he change his behavior in the future? You will find the right words and intonations in which you express both your love and your regret about the actions that this person did and which you did not like. Difficult? And no one promised that it would be easy. In general, the work of a manager is not the easiest profession, but it is very creative and rewarding, and it also pays well.

    So:

    1. Punishment must come from the future.
    2. It is not the person who is punished, but his offense.
    3. Punishment must be inevitable and timely.
    4. Pecuniary punishments should be used with extreme caution.
    5. Punishment must be personal.
    6. Punishment should not make the person feel guilty or humiliate.
    7. Actions that are punished must be maximally justified and accepted by the team as necessary for the successful work of the entire team.
    8. Punishment is a creative process.
    9. Punish with love.

    Reward what is really valuable for the employee

    So, rewards. Naturally, the first question is why and for what purpose. If the main reasonable goal of using punishments in an organization is to avoid failures (by the way, there are also unreasonable ones, for example, “so that the service does not seem like honey”), then, accordingly, the use of incentives expresses the desire to achieve better results and development .

    As in the case of punishment, encouragement should be directed to specific actions of the employee, and not to himself or any of his qualities. The types of incentives in each organization differ, but are mainly divided into two types - tangible and intangible. There are also mixed ones, for example, sending an employee to study at the expense of the organization is always beneficial to position as a material incentive for this employee and long-term investments based on the leader’s belief that this employee deserves to be “invested” in him.

    By the way, any form of training for employees, whether it concerns vocational training at the workplace or any kind of training, can always be presented as an encouragement. Many leaders often do not think about it, but in vain. If you can combine the useful with the pleasant, then why not do it?

    Caution! It is worth dwelling separately on such a form of encouraging the team as a whole, as a holiday on the occasion of the anniversary of the company and the successful work of the team for many years. Very often, partners from other organizations, representatives of buyers and suppliers are invited to such a holiday. If you are making a holiday, then decide whether it is a holiday or something else. If this is not a holiday, then this is work that must be paid separately, or, at worst, not be positioned as an encouragement.

    As an example, one well-known company that recently celebrated its tenth anniversary can be cited. A week before the holiday, in the evening (after the end of the working day), all the workers were gathered. Under the recording, the scenario of the “holiday” was read out, all the roles were distributed, the permitted and prescribed toasts were announced. Then the training took place. Permissible conversation topics are defined. All employees were seated at tables, and at each table sat one or two of their own and several guests. This event turned into a purely PR campaign, and those employees who participated in it clearly got the feeling that they were being used, and not for their professional purpose.

    Nothing irritates an employee more than a reward that he does not consider a reward . Think about the feelings of the person whom the boss, in the presence of the rest of the employees, “encouraged” with the following phrase: “You have worked much better than the rest of the employees this month, you are just a star!”. Encouragements should not combine ambiguity or the possibility of being perceived in any other way. For example, the phrase "Well, you can do well if you want" - hardly looks like an indisputable compliment.

    We gradually moved to non-financial incentives . Let us further, in order to clearly understand what we are talking about, we will call them compliments. What is a compliment? We can say that a compliment is a statement, pleasant, kind, flattering, not contradicting reality, corresponding to the situation and expectations of the partner. This is an exhaustive definition, every word of which is significant. And now a little caveat. Those who are good at giving compliments, better not read further text.

    What are compliments? Firstly, compliments are divided according to orientation to :
    - appearance
    - abilities (intelligence)
    - emotional sphere
    - volitional sphere
    - professional sphere
    - personality as a whole.

    Another way of classifying compliments - according to the form:
    - comparison
    - assessment
    - antithesis, compliment to another person, against the background of underestimation of oneself
    - indirect compliment
    - a veiled compliment
    - inversion (turning a disadvantage into a virtue)
    - a paradox
    - an embedded compliment
    - a complex compliment that includes several types.

    When you give a compliment, it is very desirable to analyze whether it is a compliment. For example, “Today you look surprisingly good ” or “ Well, finally you got a document that is impossible to find fault with, is not like before ”. These statements are, to say the least, dubious. That is, Before you want to say something to an employee, analyze your current emotions and feelings towards this person.

    Another very important point in the technique of applying rewards is the psychological type of the person who is being encouraged sh. Different people have different values. And what is valuable for one is, at best, empty for another. As an example consider the generalized socionic types: "motor", "controller", "analyzer" and "support".

