Working paper examines the EU's governance of hybrid threats, indicating a shift towards federalization and legal challenges.
This working paper examines the European Union's response to hybrid threats — including disinformation, cyber-attacks, foreign investment screening, border instrumentalization, and lawfare — as an act of ontological security management. Drawing on Mitzen's ontological security theory, Loewenstein–Müller militant democracy scholarship, and EU legal cartography (Lonardo, Martinico), the paper argues that the EU's counter-hybrid governance simultaneously generates a quiet federalization of EU competences through Articles 114, 215, 352, 42(7) TFEU and Article 29 TEU, and produces systemic rule-of-law tensions with proportionality, judicial oversight, and democratic accountability. The paper analyses five hybrid-threat instruments across three registers — ontological identity narration, legal competence shift, and rule-of-law tension — and concludes that the EU faces a structural militant liberalism paradox: the more robustly it secures its ontological self, the more it risks transforming the liberal constitutional order it claims to protect. Published as a MISSHA Working Paper, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, June 2026. AI-Assisted Drafting Disclosure: This paper was drafted with AI writing assistance (structural editing and language refinement). All arguments, interpretations, evidence selection, and scholarly judgements are entirely the author's own.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bibhu Kalyan Pradhan (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: