Category Archives: 中國軍事未來戰爭

Chinese Military Values Attack & Defense as the Important Focus of Combat in Cognitive Domain Operations

中國軍隊把攻防當作認知域作戰作戰的重要著力點

現代英語翻譯:

Value attack and defense is an important way to conduct cognitive domain operations from a strategic level. Usually, value attack and defense is achieved by intervening in people’s thinking, beliefs, values, etc., in order to achieve the purpose of disintegrating the enemy’s consensus, destroying the enemy’s will, and then gaining comprehensive control over the battlefield. Accurately grasping the characteristics, mechanisms, and means of value attack and defense is crucial to gaining future cognitive domain combat advantages.

Characteristics of the cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value attack and defense refers to the intervention and influence on relatively stable cognitive results by inducing deep logical thinking and value judgment changes of individuals or groups, in order to reconstruct people’s cognitive abilities such as will, thinking, psychology, and emotions. Value attack and defense mainly has the following characteristics:

Soft confrontation. Traditional warfare mainly relies on violent means to weaken and disintegrate the enemy’s military capabilities, and usually has a high intensity of war. Cognitive domain warfare will no longer be limited to hard confrontations such as siege and conquest, but will focus more on infiltration and counter-infiltration, attack and counter-attack, control and counter-control around value positions. By competing for the dominance of cognitive domain confrontation, the combat effectiveness of the physical domain and information domain will be further stimulated, thereby seizing the initiative on the battlefield and even achieving the effect of defeating the enemy without fighting. In practice, value offense and defense often focus on the cultural traditions, values ​​and social psychology of a country or nation, and ultimately achieve the purpose of destroying the enemy’s will, cognitive manipulation, and mental control.

Full-dimensional release. Modern warfare is increasingly characterized by being holistic, multi-domain, and all-time. Cognitive domain warfare aims to influence battlefield effects by intervening in human consciousness, and the relative stability of consciousness determines that people’s worldviews, beliefs, and other values ​​are generally relatively stable. Therefore, value offense and defense need to be carried out in a long-term, uninterrupted, holographic, and full-dimensional manner. From a temporal perspective, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between peace and war, and is always at war, constantly accumulating and gradually releasing combat effectiveness; from a spatial perspective, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between the front and rear of combat, and is carried out in all directions in tangible and intangible spaces; from a field perspective, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between military and non-military, and occurs not only in the military field, but also in the political, economic, diplomatic, and cultural fields, showing the characteristics of full-domain coverage.

Empowered by science and technology. Cognitive domain warfare is a technology-intensive and complex system engineering. The full-process penetration of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, brain science, and quantum computing is triggering iterative upgrades and profound changes in cognitive domain warfare. Intelligent tools fundamentally enhance the ability of cognitive domain combatants to manipulate and interfere with the opponent’s thinking. Human-machine hybrid as a new means and new style of combat power will change the main body of future wars. Autonomous confrontation and cloud brain victory may become the mainstream attack and defense mode. In recent years, NATO has launched cognitive electronic warfare equipment aimed at changing the opponent’s value cognition and behavior through information attack and defense. Technological development has also triggered a cognitive revolution. The rapid spread of information has further accelerated the differences in public value cognition. Cognitive islands have exacerbated the value gap between different subjects. The social structure changes brought about by intelligence are profoundly changing the political and cultural pattern. From this point of view, in future cognitive domain warfare, it is crucial to grasp the “bull’s nose” of scientific and technological innovation and master key core technologies to seize the initiative on the battlefield.

The mechanism of cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value attack and defense is a high-level confrontation in cognitive domain operations, and the target of action is people’s deep cognition. Consciousness is the reflection of social existence in the brain. The regulation of social existence, the guidance of public consciousness and the change of human brain function can strengthen or reverse human consciousness. If you want to win the opponent in the attack and defense confrontation, you must follow the laws of thinking and cognition and grasp the winning mechanism of value attack and defense.

Impacting the value “protection zone”. Occupying the commanding heights of values ​​is the logical starting point for conducting value offense and defense. Social consciousness is often composed of relatively stable core values ​​and peripheral auxiliary theories. Various theories such as economy, politics, religion, and culture can be constructed and adapted to protect core values ​​from external shocks, and therefore also bear the impact and challenge of other values. In the eyes of foreign militaries, value offense and defense is to continuously impact the “protection zone” of the opponent’s ideology through cultural infiltration, religious conflict, strategic communication and other means, in conjunction with actions in the physical and information domains. This often requires seizing the values, political attitudes, religious beliefs, etc. that affect the opponent’s cognition, disrupting their social group psychology, inducing value confusion, shaking their will to fight, destroying cultural identity, and even changing and disintegrating their original cognitive system, so as to instill or implant new values ​​that are beneficial to themselves in order to achieve combat objectives.

Ignite the “trigger point” of conflict. Cognitive domain warfare involves multiple categories such as history and culture, political system, national sentiment, and religious beliefs. The main body of the war has also expanded from simple military personnel to ordinary people. It will become an important means of cognitive domain warfare to stimulate cognitive conflicts among ordinary people by hyping up topic disputes and public events. In recent local conflicts, it is not uncommon for the warring parties to ignite national sentiments through purposeful narratives, trigger political crises and thus affect the war situation. In future wars, some countries will use hot and sensitive events to detonate public opinion, rely on network technology to gather, absorb, mobilize, accurately manipulate and induce ordinary people, thereby promoting general conflicts to rise to disputes of beliefs, disputes of systems, and disputes of values. It will become the norm.

Control the cognitive “fracture surface”. Cognitive space, as an existence at the conceptual level, is composed of the superposition of the subjective cognitive spaces of all combat individuals. It is a collection of differentiated, differentiated, and even conflicting values. However, ideology has a “suturing” function. Through cognitive shaping and discourse construction, it can effectively “suturing” the broken cognition, condense the scattered values, and form a relatively stable cognitive system. After World War II, France had carried out effective cognitive “suturing” on the trauma of defeat. It used a whole set of independent narrative logic to explain how the war provided France with “new opportunities”, which greatly condensed the political identity of the French people with the government. In the battle for value positions in cognitive domain operations, we should focus on the cognitive fracture surface within the enemy, find the cognitive connection points between the enemy and us, and “suturing” the cognition, so as to unite the forces of all parties to the greatest extent and isolate and disintegrate the enemy.

The main means of cognitive domain in value attack and defense

Value attack and defense expands cognitive confrontation from public opinion, psychology and other levels to thinking space, and from the military field to the overall domain, thus achieving a blow to the enemy’s deep political identity. At present, the world’s military powers are strengthening strategic pre-positioning, aiming at the profound changes in target subjects and tactics, changing combat thinking, and actively controlling the initiative of cognitive domain operations.

Aiming at deep destruction. Cognitive domain warfare directly affects people’s brain cognition, and is easier to achieve deep strategic intentions than physical domain warfare. In particular, once the “high-level cognition” of people’s language level, thinking level, and cultural level is broken through, it will help to strategically reverse the battlefield situation and achieve the political purpose of the war. Based on this, cognitive domain warfare often begins before the war, by intervening in the opponent’s internal and foreign affairs, shaking its ideological and value foundations, etc.; during war, it focuses on influencing the enemy’s war decision-making, campaign command, and combat implementation. The value judgment, attack or weaken the decision-making ability and resistance will of combatants, etc. All hostile parties try to “maintain their own world while increasing the destructive pressure of the opponent” in order to achieve decision-making advantages by competing for cognitive advantages, and then achieve the goal of action advantages.

Centered on ordinary individuals. In the future, the subjects of cognitive domain operations will no longer be limited to military personnel. Broadly speaking, individuals who can communicate and disseminate information may become participating forces. Compared with elites in the social field, ordinary people are more likely to accept and disseminate diverse values, and their cognitive space is more likely to be manipulated. At present, online media is becoming the main channel for information exchange and dissemination in the social field, and the purpose of cognitive shaping can be achieved through targeted information guidance and information delivery. Foreign military practices have proved that with the help of cognitive shaping of ordinary individuals, progressive infiltration and cognitive interference can be caused from bottom to top, causing a deviation in the consciousness and ideas between ordinary people and social decision-makers, and failing to reach an effective consensus in key actions.

