As drones of unknown origin have been forcing the closures of airports in different parts of Europe, and the way we share information is under attack, it is obvious that the battlefield has changed.
Hybrid threats do not announce themselves as loud missiles or tanks. They slowly and quietly penetrate our public life — through hacked hashtags, anonymous blogs, diaspora chat groups and algorithmic feeds. Their objective is not to take over the land but to gradually erode trust, to make citizens doubt their institutions, suspect their neighbours, and become tired of uncertainty.
Canada’s openness and diversity are our weapons and, at the same time, our Achilles heel. Russia and China in particular have become proficient in testing and exploiting our social fault lines. They spread lies about pipelines in Alberta, language politics in Quebec or Indigenous reconciliation. They do this to sow cynicism in the electoral process and public health initiatives, and to lower trust in Canadian alliances such as NATO and NORAD. They also directly target diaspora communities through various means, including online threats and surveillance on Canadian soil.
This is the new front line. Hybrid war is less about geography than perception. Its success depends on a population that is too exhausted or divided to fight back. The main question for Canada is not about the strength of our cyber defences, but about citizens’ ability to perform under such circumstances.
It’s tempting to treat resilience as a technical solution: better firewalls, quicker fact-checking, more efficient government communications. All these things are good, but they miss the tough part.
Resilience is not only about recognizing lies; it’s about remaining composed and confident when the information environment seems to be in crisis. It’s about having different opinions without separating, understanding complexity without falling into conspiracy theories, and continuing to trust our institutions when they are being attacked.
We have reason to be hopeful. Canada is leading the G7’s Rapid Response Mechanism to detect foreign interference. The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security helps citizens recognize manipulation. Civil society groups have developed ways to monitor the spread of hostile narratives.Â
However, the most significant resilience is always away from Ottawa. It is when Indigenous NGOs revive culture as a means of communication, when immigrant communities establish trustworthy sources in different languages, or when local broadcasters and talk show hosts confront misinformation with the trust that no federal press release can replicate. Trust is seldom built at the national level; it develops through relationships and voices that people are familiar with.
The dilemmas in this work are real. Governments are in a dilemma over the amount of information they should share without exposing themselves to risks. They are pressured to act against harmful content while not crossing into censorship. Citizens are also fatigued — they are tired of constantly being told to stay vigilant after years of pandemic warnings and geopolitical crises. Furthermore, Canada’s multiple levels of government make quick coordination a challenge.
The biggest mistake, though, would be to consider resilience as a narrative control project. This way, trust is lost. Rather, our aim should be to enable Canadians to deal with contested information in a way that is confident and clear.
None of this is happening in a vacuum, but against a rapidly changing geopolitical backdrop. For years, Canada could rely on the assumption that the U.S. would take the lead in tackling foreign interference, disinformation and malign influence. But now, Washington appears confused and possibly retreating on this issue. The polarization of U.S. politics has made American society more vulnerable to hybrid threats and American leadership in the world less predictable. In this way, Canada has both exposure and opportunity.
We should not depend solely on the U.S. to lead the way or take the blows. First, we need to enhance our resilience here at home; second, we can be more intentional in working with allies who share our values.
Canadians can win the hybrid war if they can avoid division, stay true to democratic values and trust each other. This is our strongest shield. An informed public is less likely to be confused, manipulated or destroyed.
Hybrid threats are fundamentally about undermining trust and belonging. Canada’s response should be to make both harder to achieve.
In a world where the battle lines are soft, our national security depends not only on our spy service or cyber weapons but on the ordinary trust of people who belong, trust and debate in good faith. If we can do that, the destructive work of the enemies will find very little space to grow.
Well said! I would liked to have seen a ‘share’ button.