Lateral warfare will impact almost everyone within a destabilized society through multiple pressures designed to change the power paradigm and alter existing boundaries. It may not even involve military or violent means, but its goal is to overturn existing boundaries and to alter the existing power paradigm.
Basically, in a lateral warfare situation, a society is in a constant state of war within itself. Everything from family relationships to banking and from entertainment to social interactions is weaponized or is used to distinguish between the in-group and the out-group.
Violence or military actions may or may not be the end result. A society with plenty of noise, dirty tricks, renouncements of people, and polarization in every arena, where everything becomes a political brawl, is in the throes of lateral warfare. This is qualified by the standard that its insurgents mean to change the power paradigm and/or boundaries within society.
“Lateral pressure” refers to any tendency (or propensity) of individuals and societies to expand their activities and exert influence and control beyond their established boundaries, whether for economic, political, military, scientific, religious, or other purposes, according to a Wikipedia entry.
Lateral warfare is a form of warfare that may be quite indirect, subversive, and covert but that is designed to excert real influence beyond the boundaries normally imposed on the insurgents, be they armed or not. Unlike asymmetric warfare, which is basically two very unevenly matched opponents where one use unconventional means to equalize the fight, lateral warfare may not even necessarily involve any apparent military or violent activity.
The concept of lateral warfare is difficult to grasp and may be difficult to implement by insurgents against an established order because its implementation as a strategy is so multi-faceted and multi-dimensional. Lateral warfare will likely begin to occur as insurgent groups, we are using insurgent for any group desiring to upset or change the established order and boundaries, become more sophisticated about the multiplicity of cyber, sociocultural, economic, and information channels available for them to engage in boundary-moving activities.
Lateral warfare may eventually involve actual violence, but it may also never use violence. The key thing is the out-group to the power-holders and favored groups is seeking deliberately, through some entity or entities guided by its cause, to change the power paradigm and change the boundaries.
Creating real loss to the opponent and rewarding adherants with benefits are the key aspects of lateral warfare. If exposing a key leader or damaging a brand will hurt the opponents and if generating popular financial backing for a business deemed beneficial to the insurgents will reward adherants, the net effect is the number and socioeconomic power level of the insurgents grows at the expense of the holders of dominant power.
The key thing about lateral warfare is that it is viewed as an existential battle by its practitioners and their goal is to either alter the boundaries of society or to completely overturn the existing power paradigm. This is not mere political opposition.
Cyber warfare, social and economic pressure, information and misinformation campaigns, political activism, and perhaps even some forms of violence, from rioting to targeted acts, may typify this type of warfare. It is especially more likely to occur when the power holders are out of touch with a society that has collectively lost its moral compass or organic cohesiveness.
There are no front lines and nor are purely military or violent actions the limits. Every aspect of human society that can be influenced through pressure to bend to the will of the insurgents becomes the battlefield and every single individual and their life becomes the field of action.
Lateral warfare is not “the future of warfare”, it is, however, within the realm of future forms and methods of warfare in keeping with the information age. Increasingly, within societies where there is a lack of a moral compass or organic cohesiveness and where the power paradigm is typified by rulers who are out of touch with the people, individuals become either warriors on one side or somehow targets for influence and control.