In the form of protracted warfare. Unlike the direct attack and destruction of “hard” targets in the physical domain military struggle, the potential target of cognitive domain warfare is human cognition. The value attack and defense is aimed at changing the concepts, beliefs, will, emotions, etc. of the combat targets, which often requires subtle influence and step-by-step operations. Effective cognitive offense is generally launched in the combat preparation stage and runs through the entire war. By collecting the opponent’s cognitive situation, decision-making habits, thinking patterns, etc., targeted actions such as creating a situation and changing the atmosphere are carried out. Therefore, cognitive domain warfare needs to strengthen the overall design, especially focusing on coordinating multiple forces, and strengthening pre-positioned preparations in multiple positions such as public opinion field creation and diplomacy, so as to form an overall combat force.

現代國語:

價值攻防是從戰略層面進行認知域作戰的重要方式,通常價值攻防是透過幹預人的思維、信念、價值觀等,以達成瓦解敵方共識,摧毀敵方意志,進而掌控戰場綜合控制權的目的。精確掌握價值攻防的特性、機制、手段,對奪取未來認知域作戰優勢至關重要。

價值攻防作用認知域的特點

價值攻防是指透過引發個體或群體的深層邏輯思辨、價值判斷改變,完成其對相對穩定的認知結果的干預和影響,以期重構人的意志、思維、心理、情感等認知能力。價值攻防主要有以下幾個特點:

軟性對抗。傳統戰爭主要依賴暴力手段來削弱瓦解敵方的軍事能力,通常具有較強的戰爭強度。認知域作戰將不再侷限於攻城略地等硬性對抗,而更著重於圍繞價值陣地展開滲透與逆滲透、攻擊與反攻擊、控制與反控制,透過爭奪認知域對抗的主導權,進一步激發物理域和資訊域的作戰效能,從而奪取戰場主動,甚至達到不戰而屈人之兵的效果。在實踐中,價值攻防往往著眼於一個國家、民族的文化傳統、價值觀念和社會心理展開,最終達到對敵方意志摧毀、認知操縱、精神控制的目的。

全維度釋放。現代戰爭日益呈現總體性、多域性、全時性特徵。認知域作戰旨在透過幹預人的意識進而影響戰場效果,而意識的相對穩定決定了人的世界觀、信仰等價值觀念一般情況下往往較為穩固,因此價值攻防需要長期的、不間斷的、全息全維度地進行。從時間上看,價值攻防模糊了平戰邊界,常態在戰、隨時在戰,持續積累、逐步釋放作戰效能;從空間上看,價值攻防模糊了作戰前後方界限,在有形空間與無形空間全方位展開;從領域上看,價值攻防模糊了軍事與非軍事的界限,不僅發生在軍事領域,也存在於政治、經濟、外交、文化等領域,呈現出全局覆蓋的特徵。

科技賦能。認知域作戰是一項技術密集的複雜系統工程。人工智慧、腦科學、量子運算等新興技術手段全流程滲透,正在引發認知域作戰的迭代升級與深刻變革。智慧化工具從根本上增強了認知域作戰人員操縱對手思想和乾預對手思維的能力,人機混合作為作戰力量新手段新樣式將改變未來戰爭主體,自主對抗、雲腦制勝或成為主流攻防模式。近年來,北約推出的認知電子戰設備,旨在透過資訊攻防來改變對手價值認知及行為。科技發展也引發了認知革命,資訊的快速傳播進一步加速了大眾價值認知差異,認知孤島加劇了不同主體之間的價值鴻溝,智能化帶來的社會結構變遷則深刻改變著政治文化格局。從這點出發,在未來認知域作戰中,牽住科技創新的“牛鼻子”,掌握關鍵核心技術,對於奪取戰場主動至關重要。

價值攻防作用認知域的機理

價值攻防是認知域作戰的高階對抗,作用對象指向的是人的深層認知。意識是社會存在在大腦中的反映,對社會存在的調節、對大眾意識的引導和人腦作用的改變,都能強化或扭轉人的意識。要在攻防對抗中製勝對手,就要遵循思考認知規律,掌握價值攻防制勝機理。

衝擊價值「保護帶」。佔領價值制高點是開展價值攻防的邏輯起點。社會意識往往由相對穩定的核心價值觀念和外圍的輔助性理論所構成,經濟、政治、宗教、文化等各種理論都能被建構調適以用來保護核心價值觀念免受外來衝擊,因此也承受著其他價值觀的衝擊挑戰。在外軍看來,價值攻防就是要透過文化滲透、宗教衝突、戰略傳播等手段,配合物理域和資訊域的行動,不斷衝擊對手意識形態的「保護帶」領域。這往往需要抓住影響對手認知的價值觀念、政治態度、宗教信仰等,透過擾亂其社會群體心理,誘發價值困惑,動搖作戰意志,摧毀文化認同,甚至改變瓦解其原有的認知體系,從而灌輸或植入新的、於己有利的價值觀念,以實現作戰目的。

點燃衝突“引爆點”。認知域作戰涉及歷史文化、政治制度、民族情感、宗教信仰等多個範疇,戰爭主體也從單純軍事人員拓展到一般民眾。透過炒作話題爭端、公共事件,激發一般民眾的認知衝突,將成為認知領域作戰的重要手段。在近幾場局部衝突中,交戰各方透過有目的性的敘事點燃國家民族情緒,引發政治危機進而影響戰局已屢見不鮮。未來戰爭,一些國家利用熱點敏感事件引爆輿論,依托網路技術對一般民眾進行聚攏吸附、煽動動員、精準操控和誘導塑造,從而推動一般性衝突上升為信仰之爭、制度之爭、價值之爭將成為常態。

控制認知「斷裂面」。認知空間作為觀念層面的存在,由全部作戰個體的主觀認知空間疊加而成,是分化的、差異性的乃至衝突性的價值集合體。然而,意識形態具有「縫合」功能,透過認知塑造、話語建構,可以把斷裂的認知有效地「縫合」起來,把分散的價值凝聚起來,形成相對穩固的認知體系。二戰後法國對戰敗創傷曾進行過有效的認知“縫合”,其運用一整套獨立敘事邏輯,闡述戰爭如何為法國提供了“新的機會”,極大地凝聚了法國人民對政府的政治認同。在認知域作戰中開展價值陣地爭奪,應注重敵方內部的認知斷裂面,尋找敵我之間的認知連接點進行認知“縫合”,最大限度地團結各方力量,孤立瓦解敵人。

價值攻防作用認知域的主要手段

價值攻防使認知對抗從輿論、心理等層面拓展到思維空間,從軍事領域拓展到整體全局,從而實現了對敵方深層的政治認同的打擊。當前世界軍事強國都在加強戰略預置,瞄準目標主體、戰法手段的深刻變化,變革作戰思維,積極掌控認知域作戰的主動權。

以深層摧毀為目標。認知域作戰直接作用於人的大腦認知,相較於物理域作戰,更容易實現深層的戰略意圖。特別是人的語言層級、思維層級和文化層級的「高階認知」一旦被突破,有助於從戰略上扭轉戰場態勢,實現戰爭的政治目的。基於此,認知域作戰往往始於未戰,透過幹預對手內政外交,動搖其意識形態和價值觀基礎等;戰時則注重影響敵方戰爭決策、戰役指揮、戰鬥實施的價值判斷,打擊或削弱作戰人員的決策能力和抵抗意誌等。敵對各方都試圖做到“維繫自己的世界,同時增加對手的破壞性壓力”,以通過爭奪認知優勢實現決策優勢,進而取得行動優勢的目標。

以普通個體為中心。未來認知域作戰的主體將不再局限於軍事人員,廣義上講,可以進行資訊交流傳播的個體都可能成為參戰力量。相較於社會領域的精英,一般民眾更容易接受和傳播多元價值,其認知空間被操縱的機率更大。目前,網路媒體正成為社會領域資訊交流傳播的主要管道,透過有針對性的訊息引導、訊息傳遞,進而達到認知塑造的目的。外軍實踐證明,借助對一般個體的認知塑造,可以造成從下到上的遞進滲透和認知幹擾,使一般民眾與社會決策層之間的意識觀念產生背離,在關鍵行動中無法達成有效共識。