    "MOTOR". In its pure form, it is quite rare, always noticeable, rather noisy, very creative. The type is exceptionally extraverted. The main disadvantage is that he can successfully do only what he is interested in. If it is not interesting, then at best it does it formally, or does not do it at all (under any pretexts). Big problems with teamwork and delegation of authority. And if the “motor” suddenly starts to slow down, which, thank God, happens infrequently and not for long, then you cannot find a stronger “brake”. These are mostly politicians, consultants, psychologists, artists, sellers, journalists. A lot of motors among the coaches.
    What are you afraid of?
    Lose public recognition.
    Benefits that can attract him:
    Prestige, recognition, flexibility, comfort and convenience.
    Needs leadership that:
    Will inspire them to greater and better results.
    Appreciates:
    Forces: “motor” chooses easy ways.
    He wants:
    Public recognition, freedom of expression, equality in relationships, freedom of action and the opportunity not to deal with trifles. Do not waste energy so that another person embodies his idea.

    "CONTROL" . Quite often, "motors" envy the "controllers", their ability to achieve goals, plan everything, cold mind, practicality. “Controllers”, and by the way, everyone else, “motors” usually annoy with their unpredictability, characteristic “motorism” and the fact that they easily and effortlessly solve seemingly insoluble problems (if they are interested). "Controllers" are always focused on the result. These are mainly masters, managers, leaders, coordinators, military leaders. The main drawback is the inability to build relationships, which is why they themselves often suffer a lot, harshness, sometimes turning into rudeness, distrust of others, impatience.
    What are you afraid of?
    That he will be bypassed.
    Benefits that can attract him:
    Save time, recognition, prestige, earn money, improve health.
    Needs leadership that:
    Will give him the freedom to do things his way.
    Appreciates:
    Time: you always find the “controller” busy and efficient.
    He wants:
    Power and prestige, prestige and struggle with circumstances, a wide range of activities, direct answers, freedom from outside control. New and varied activities.

    "ANALYZER" . The type is directly opposite to the "motor". The main advantage is the high quality of everything they do. The main drawback is that it is very difficult to get a finished product from them. Often doubt the quality and constantly improve. These are mainly accountants, bankers, scientists, inventors, entrepreneurs, travelers.
    What are you afraid of?
    Critics.
    Benefits that may attract him:
    Save money, get satisfaction from a job well (in his opinion) done.
    Needs leadership that:
    Will set the structure and boundaries or outline the path to follow.
    Appreciates:
    "Facade": the "analyzer" can't look bad or do something bad.
    He wants:
    Guarantees of reliability, compliance with the rules, a sense of security, encouragement, an established course of life not disturbed by sudden changes, attention to oneself.

    "SUPPORT" . Something similar to the "motor" in the ability to create relationships with people. Experts in the organization of cooperation. They often forget about themselves. Passionate, sentimental, vindictive. prone to fanaticism. God forbid hurt their values. Focused on justice and warm human relations. It is found among historians, poets, psychologists, doctors, lawyers, teachers, secretaries. Type exclusively introverted. The connection "controller" - "support" works very well.
    What are you afraid of?
    Lose a sense of security, confidence in the future, make a mistake.
    Benefits that can attract him:
    Recognition, comfort, opportunity to take care of.
    Needs leadership that:
    Will give details, specific plans and activities.
    Appreciates:
    Relationships: friendship means a lot to “support”.
    He wants:
    Feeling safe, keeping the status quo and not changing anything so that the work stays outside family life, sincere approval, the smooth running of life, the opportunity to participate in the lives of employees, help them solve problems.

    Thus, we have identified the possible buttons and levers of influence on employees. When exposed (whether punished or rewarded), we very often focus on ourselves. And what would I like to receive as a reward, or what would be a punishment for me?
    Only a reasonable combination of punishments and rewards makes it possible to avoid failures in the activities of the company (punishment) and move forward and develop (encouragement).

    Source: Business Development League

    NATO Review - Hybrid Warfare: New Threats, Challenges and 'Trust' as an Antidote

    The publications of NATO Review are not the official position or policy of NATO or member states.
    The mission of NATO Review is to inform and encourage discussion of security issues. The authors of the articles express their personal opinion.

    • Arsalan Bilal
    • November 30, 2021

    It can be argued that the nature of international security and conflict remains the same. States continue to be embroiled in zero-sum military and economic rivalries, military conflicts still seem inevitable, security dilemmas continue to arise and balancing is constantly required, and so on. and so on. However, the modus operandi (mode of action) is not the same as before. Conflicts are fought in new, innovative and radically different ways. With the advent of modern hybrid warfare, it is less and less about lethal or physical force.

