One of the most pressing issues in international politics today is the steady escalation of maritime security threats, particularly in contested waters such as the South China Sea or waters close to conflict ridden regions such as the Red Sea and Strait of Hormuz. States often justify their actions in these waters as matters of strategic necessity or the protection of legitimate maritime claims, yet the outcomes on the ground tend to be far more complex. Grey zone tactics and hybrid warfare, precisely because they operate below the threshold of open conflict, allow states to pursue their interests while evading the accountability that typically accompanies overt military action. Over time, this has exacted a real cost: shifting regional power balances, deepening disputes between neighbouring states, and, on occasion, dangerous confrontations between naval and coast guard vessels that risk escalating further. What makes these tactics particularly difficult to address is their inherent ambiguity and the deniability built into them which makes it increasingly difficult to distinguish legitimate deterrence from coercion. This raises pressing questions regarding freedom of navigation, sovereignty over maritime zones, and whether the current international order is equipped to respond effectively. Ultimately, these disputes serve as a reminder that actions taken just short of war can carry consequences no less serious, not only for regional stability, but also for international law and affected communities.