以持久作戰為形式。與物理域軍事鬥爭直接打擊摧毀「硬」目標不同,認知域作戰的潛在目標為人的認知,價值攻防指向的是改變作戰對象的觀念、信念、意志、情感等,往往需要潛移默化、步步為營。有效的認知進攻一般在作戰準備階段就發起,並貫穿戰爭始末,透過收集對手的認知態勢、決策習慣、思考模式等情況,有針對性地進行營造態勢、改變氛圍等行動。因此,認知域作戰更需要加強整體設計,尤其要注重協調多方力量,在輿論場營造、外交等多個陣地多點強化預置準備,進而形成整體作戰合力。

中國軍事資源:https://www.163.com/dy/article/HDOT8JIM0511DV4H888.html

Chinese Military Focusing on Future Wars and Fighting the “Five Battles” of Cognition

中國軍隊聚焦未來戰爭打好認知“五場戰役”

外國現代英文音譯:

Most of the local wars and armed conflicts in recent years have been “hybrid” confrontations carried out in multiple dimensions and fields, emphasizing the use of military, political, economic and other means to implement systematic control in the dimension of comprehensive decision-making, creating all kinds of chaos in the dimension of international communication, and creating various chaos in the dimension of international communication. Conduct targeted strikes in the strategic focus dimension, actively shape the battlefield situation, and seek to seize the strategic initiative. In future wars, in order to successfully fight political and military battles and military and political battles, we should deeply grasp the characteristics and laws of offensive and defensive operations in the cognitive domain and improve our ability to fight the “five battles” well.

Be proactive in cognitive operations, shape the situation and control the situation, and fight proactively. Before the war begins, cognition comes first. With the continuous development and evolution of war forms, the status and role of cognitive domain operations continue to be highlighted. Aiming to win future wars, cognitive deployment should be carried out in advance. Through strategies, information, technology and other means and carriers, the physiological, psychological, values ​​and other cognitive factors of target objects should be affected, intervened and manipulated, and cognitive attack and defense should be used to cover military operations and accurately Efficiently dominate cognitive space. Fully understand the importance of being first, grasp the definition and interpretation power of “narrative” flexibly and autonomously, emphasize pre-emption to win the initiative in the cognitive narrative struggle dimension, create a favorable situation in which legal principles are in hand and morality is on our side, and occupy the moral commanding heights.

Cognitive operations focus on attacking the heart, and implement layered strategies to fight precise battles. “Those who are good at fighting will benefit others without killing them.” In future wars, the combat space will extend to the deep sea, deep space, deep network and other fields, and the battlefield space and time will present the characteristics of being extremely far, extremely small, extremely intelligent and uninhabited, invisible, and silent. We should keep a close eye on cognitive gaps to improve effectiveness, and use methods such as big data simulation, artificial intelligence matching, and psychological model evaluation to analyze and control the key information of cognitive subjects to achieve effective penetration and early deterrence of cognitive subject information. Closely focus on cognitive blind spots to enhance penetration, target the ideological consensus points, psychological connection points, and spiritual pillar points that maintain the unity of powerful enemy alliances to carry out effective strikes, and use their cognitive differences and interest conflicts to achieve differentiation and disintegration at all levels.

Based on cognitive combat strategies, we must penetrate the entire territory and fight for deterrence and control. In future wars, the strategic competition and tactical confrontation between the two warring parties will be extremely fierce. We should pay close attention to the decision-making process and make comprehensive efforts to increase the opponent’s decision-making dilemma and form our own decision-making advantages. On the one hand, we must pay more attention to key nodes such as the enemy’s decision-making center, command hub, reconnaissance and early warning system, and use advanced strike methods to physically destroy these nodes. On the other hand, we must pay more attention to the “soft kill” effects of cognitive shaping, cognitive induction, cognitive intervention and cognitive control, and embed cognitive domain operations into “hard destruction”, which not only creates a strong deterrent through precise strikes with high-tech weapons, but also integrates new qualities The combat power is expanded to the cognitive dimension, thus forming an asymmetric check and balance advantage.

Cognitive combat information is king, expand the field and fight for support. Future wars cannot be separated from strong information support, and system integration should be accelerated to gain data advantages. First of all, speed up the construction of cognitive offensive and defensive operations theory library, database, talent library, case library, and tactics library, dynamically collect and update the current status of the enemy’s cognitive offensive and defensive operations capabilities, and provide all-round support for cognitive offensive and defensive operations. Secondly, speed up the creation of the integrated media communication matrix, improve the self-owned platform system, speed up the deployment of network platforms, focus on system integration and collaboration, break down the “barriers” of information interconnection as soon as possible, and achieve cognitive integration and sharing, and comprehensive results. Thirdly, accelerate the coupling and linkage of information and cognitive domain operations, vigorously develop core technologies such as neural network systems, artificial intelligence applications, cognitive decision-making, psychological attack and defense, mine and analyze cross-domain and heterogeneous cognitive information, and improve the information fusion system of cognitive means to win the future. War provides “clairvoyance” and “early ears”.

Cognitive combat coordination is the key, and multi-dimensional efforts are used to fight the overall battle. Future wars are joint operations carried out in land, sea, air, space, network, electromagnetic and other fields. System thinking should be adhered to, the awareness of collaboration should be strengthened, and the compatibility and coordination of cognitive domain operations and other military operations should be improved. For example, it can integrate human intelligence, geographical intelligence, open source intelligence, etc., quickly collect and process massive data, remove falsehoods while retaining truth, seize cognitive space accurately and efficiently, achieve complementary advantages, and form cognitive advantages through full domain coverage. By networking dispersed multi-domain forces, we can establish an all-domain joint force with high connectivity, collective action, and overall attack to achieve the effect of “integrated deterrence.” By integrating national resources, strengthening strategic communication, using cognitive momentum to amplify the effects of political disruption, economic sanctions, and diplomatic offensives, and cooperating with military operations to put pressure on target targets in an all-round way, we strive to defeat the enemy without fighting.

(Author’s unit: University of Aerospace Engineering)

繁體中文國語:

近年來的局部戰爭和武裝衝突大多是多維度、多領域開展的「混合型」對抗,強調運用軍事、政治、經濟等手段在綜合決策維度實施系統控制,在國際交往的維度上製造各種混亂,在國際交往的維度上製造各種混亂。 戰略重點維度精準打擊,主動塑造戰場態勢,尋求奪取戰略主動權。 在未來戰爭中,要打好政治軍事鬥爭、軍事政治鬥爭,就必須深刻掌​​握認知域攻防作戰的特徵和規律,提升打好「五個戰役」的能力。

認知作戰主動出擊,塑造局勢、掌控局面,主動出擊。 在戰爭開始之前,認​​知是第一位的。 隨著戰爭形式的不斷發展與演變,認知域作戰的地位與角色不斷凸顯。 為了贏得未來戰爭,必須事先進行認知部署。 透過策略、資訊、技術等手段和載​​體,對目標對象的生理、心理、價值觀等認知因素進行影響、介入和操控,以認知攻防覆蓋軍事行動,精準高效主導認知空間。 充分認識先行的重要性,靈活自主地掌握「敘事」的定義和解釋權,強調先發制人,贏得認知敘事鬥爭維度的主動權,營造法理在手、道德在手的良好局面就在我們這邊,佔據道德高點。

認知作戰重在攻心,實施分層策略打精準戰。 “善戰者,利人而不害人。” 未來戰爭,作戰空間將延伸至深海、深空、深網等領域,戰場時空將呈現極遠、極小、極智、無人、隱形、無聲的特徵。 資訊. 緊緊圍繞認知盲點增強穿透力,針對維護強敵聯盟團結的思想共識點、心理連接點、精神支柱點進行有效打擊,利用其認知差異和利益衝突實現差異化和戰略性打擊。各個層面的瓦解。