    It is important to note that the concept of hybrid warfare may not be all that new. Many experts claim that it is as old as war. However, the concept has gained wider popularity and relevance in recent years as states use non-state actors and information technology to subdue their adversaries during or, more importantly, in the absence of direct armed conflict.

    Russian special forces in the Crimea. They are sometimes called "little green men"; they were one of the offensive "columns" that led to Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea to Ukraine. @Global Security Review

    Before delving into the concept, it is important to emphasize that in the modern era, hybrid warfare has become especially popular in political debates after two important developments. First, in 2005, two U.S. military officials wrote about the "rise of hybrid warfare" and emphasized the combination of conventional and unconventional strategies, methods, and tactics in modern warfare, as well as the psychological and information aspects of contemporary conflicts. Second, in 2014, Russia took over Crimea and achieved its goals through a mixture of denied presence special forces, local armed players, economic power, disinformation, and skillful exploitation of Ukraine's socio-political polarization.

    Hybrid warfare remains a controversial concept, and there is no generally accepted definition of hybrid warfare. It has been heavily criticized for its lack of conceptual clarity, for being just a catchphrase or buzzword, and for bringing nothing new to the political debate. Nevertheless, thanks to this concept, one can get a good understanding of current and future defense and security issues.

    In simple words, hybrid warfare means the interaction or combination of conventional and non-traditional instruments of force and sabotage. There is a synchronized mixture of these tools or means to take advantage of the opponent's vulnerabilities and achieve a synergistic effect.

    Kinetic means and non-kinetic methods are mixed in order to optimally inflict maximum damage on a belligerent state. Moreover, there are two characteristic features of hybrid warfare. First, the dividing line between war and peace is not clearly visible. This means that it is difficult to recognize the threshold of war. War becomes indistinguishable, and it is difficult to materialize it.

    Hybrid warfare below the threshold of war or outright open violence pays dividends, although it is simpler, cheaper, and less risky than kinetic operations. It is much easier to pay for and orchestrate disinformation with non-state actors than to send tanks into another country's territory or send fighter jets into its airspace. The costs and risks are much less, and the damage can be real. At the same time, the main question is: is it possible to wage war at all without direct combat or physical clashes? Since hybrid warfare has infiltrated interstate conflicts, this question can be answered in the affirmative. It is still closely related to the philosophy of war. As the ancient military strategist Sun Tzu said, the highest military art is to subdue the enemy without a fight.

    The second hallmark of hybrid warfare has to do with ambiguity and accountability. In hybrid attacks, as a rule, there is a lot of ambiguity. Hybrid players deliberately create and amplify ambiguity so that it is difficult to establish responsibility and respond. In other words, the country that is being struck is either unable to detect a hybrid attack or is unable to determine which state is responsible for launching or sponsoring that strike. The actor of hybrid warfare takes advantage of thresholds for identification and attribution of responsibility, and thus it is difficult for a state that has become the target of hybrid actions to develop political and strategic responses.

    Recent studies of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq show that full-scale wars can be very costly in terms of human, economic, and social and political losses, even if the forces and means of the conflicting parties or adversaries are not comparable. Due to rapid technological progress and the rise of asymmetric warfare, a full-scale war may not be effective even if the enemy has fewer resources and power. Thus, winning may not be easy at all.

    Recent studies of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq show that full-scale wars can be very costly in terms of human, economic, and social and political losses, even if the forces and means of the conflicting parties or adversaries are not comparable. Due to rapid technological progress and the rise of asymmetric warfare, a full-scale war may not be effective even if the enemy has fewer resources and power. Photo: © The Journalist's Review

    It's getting more costly to fight, and new tools are being added to states all the time, so you might not want to fight all-out wars anymore. This does not mean that conflicts will subside; it means that the dynamics of the war is changing. It is in this context that states are increasingly resorting to hybrid warfare below the threshold of armed conflict in pursuit of their zero-sum security goals. In short, the overall security environment is changing radically, although the nature of the conflicts remains the same.

