← Research library
05Collaborative national-security report2024

Hybrid warfare and disinformation in the Canadian context

A multidisciplinary threat, vulnerability, and risk assessment that moves from contested definitions to practical recommendations for prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery.

University of Ottawa

01 / Inquiry

The question beneath the paper

How should Canada understand and respond to the overlapping risks of hybrid warfare and disinformation?

The report first tests the usefulness and limits of the terms 'hybrid warfare' and 'disinformation' rather than treating either as self-explanatory.

It then maps intent, capability, vulnerability, likelihood, and consequence before organizing recommendations through a prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery framework.

Because these threats operate across cyber, political, economic, and social systems, an effective response must combine technical defence, institutional readiness, public resilience, international cooperation, and credible recovery planning.

02 / Approach

How the argument was built

Methods

  • Threat and risk assessment
  • Vulnerability analysis
  • Policy synthesis
  • Recommendation design

Analytical lenses

  • National security
  • Disinformation
  • Cyber resilience
  • Democratic trust

Geographic scope

  • Canada

03 / Findings

What the analysis brings into focus

  1. 01

    The threat is cross-system

    Cyberattacks, espionage, foreign interference, and manipulated information can reinforce one another; no single-agency response is sufficient.

  2. 02

    Resilience is partly social

    Media literacy, transparent public communication, and trusted institutions are security capabilities alongside technical cyber defences.

  3. 03

    Recovery needs a real plan

    The report argues for clearer incident protocols, evidence preservation, personnel and systems review, mental-health support, and timely public communication after an event.

04 / Portfolio perspective

What this work demonstrates

The report's value lies in joining conceptual discipline to operational thinking. It asks not only whether a threat is likely, but what assets are vulnerable, how consequences compound, and what a usable response would require across government and society.

Co-authored with Annabel Zhu, Darya Makiyenko, and Colin Kaduck.

05 / Source & evidence boundary

The work in its original context

This was a jointly authored report. The portfolio summarizes its scope and analytical framework while keeping the complete original off the public site in respect of the other authors' interests.

Summary available publiclyComplete report withheld from public access.Private source