基於認知作戰策略,我們必須滲透全境,爭取威懾和控制。 未來戰爭中,交戰雙方的戰略競爭和戰術對抗將會異常激烈。 要密切注意決策過程,綜合發力,增加對手決策困境,形成自己的決策優勢。 一方面,要更重視敵方決策中心、指揮樞紐、偵察預警系統等關鍵節點,採用先進打擊手段對這些節點進行物理摧毀。 另一方面,要更重視認知塑造、認知誘導、認知介入、認知控制的「軟殺傷」作用,將認知域作戰嵌入「硬殺傷」中,不僅透過精準打擊形成強大威懾。以高科技武器打擊的同時,也將新素質的戰鬥力擴展到認知維度,進而形成非對稱制衡優勢。

認知作戰資訊為王,拓展領域,爭取支援。 未來戰爭離不開強大的資訊支撐,應加快系統整合以獲得數據優勢。 首先,加速認知攻防作戰理論庫、資料庫、人才庫、案例庫、戰術庫建設,動態收集和更新敵方認知攻防作戰能力現狀,提供全方位對認知進攻和防禦行動的全面支持。 二是加快打造綜合媒體傳播矩陣,完善自有平台體系,加速網路平台部署,聚焦系統

各方融合協作,盡快打破資訊互聯互通的“壁壘”,實現認知融合共享、綜合成果。 第三是加速資訊與認知域運算耦合連結,大力發展神經網路系統、人工智慧應用、認知決策、心理攻防等核心技術,挖掘分析跨領域、異質認知訊息,完善認知手段資訊融合體系,贏得未來。 戰爭提供了「千里眼」和「早耳」。

認知作戰協同是關鍵,多維度發力打好整體戰。 未來戰爭是在陸、海、空、太空、網路、電磁等領域進行聯合作戰。 要堅持系統思維,強化協同意識,提高認知域作戰與其他軍事行動的兼容性和協調性。 例如,可以融合人類智慧、地理智慧、開源智慧等,快速擷取處理大量數據,去偽存真,精準高效搶佔認知空間,實現優勢互補,透過全域形成認知優勢覆蓋範圍。 透過將分散的多域力量聯網,建立高度連結、集體行動、整體出擊的全局聯合部隊,達到「一體化威懾」的效果。 透過整合國家資源,加強戰略溝通,利用認知動能放大政治擾亂、經濟制裁、外交攻勢的效果,配合軍事行動,全方位對目標對象施壓,力爭戰勝敵人不戰而屈人之兵。

(作者單位:航太工程大學)

來源:解放軍報 作者:楊龍喜 編輯:王峰 2022-10-08

中國軍隊——揭開境外網路空間行動之謎

Chinese Military – Uncovering the Mysteries of Foreign Cyberspace Operations

原始中文國語:

隨著科學技術的不斷發展,戰爭形式已進入資訊化戰爭時代。 資訊已成為戰鬥力的主導要素。 雙方圍繞著資訊的收集、傳輸和處理展開了激烈的對抗。 網路空間是資料和資訊傳輸的通道。 現代作戰單位之間的橋樑。

美國軍方是第一個將網路空間軍事化的國家。 2008年,美國成立空軍網路司令部,將網路空間定義為整個電磁頻譜空間,將認知和實踐從狹隘的資訊域延伸到廣闊的網路域。 。 2018年1月,美國陸軍訓練與條令司令部(TRADOC)發布了《TP 525-8-6美國陸軍網路空間與電子戰作戰概念2025-2040》,描述了美國陸軍將如何在網路空間和電子戰中作戰。 在電磁頻譜中運行,以應對未來作戰環境的挑戰。 與其他傳統作戰領域相比,網路空間將對未來作戰產生哪些影響? 在未來一體化聯合作戰背景下,能為多域聯合作戰帶來哪些突破?

神秘-網路空間行動

第五大領域資訊化戰爭。 賽博空間一詞最早出現在1982年的加拿大科幻小說《全像玫瑰碎片》中,描述了網路與人類意識融合的賽博空間。 根據美國國防部軍事詞彙詞典,網路空間是資訊環境中的全球性領域,由獨立的資訊技術基礎設施網路組成,包括互聯網、電信網路、各種區域網路和電腦系統以及嵌入式處理器和控制器。 隨著網路技術的不斷發展,網路空間已從電腦網路擴展到不可見的電磁頻譜,即電磁環境中的實體場。 它不僅包括我們通常認識的電腦網絡,還包括使用各種電磁能量的所有物理系統。

此外,在現代戰爭中,網路空間是資訊戰的新領域。 已被美軍列為與陸、海、空、天同等重要、必須保持決定性優勢的五個領域之一。 涉及網路戰、資訊戰、電子戰、太空戰、指揮控制戰、C4ISR等領域。 它是超越傳統的陸、海、空、天四維戰鬥空間的第五維度戰鬥空間。 它既相對獨立又嵌入其他領域。 與傳統領域相比,網路空間具有邊界邊界模糊、覆蓋範圍廣、情勢複雜多變的特性。

網路空間作戰超越了時間和空間的限制。 由於電磁頻譜缺乏地理邊界和自然邊界,網路空間超越了地理邊界、時間和距離的限制,使得網路空間作戰幾乎可以在任何地方發生,跨越陸地、海洋、太空和空中作戰,將傳統的四種作戰方式融為一體。立體作戰空間領域,可瞬間對遠程目標進行攻擊。 由於資訊在網路空間的傳播速度接近光速,高速資訊傳輸將大幅提升作戰效率與能力,提供快速決策、指導作戰、達到預期作戰效果的能力。 更重要的是,根據作戰需要,在網路空間或透過網路空間實現軍事目標或軍事效果可以分為進攻性網路作戰和防禦性網路作戰兩種類型。

進攻性網路行動是指在網路空間預防、削弱、中斷、摧毀或欺騙敵方網絡,以確保己方在網路空間的行動自由。 其主要行動包括實施電子系統攻擊、電磁系統封鎖和攻擊、網路攻擊和基礎設施攻擊等。防禦性網路行動包括防禦、偵測、表徵、反擊和減輕網路空間威脅事件的活動,旨在保護美國國防部防禦網絡或其他友方網絡,維持被動和主動利用友方網路空間的能力,保護資料、網路和其他指定的系統能力。

網路空間電磁戰

戰略威懾,輿論制勝。 近年來,針對經濟、政治、軍事等目標的網路攻擊不斷增加。 由於具有規模大、隱蔽性好、攻擊基礎設施能力強等特點

網路攻擊已成為一些國家在政治衝突中的優勢。 優勢手段。 俄烏衝突期間,俄羅斯以網路空間為陣地,以無線電電子戰為輔助,切斷烏克蘭系統通訊,中斷烏克蘭指揮; 抵制輿論負面消息,發布正面消息; 它癱瘓了網路上的敵人。 利用敵方網站製造恐慌,然後配合部隊正面進攻,達到速勝的目的。

全球佈局,千里之外擒敵。 美國在建立以本國主導的網路空間安全框架的過程中,掌握了盟友的網路空間作戰能力,建立了全球軍事基地和網路空間互聯互通。 相關情報人員平時透過情報行動完成網路預設,例如利用網路等手段透過情報分析來監控和收集敵方網路資料。 透過網路預設,必要時可利用網路漏洞入侵敵方網路、控制系統、破壞資料等,實現「千里取敵性命」。 2010年7月,美國透過某種蠕蟲病毒入侵伊朗核電廠,並控制了其核心設備,大大拖延了伊朗的核計畫。

充分發揮非對稱作戰優勢,提高作戰效益。 「舒特」計畫是美國空軍為了壓制敵方防空能力而提出的。 它利用不對稱作戰理論來摧毀敵方的防空系統。 核心目標是入侵敵方通訊、雷達、電腦等網路電力系統。 戰爭中,「舒特」攻擊可以透過遠程無線電侵入敵方防空預警系統和通訊系統的電腦網絡,進而攻擊並癱瘓敵方防空系統,或攻擊敵方可用的電子系統和網路系統,突破敵人的網絡。 攔截,然後利用相應的專業算法(主要是“木馬”病毒)侵入敵方雷達或網絡系統,監聽或竊取相關信息,洩露敵方作戰計劃、部隊部署、武器裝備等重要信息,從而幫助調整己方的作戰計畫、作戰結構和武器配比,以最小的成本獲得最大的利益。