    As the outstanding military strategist Clausewitz said: "War is nothing but the continuation of politics by other means." Perhaps this is still true, but with the advent of modern hybrid warfare, the means of warfare have become much greater. This means that the politics-war matrix has become even more complex as the dynamics of war are constantly changing. From now on, war means a whole range of possibilities. Sometimes this involves kinetic operations along with the use of non-state actors. Sometimes cyberattacks against critical infrastructure can be carried out in parallel with disinformation campaigns. There are many ways, as well as opportunities to combine them or use them in parallel.

    Due to hybrid warfare, the dynamics of the conflict become darker, not only because there is a wide and growing toolbox for undermining the enemy, but also because it becomes possible to deprive him of security on two fronts at the same time. It also ties in with the overall goals of hybrid warfare. In terms of potential, the political, military, economic, social, information and infrastructure vulnerabilities of the attacked state are used to such an extent that the state is tangibly and functionally weakened.

    The second front, on which the security of the state is being undermined, is ideological in nature and is associated with the legitimacy of the state. As noted in the report of the Norwegian Development Agency, “the legitimacy of the state is the very basis of the relationship between the state and society, the rationale for the authority of the state.” Legitimacy is the stronghold and symbol of the power of the state.

    In an effort to undermine the social contract that binds the state and its constituent parts into a single whole, the subject of a hybrid war is trying to undermine trust between state institutions and people. As a result, the state loses its legitimacy, which in the modern age is largely a function of public confidence, and in turn loses its ability to act as a Leviathan in the domestic sphere. Thus, as a result of hybrid attacks, both the ideological foundations of the state and its ability to function normally are damaged.

    Given the complex nature and dynamics of hybrid warfare, experts have proposed a range of political and strategic responses. Among them are thorough measures to identify, contain, counter and respond to hybrid threats. However, due to the information factor and the fact that the cognitive and social spheres are becoming the cornerstone of hybrid warfare, any solutions that do not include confidence-building measures are unlikely to offer effective antidotes.

    We have already said that hybrid warfare is often conducted below the traditional war threshold. At the same time, the role of the civilian population comes to the fore: how it thinks and acts in relation to the state. Modern digital and social media platforms allow the subjects of hybrid warfare to quite easily influence the civilian population to the detriment of the enemy state. A good example of this are Russian anti-Western disinformation campaigns on the Internet, some of which are subtle but very serious.

    Modern digital and social media platforms allow the subjects of hybrid warfare to quite easily influence the role of the civilian population, how it thinks and acts in relation to the state. Photo © Brookings Institution

    As mentioned earlier, without people, the state is soft. The people are the source of the legitimacy and strength of the state. This primarily applies to countries with a democratic form of government. If you drive a wedge between the state and the people, you can create conditions for the collapse of this state. Namely, this is what the actions of the subject of a hybrid war are aimed at until the threshold of war.

    Hybrid threats often target the vulnerable sides of the target state or interstate political communities. The goal is to use them until they become so deep that they lead to the creation or exacerbation of polarization at the national and international level. The result is a dangerous emasculation of the core values ​​of coexistence, harmony and pluralism within and between democratic societies, as well as the ability of political leadership to make decisions. Ultimately, hybrid threats undermine trust.

    This is why confidence-building should be seen as the main barrier against hybrid threats, especially those aimed at undermining democratic states and forms of government. Moreover, trust is a sine qua non condition for political or strategic responses to hybrid threats to bear fruit. In other words, without trust, nothing will work and nothing will give the desired results.

    Trust should not be understood as a monosyllabic or one-dimensional phenomenon. It is required at several levels and in many areas. In particular, in order for the decisions of governments to be carried out, people must trust the organs of the state. It is alarming that in many Western countries, as the facts show, the institutions of the state are losing their authority due to a decrease in public confidence. In the US, public confidence has dropped from 73 percent in the 1950s to 24 percent in 2021. Similarly, since the 1970s, the level of trust in Western Europe has been gradually declining.

    It is not only the public's trust in the state that is important. It is also important that people trust each other. The surge of populism in different parts of the world, in particular in Western countries, is a symptom of the growing socio-political polarization of political communities. As a result, not only harmony within society is threatened, but also the social and political structure of the community, which makes it difficult to develop consensus in decision-making at all levels.

    Building and restoring confidence remains critical to building strong resilience in the face of hybrid threats that pose an acute threat to the security of the state and society. Building trust within and between communities should be the main goal of efforts to neutralize hybrid warfare and hybrid threats. This requires ongoing structural and political work to strengthen the relationship between the state and the people, based on meaningful transparency, accountability and inclusiveness.

    Learn more