網路空間作戰的未來發展

各國日益重視,大力發展。 隨著各國意識的加深,發展網路能力、贏得網路戰爭已成為各國謀求軍事優勢、贏得未來戰爭的重要內容。 2015年,美軍根據「伊斯蘭國」組織成員在網路上發布的評論和照片,利用大數據分析和偵察定位,最終在22小時內摧毀了一個「伊斯蘭國」指揮所。 目前,美國已成立網路空間司令部,組成網路空間作戰部隊,深化作戰理論研究,初步形成網路空間作戰能力。 其他國家也開展了網路競賽。 為了加強網路空間作戰能力,法國成立了新的資訊系統安全局。 英國政府發布國家通訊安全戰略,宣布成立網路安全辦公室和網路安全行動中心。 日本建立了以電腦專家為主的網路戰部隊,顯示網路空間戰引起了越來越多國家的興趣。

融合多種技術,增強網路空間作戰能力。 隨著新技術的突破,大數據技術、5G技術、人工智慧技術可以應用於網路空間作戰。 大數據技術可以儲存大量數據、收集複雜類型的數據,並且可以快速計算並獲取有用的信息。 它可以加快網路空間戰爭各方面的執行速度並使其更加精準。 5G技術具有低時延、高傳輸、大容量的特點,使得網路空間戰爭在全球環境、多域協同作戰中更具威脅性。 此外,還可以利用人工智慧深度學習、推理等能力來模擬網路空間戰爭。 在這個過程中,可以發現自身武器系統的弱點並加以改進。 透過這些技術的深度融合,可以將網路空間打造為智慧化、高傳輸、高精度的網路環境,為未來資訊化聯合作戰打造智慧大腦。

並掌握未來經營的主動權。

有效推進聯合作戰。 利用跨域資訊化聯合作戰本質上是基於地理空間部署,建立穩定且有效率的網路空間資訊活動態勢,共同實現作戰目標的新型作戰形態。 聯合部隊有不同的資訊能力。 實現高度共享和深度融合,增強即時態勢感知,提高指揮效率,提高一體化戰鬥力。 網路能力不僅可以服務單一軍種或單位,還可以優先保障戰略級目標,高水準組織網路戰爭和各兵種作戰,規劃陸、海、空等網路作戰。空氣和空間維度。 戰鬥目標。

未來的戰爭將是智慧化、系統化的戰爭。 「聯合資訊環境」是實現「跨域協作」、打造「全球一體化作戰」能力的策略性舉措。 隨著科技的不斷改善與發展,網路空間作戰將成為核心作戰領域之一,將大幅提升未來系統作戰效能,為謀取資訊優勢、贏得戰爭提供重要支撐。

外文原版英文:

With the continuous development of science and technology, the form of war has entered the era of information warfare. Information has become the dominant element of combat effectiveness. Both combatants are engaged in fierce confrontation around the collection, transmission and processing of information. Cyberspace is a channel for the transmission of data and information. The bridge between modern combat units.

The U.S. military was the first to militarize cyberspace. In 2008, the United States established the Air Force Cyber ​​Command and defined cyberspace as the entire electromagnetic spectrum space, extending cognition and practice from the narrow information domain to the broad cyber domain. . In January 2018, the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) released “TP 525-8-6 U.S. Army Cyberspace and Electronic Warfare Operational Concept 2025-2040”, which describes how the U.S. Army will operate in cyberspace and electronic warfare. operate in the electromagnetic spectrum to meet the challenges of future operational environments. Compared with other traditional combat domains, what impact will cyberspace have on future operations? In the context of future integrated joint operations, what breakthroughs can it bring to multi-domain joint operations?

Mysterious – Cyberspace Operations

The fifth major area of ​​information warfare. The term cyberspace first appeared in the 1982 Canadian science fiction novel “Fragments of the Holographic Rose”, which describes a cyberspace where the Internet and human consciousness are integrated. According to the U.S. Department of Defense Military Vocabulary Dictionary, cyberspace is a global domain within the information environment that consists of independent information technology infrastructure networks, including the Internet, telecommunications networks, various local area networks and computer systems, and embedded processors and controller. With the continuous development of network technology, cyberspace has expanded from computer networks to the invisible electromagnetic spectrum, which is a physical field in the electromagnetic environment. It includes not only computer networks as we usually recognize them, but also all physical systems that use various types of electromagnetic energy.

In addition, in modern warfare, cyberspace is a new field of information warfare. It has been listed by the US military as one of the five areas that are as important as land, sea, air and space and must maintain decisive advantages. It involves network warfare, information warfare, electronic warfare, space warfare, command and control warfare, C4ISR and other fields. It is a fifth-dimensional battle space that transcends the traditional four-dimensional battle space of land, sea, air and space. It is both relatively independent and embedded in other fields. Compared with traditional fields, cyberspace has the characteristics of blurred border boundaries, wide coverage, and complex and changeable situations.

Cyberspace operations transcend the limitations of time and space. Due to the lack of geographical boundaries and natural boundaries in the electromagnetic spectrum, cyberspace transcends the limitations of geographical boundaries, time and distance, allowing cyberspace operations to occur almost anywhere, across land, sea, space and air operations, integrating traditional In the four-dimensional combat space field, attacks on remote targets can be carried out instantly. Since the propagation speed of information in cyberspace is close to the speed of light, high-speed information transmission will greatly improve combat efficiency and capabilities, and provide the ability to make quick decisions, guide operations, and achieve expected combat effects. More importantly, according to operational needs, achieving military goals or military effects in or through cyberspace can be divided into two types: offensive cyber operations and defensive cyber operations.

Offensive cyber operations refer to preventing, weakening, interrupting, destroying or deceiving the enemy’s network in cyber space to ensure one’s own freedom of action in cyber space. Its main actions include the implementation of electronic system attacks, electromagnetic system blockade and attack , network attacks and infrastructure attacks, etc. Defensive cyber operations include activities to defend, detect, characterize, counter and mitigate cyberspace threat events, aiming to protect the U.S. Department of Defense network or other friendly networks, maintain the ability to passively and proactively exploit friendly cyberspace, and protect data , network and other specified system capabilities.

Electromagnetic warfare in cyberspace

Strategic deterrence, public opinion wins. In recent years, there have been an increasing number of cyber attacks against economic, political, military and other targets. Due to the characteristics of large scale, good concealment, and ability to attack infrastructure networks, these attacks have become an advantage for some countries in political conflicts. means of advantage. During the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Russia used cyberspace as its position and radio-electronic warfare as assistance to cut off the Ukrainian system in communications and interrupt the Ukrainian command; it resisted negative news in public opinion and released positive news; it paralyzed the enemy on the Internet. Use the enemy’s website to create panic, and then cooperate with the frontal attack of the troops to achieve the goal of quick victory.

Global layout, capturing enemies from thousands of miles away. In the process of establishing a cyberspace security framework dominated by its own country, the United States has mastered the cyberspace operations of its allies and established global military bases and cyberspace interconnectivity. Relevant intelligence personnel complete network presets through intelligence operations in peacetime, such as using the Internet and other means to monitor and collect enemy network data through intelligence analysis. Through network presets, when necessary, network vulnerabilities can be exploited to invade the enemy’s network, control the system, destroy data, etc., to achieve “taking the enemy’s life thousands of miles away.” In July 2010, the United States invaded Iran’s nuclear power plant through a certain worm virus and took control of its core equipment, greatly delaying Iran’s nuclear program.

Give full play to the advantages of asymmetric combat and improve combat benefits. The “Shute” plan was proposed by the U.S. Air Force to suppress the enemy’s air defense capabilities. It uses asymmetric combat theory to destroy the enemy’s air defense system. The core goal is to invade the enemy’s communications, radar, computer and other network power systems. In war, the “Shute” attack can invade the computer network of the enemy’s air defense early warning system and communication system through remote radio, and then attack and paralyze the enemy’s air defense system, or attack the enemy’s available electronic systems and network systems to break through the enemy’s network. Block, and then use corresponding professional algorithms (mainly “Trojan horse” viruses) to invade the enemy’s radar or network system, monitor or steal relevant information, and leak important information about the enemy’s combat plan, troop deployment, and weapons and equipment, thereby helping Adjust the combat plan, combat structure and weapon ratio to your own side to obtain the maximum benefits at the minimum cost.

The future development of cyberspace operations

Paying increasing attention to it, countries are vigorously developing it. As countries’ understanding deepens, developing cyber capabilities and winning cyber wars have become an important part of countries seeking military advantages and winning future wars. In 2015, based on comments and photos posted online by members of an “Islamic State” organization, the U.S. military used big data analysis and reconnaissance positioning, and finally destroyed an “Islamic State” command post within 22 hours. At present, the United States has established a Cyberspace Command, organized a cyberspace combat force, deepened research on combat theory, and developed preliminary cyberspace combat capabilities. Other countries have also launched cyber competitions. In order to strengthen its cyberspace combat capabilities, France established a new Information Systems Security Agency. The British government released the National Communications Security Strategy and announced the establishment of a Cybersecurity Office and a Cybersecurity Action Center. Japan has established a cyber warfare force mainly composed of computer experts, which shows that cyber space warfare has aroused the interest of more and more countries.

Integration of multiple technologies to enhance cyberspace combat capabilities. With the breakthrough of new technologies, big data technology, 5G technology, and artificial intelligence technology can be applied to cyberspace operations. Big data technology can store large amounts of data, collect complex types of data, and can quickly calculate and obtain useful information. It can speed up the execution of all aspects of cyberspace warfare and make it more accurate. 5G technology has the characteristics of low latency, high transmission and large capacity, making cyberspace warfare more threatening in a global environment and multi-domain coordinated operations. In addition, artificial intelligence deep learning, reasoning and other capabilities can be used to simulate cyberspace warfare. In the process, the weaknesses of one’s own weapon systems can be found and improved. Through the deep integration of these technologies, cyberspace can be built into an intelligent A network environment with high transmission and precision can create an intelligent brain for future information-based joint operations and grasp the initiative in future operations.

Effectively promote joint operations. The use of cross-domain information-based joint operations is essentially a new combat form that jointly achieves operational goals by establishing a stable and efficient cyberspace information activity situation based on the deployment of geographical space. The joint forces have different information capabilities. Achieve a high degree of sharing and deep integration to enhance real-time situational awareness, improve command efficiency, and improve integrated combat effectiveness. Cyber ​​capabilities can not only serve a single service branch or unit, but can also prioritize the protection of strategic-level goals, organize cyber wars and operations of various arms with a high overall level, and plan cyber operations in land, sea, air, and space dimensions. battle target.

Future wars will be intelligent and systematic wars. The “joint information environment” is a strategic move to achieve “cross-domain collaboration” and build “global integrated operations” capabilities. With the continuous improvement and development of technology, cyberspace Operations will become one of the core operational domains, which will greatly improve the effectiveness of future systematic operations and provide important support for seeking information advantages and winning wars.

2020 年 8 月 31 日 | 來源:人民網-軍事頻道

http://military.people.com.cn/n1/2020/0831/c1011-3184888z.html

中國軍事設計與發展聚焦未來戰爭的作戰概念

Chinese Military Designs & Development for Operational Concepts Focusing on Future Warfare

原始國語(繁體):

自21世紀以來,隨著世界新軍事革命的深入,世界軍事強國提出了一系列新的作戰概念,並在戰爭實踐中不斷完善,導致戰爭加速演變。 隨著雲端運算、區塊鏈、人工智慧、大數據等資訊科技的快速發展以及在軍事領域的廣泛應用,人們認識戰爭的模式逐漸從總結實戰經驗轉變為研究判斷未來戰爭。 目前,作為軍事能力建構的源泉,作戰理念發展能力的強弱將直接影響戰爭的勝負。 特別是世界新軍事革命方興未艾,時刻呼喚作戰理論創新。 只有建立新的作戰理念,前瞻性地設計未來戰爭,才能贏得軍事鬥爭準備的主動權。

作戰理念從根本解決如何打仗

一流的軍隊設計戰爭,二流的軍隊應對戰爭,三流的軍隊跟隨戰爭。 所謂“真正的戰爭發生在戰爭之前”,就是在戰爭開始之前,戰爭的理論、風格、戰鬥方式就已經設計好了。 照設計打仗怎麼可能打不贏呢? 設計戰爭的關鍵是在認識戰爭特徵和規律的基礎上,設計和發展新的作戰理念,推動作戰方式和戰術創新,從根本上解決「如何打戰爭」。

在設計戰爭時,理論是第一位的。 近年來,美軍提出“網路中心戰”、“空海戰”、“混合戰”等新概念,俄軍提出“非核遏制戰略”、“戰略空天戰役”和“國家資訊安全主義”,體現了世界軍事強國正大力研究作戰理論,搶佔軍事制高點。 從某種程度上來說,作戰概念是作戰理論形成的「組織細胞」。 沒有完整的概念生成能力,就很難產生先進的理論。 當一種作戰理論提出後,需要發展相關的作戰概念,使作戰理論能夠具體“下沉”,更好地完善,轉化為軍事實踐。 在沒有作戰理論概念的情況下,作戰概念創新可以為作戰理論研究提供「原料」。 軍事領域是最不確定的領域,人們對戰爭的認知總是不斷演變。 然而,作戰理論的創新不能等到認識成熟之後才開始。 相反,需要在現有認識的基礎上積極發展和創新作戰理念,建構未來作戰圖景,探索未來制勝機制,指導和指導軍事實踐。 掌握戰爭主動權。 因此,作戰理念創新正在成為軍隊建設和發展的戰略支點和槓桿。

營運概念開發著重於設計核心營運概念。 核心作戰理念是作戰理念的核心與胚胎。 它體現了作戰的本質要求,蘊含著作戰理念成長的「基因」。 整個概念體係都是由此衍生發展出來的。 目前,對資訊化、智慧化戰爭制勝機制的認識逐漸清晰,戰爭設計的著力點應該集中到主要作戰理論和關鍵作戰理念的發展。

經營理念是經營思想的抽象表達。

「作戰概念」一詞源自美軍。 這是對未來如何戰鬥的描述。 日益成為推動軍隊建設發展的重要抓手。 美國陸軍訓練與條令指揮概念發展指南指出,作戰概念是一種概念、一種想法、一種整體理解和基於作戰環境中具體事件的推論。 它概述了最廣泛的意義和更具體的措施。上面描述了戰鬥是如何進行的。 美國海軍陸戰隊作戰發展司令部作戰發展和整合指令指出,作戰概念表達瞭如何打一場戰爭,用於描述未來的作戰場景以及如何利用軍事藝術和科學能力來應對未來的挑戰。 美國空軍作戰概念發展條令指出,作戰概念是戰爭理論層面的概念描述。 它實現了既定的營運理念和意圖

透過有序組織作戰能力和作戰任務。

綜上所述,作戰理念可以理解為對當前或未來具體作戰問題的作戰思路和行動方案的抽象理解。 一般來說,作戰構想包含三個部分:一是作戰問題的描述,即作戰構想的背景、作戰環境、作戰對手等;二是作戰構想的描述。 二是解決方案的描述,即概念內涵、應用場景、動作風格。 、制勝機制、能力特性及優勢等; 三是能力要求描述,即實施作戰理念所需的裝備技術、基本條件、實施手段等。 可見,作戰概念應具有針對性、科學性、適應性和可行性等特點,其內涵和外延會隨著戰略背景、軍事政策、威脅對手、時空環境、能力條件和作戰能力的變化而不斷調整。其他因素。

從某種意義上說,作戰理念實際上是作戰理論的一種過渡形式,其最終價值在於指導和拉動軍事實踐。 發展新作戰理念的目的和歸宿是挖掘和增強軍隊戰鬥力。 將作戰理念轉化為作戰條令、作戰方案,其價值才能充分發揮。

作戰理念創新驅動作戰方式變革

進入21世紀以來,世界軍事強國根據國家戰略要求,應對新威脅新挑戰,把發展新作戰理念作為軍事能力轉型的關鍵步驟,推動軍事力量變革。作戰風格,並尋求在未來戰場上獲得勝利的機會。 為了進一步加強軍事領導力,世界軍事強國正加速推出一系列新的作戰概念。

美軍積極抓住科技進步帶來的機遇,綜合運用新一代資訊科技、人工智慧技術、無人自主技術等尖端技術,提出馬賽克戰爭、多域作戰、分散式殺傷、決策作戰等。集中作戰、聯合全局指揮控制。 等一連串新的作戰概念,推動作戰思想、作戰方式、作戰空間、作戰體系發生根本性變革。

與美軍不同,俄軍在軍事實踐中實行作戰理念迭代創新。 近期,俄軍致力於推動聯合作戰能力建設,加速新型無人裝備研發部署,著力打造網路資訊化戰場優勢,不斷豐富傳統作戰理念內涵,與新時代融合發展。混合戰和心理戰等作戰概念。 用於指導戰爭實踐。

總體而言,近年來,世界軍事強國提出的新作戰理念正在導致作戰方式的深刻變化。 其能力、特徵和優勢主要體現在以下五個方面:一是無人作戰裝備,基於新作戰理念的無人裝備系統比重顯著增加,有人與無人協同作戰成為主要作戰方式之一。風格,形成利用無人系統控制有人部隊的優勢。 其次,部署方式是去中心化的。 基於新作戰概念的兵力部署是分散式的、系統間互聯的、具有互通能力的,形成單獨系統和組合的優勢; 第三,殺傷網絡複雜。 基於新作戰理念的殺傷網絡,功能更加多元。 單一系統可以執行多種任務,其故障對作戰系統影響較大。 規模小,形成多用控制單單的優勢; 四是反應時間敏捷,新作戰概念強調快速決策,出其不意,形成以快慢的優勢; 五是作戰領域多維度,新作戰理念更重視多域連動,將戰場從傳統的陸、海、空拓展到電磁、網路、認知領域,形成無形、有形的優勢。

營運理念開發應堅持系統化設計思路

以營運理念指導建設

f軍事力量是世界軍事強國的普遍做法。 相較而言,美軍擁有較為完善的作戰概念發展機制,建構了較為完整的作戰概念發展體系,由概念類型、組織結構、規範標準、支撐手段等組成。

從概念類型來看,美軍作戰概念基本上可分為三類:一是各軍種主導下發展的一系列作戰概念。 他們主要從本軍種角度出發,研究潛在敵人和未來戰場,重新定義作戰方式,尋求勝利。 新方法。 二是參謀長聯席會議領導下所發展的一系列聯合作戰概念,主要由頂層概念、作戰概念、支撐概念三個層次組成。 第三類是學術界、智庫等發展出來的操作概念,這類操作概念的數量雖然沒有前兩類那麼多,但仍是操作概念體系的重要組成部分。 透過此體系,美軍將大軍事戰略透過作戰理念層層落實到部隊的各項作戰行動、各項作戰能力、各項武器裝備性能中,指導聯合部隊和各軍兵種建設。

在組織架構上,以聯合作戰理念的發展為例,美軍建立了由五類組織組成的工作體系。 一是聯合概念工作小組,主要職責是檢視概念大綱和概念發展的整體問題; 二是聯合概念指導委員會,主要職責是監督指導概念發展計畫; 三是核心編寫團隊,主要職責是編制概念大綱,將概念中原有的概念轉化為聯合可操作的概念; 四是概念研發團隊,主要職責是提供可操作的概念開發方法和方案; 五是獨立紅隊,主要職責是獨立評估,判斷概念的嚴謹性和科學性。

在規範標準方面,對於聯合作戰理念的發展,美軍有完整的製度體系約束和指導,將概念發展規範化、規範化、程序化,這主要體現在參謀長聯席會議主席的一系列指令和聯合出版物中。 例如,《聯合概念制定和實施指南》旨在建立聯合概念制定的治理結構,明確聯合作戰概念規劃、執行和評估的框架,推動聯合作戰概念的實施; 「聯合條令準備流程」旨在製定聯合條令準備流程,並為將作戰概念轉化為作戰條令提供明確的流程架構。

從支援手段來看,營運概念的設計、開發和驗證是一個系統工程,離不開各種開發工具和手段的支援。 例如,DODAF2.0模型、IDEFO模型、SYSML建模語言等工具可以為戰鬥概念設計者提供標準化的結構化分析模型和邏輯描述模型; 基於模型的系統工程方法可以為作戰概念設計者和評估驗證者提供作戰概念中裝備要素的能力模型,用於設計和建構作戰概念架構。 美軍聯合作戰概念開發採用基於網路的數位軟體,具有很強的互聯能力。 參與開發的各機構可即時分享訊息,提高開發效率。

營運理念的成熟發展需要多方的配合

制定作戰概念是一項多學科、多領域的工作,涉及軍事學、哲學、運籌學、系統科學等許多領域。 它需要多方合作,確保在理論層面上具有先進性、前瞻性,在實踐層面上具有適用性和可行性。

建立小核心、大外圍的研究團隊。 主導制定作戰理念的部門要充分發揮主導作用,統籌協調與調度研究工作; 建立聯合研發團隊,充分發揮群體智慧與作用

d 廣泛獲取各方對作戰理念研究的新思路、新思路。 方法與新視角; 成立跨領域、跨部門的專家委員會,多角度監督、審查、指導相關工作。

形成多部門連動工作機制。 為了確保各部門之間溝通順暢、有效率運轉,首先要明確各自的任務與職責。 例如,概念發起部門負責總體規劃和實施,實驗室負責技術驗證,工業部門負責裝備研發,作戰部隊負責實戰測試。 其次,要製定相關規範文件,確保各項工作有秩序地進行,並為可操作理念的研發提供製度支撐。 最後,要建立需求牽引機制、協同研究機制、迭代回饋機制等,打通作戰概念從研發到實際運用的環節。

促進理論與實務的有機結合。 只有透過「設計研究-推演驗證-實戰測試」的循環迭代,才能逐步調整、優化、完善作戰理念,帶動戰爭理論的發展。 因此,操作理念的發展必須特別注重理論創新與實際應用的結合。 透過理論與實踐的相互驅動,才能達到引領新一代優質作戰能力生成的根本目的。 具體方法包括將成熟的作戰理念及時納入作戰條令,編寫相應的訓練大綱或教材,逐步向部隊推廣; 組織相關演練或試驗,在接近實戰的條件下檢驗作戰理念的成熟度和可行性。 自然,發現問題並解決問題; 以作戰理念確定的能力指標作為裝備需求論證的參考,帶動裝備技術發展,促進作戰能力提升。

新時代科學技術快速發展,為軍事能力建構帶來許多新的機會與挑戰。 發展新的作戰概念,有利於敏銳抓住科技進步帶來的軍事機遇,積極應對科技發展帶來的威脅和挑戰,及時掌握戰爭形態演變的方向和規律,為戰爭形態的演變提供指導。引領未來戰爭風格,抓住勝利機會。 重要的支持。 目前,國際安全情勢複雜多變。 打贏未來資訊化戰爭,需要把作戰理念發展作為國防和軍隊建設的抓手,積極開展軍事技術創新,推動武器裝備升級換代,實現跨越式發展,從而引領新時代。 軍事革命趨勢。

(作者單位:中國航太科工集團第二研究院)

現代外語英語翻譯:

Since the 21st century, with the deepening of the world’s new military revolution, the world’s military powers have proposed a series of new combat concepts and continuously improved them in war practice, thus leading to the accelerated evolution of war. With the rapid development of information technologies such as cloud computing, blockchain, artificial intelligence, and big data, as well as their widespread application in the military field, people’s mode of understanding war has gradually changed from summarizing actual combat experience to studying and judging future wars. At present, as the source of military capability building, the strength of operational concept development capabilities will directly affect the opportunity to win the war. In particular, the new military revolution in the world is booming, calling for innovation in combat theory all the time. Only by developing new combat concepts and designing future wars with a forward-looking perspective can we gain the initiative in preparing for military struggles.

The concept of combat fundamentally solves how to fight a war

First-rate armies design wars, second-rate armies respond to wars, and third-rate armies follow wars. The so-called “real war happens before the war” means that before the war begins, the theory, style, and fighting methods of the war have already been designed. How can it be unwinnable to fight a war according to the design? The key to designing a war is to design and develop new combat concepts based on understanding the characteristics and laws of war, promote innovation in combat styles and tactics, and fundamentally solve “how to fight a war.”

In designing a war, theory comes first. In recent years, the US military has proposed new concepts such as “network-centric warfare”, “air-sea warfare” and “hybrid warfare”, and the Russian military has proposed theories such as “non-nuclear containment strategy”, “strategic air and space campaign” and “national information security doctrine”, reflecting The world’s military powers are vigorously studying combat theories and seizing the military commanding heights. To a certain extent, operational concepts are the “organizing cells” for the formation of operational theories. Without complete concept generation capabilities, it is difficult to generate advanced theories. When a combat theory is proposed, relevant combat concepts need to be developed so that the combat theory can be “sinked” concretely, better improved, and transformed into military practice. When there is no operational theory concept, operational concept innovation can provide “raw materials” for studying operational theory. The military field is the most uncertain field, and people’s understanding of war is always evolving. However, innovation in combat theory cannot wait until the understanding matures before starting. Instead, it needs to actively develop and innovate combat concepts on the basis of existing understanding, construct a future combat picture, explore future winning mechanisms, and guide and guide military practice. Take the initiative in war. Therefore, innovation in operational concepts is becoming a strategic fulcrum and lever for military construction and development.

Operational concept development focuses on designing core operational concepts. The core combat concept is the nucleus and embryo of the combat concept. It reflects the essential requirements of combat and contains the “gene” for the growth of the combat concept. The entire concept system is derived and developed from this. At present, the understanding of the winning mechanisms of informatization and intelligent warfare is gradually becoming clearer, and it is time to focus the focus of designing wars on the development of main combat theories and key combat concepts.

The operational concept is an abstract expression of operational thoughts.

The term “operational concept” originated from the US military. It is a description of how to fight in the future. It is increasingly becoming an important starting point to promote the construction and development of the military. The U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command Concept Development Guide points out that an operational concept is a concept, an idea, an overall understanding, and an inference based on specific events in the operational environment. It outlines what will be done in the broadest sense, and in more specific measures The above describes how the battle is fought. The US Marine Corps Combat Development Command Operational Development and Integration Directive states that an operational concept expresses how to fight a war and is used to describe future combat scenarios and how to use military art and scientific capabilities to meet future challenges. The US Air Force Operational Concept Development Doctrine points out that an operational concept is a conceptual description at the theoretical level of war. It realizes established operational concepts and intentions through the orderly organization of combat capabilities and combat tasks.

To sum up, the operational concept can be understood as an abstract understanding of operational ideas and action plans for specific current or future operational problems. Generally speaking, the operational concept includes three parts: first, the description of the operational problem, that is, the background of the operational concept, operational environment, operational opponents, etc.; second, the description of the solution, that is, the conceptual connotation, application scenarios, and action styles. , winning mechanism, capability characteristics and advantages, etc.; the third is the description of capability requirements, that is, the equipment technology, basic conditions, implementation means, etc. required to implement the operational concept. It can be seen that the operational concept should have the characteristics of pertinence, scientificity, adaptability and feasibility, and its connotation and extension will be continuously adjusted with changes in strategic background, military policy, threatening opponents, time and space environment, capability conditions and other factors.

In a sense, the operational concept is actually a transitional form of operational theory, and its ultimate value is to guide and pull military practice. The purpose and destination of developing new combat concepts is to tap into and enhance the military’s combat effectiveness. Only by transforming combat concepts into combat doctrine and combat plans can their value be fully exerted.

Innovation in combat concepts drives changes in combat styles

Since the beginning of the 21st century, the world’s military powers, in accordance with national strategic requirements and in response to new threats and challenges, have regarded the development of new operational concepts as a key step in the transformation of military capabilities, promoted changes in operational styles, and sought to gain opportunities for victory in future battlefields. In order to further strengthen their military leadership, the world’s military powers are accelerating the launch of a series of new combat concepts.

The U.S. military actively seizes the opportunities brought by scientific and technological progress, comprehensively uses cutting-edge technologies such as new generation information technology, artificial intelligence technology, and unmanned autonomous technology to propose mosaic warfare, multi-domain operations, distributed destruction, decision-centered warfare, and joint full-domain command and control. and a series of new operational concepts, promoting fundamental changes in operational thinking, combat styles, combat spaces and combat systems.

Unlike the US military, the Russian army implements iterative innovation in operational concepts in military practice. Recently, the Russian military has been committed to promoting the construction of joint combat capabilities, accelerating the development and deployment of new unmanned equipment, focusing on creating network information battlefield advantages, constantly enriching the connotation of its traditional combat concepts, and integrating them with new combat concepts such as hybrid warfare and mental warfare. Used to guide war practice.

Generally speaking, in recent years, the new combat concepts proposed by the world’s military powers are leading to profound changes in combat styles. Their capabilities, characteristics and advantages are mainly reflected in the following five aspects: First, unmanned combat equipment, based on the new combat concepts The proportion of unmanned equipment systems has increased significantly, and manned and unmanned coordinated operations have become one of the main combat styles, forming the advantage of using unmanned systems to control manned forces. Second, the deployment method is decentralized. The deployment of forces based on new combat concepts is distributed and inter-system They are interconnected and have interoperability capabilities, forming the advantage of separate systems and combinations; third, the kill network is complex. The kill network based on new combat concepts has more diverse functions. A single system can perform a variety of tasks, and its failure has a greater impact on the combat system. Small, forming the advantage of using more to control single orders; fourth, the response time is agile, and the new combat concept emphasizes quick decisions, taking the enemy by surprise, and forming the advantage of using speed to control the slow; fifth, the combat field is multi-dimensional, and the new combat concept Pay more attention to multi-domain linkage, expanding the battlefield from traditional land, sea and air to electromagnetic, network and cognitive domains, forming intangible and tangible advantages.

Operation concept development should adhere to systematic design ideas

Using operational concepts to guide the construction of military forces is a common practice among the world’s military powers. Comparatively speaking, the U.S. military has a relatively complete operational concept development mechanism and has built a relatively complete operational concept development system, which consists of concept types, organizational structures, specifications and standards, and support means.

In terms of concept types, U.S. military operational concepts can be basically divided into three categories: First, a series of operational concepts developed under the leadership of each service. They mainly start from the perspective of their own services to study potential enemies and future battlefields, redefine combat styles, and seek to win. new ways. The second is a series of joint operations concepts developed under the leadership of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which are mainly composed of three levels: top-level concepts, operational concepts and supporting concepts. The third is the operational concepts developed by academia, think tanks, etc. The number of such operational concepts is not as large as the first two categories, but it is still an important part of the operational concept system. Through this system, the US military implements grand military strategies layer by layer through operational concepts into various combat operations, various combat capabilities, and various types of weapons and equipment performance for the troops, guiding the construction of joint forces and various services and arms.

In terms of organizational structure, taking the development of joint operations concepts as an example, the US military has established a working system composed of five types of organizations. The first is the Joint Concept Working Group, whose main responsibility is to review the concept outline and overall issues of concept development; the second is the Joint Concept Steering Committee, whose main responsibility is to supervise and guide the concept development plan; the third is the core writing team, whose main responsibility is to compile the concept outline The original concepts in the concept are transformed into joint operational concepts; the fourth is the concept research and development team, whose main responsibility is to provide operational concept development methods and plans; the fifth is the independent red team, whose main responsibility is to carry out independent evaluation to judge the rigor and scientificity of the concept.

In terms of norms and standards, for the development of joint operations concepts, the U.S. military has complete institutional system constraints and guidance to standardize, standardize and program the concept development, which is mainly reflected in a series of joint chiefs of staff chairman Directives and joint publications. For example, the “Joint Concept Development and Implementation Guide” aims to establish a governance structure for joint concept development, clarify the framework for joint operational concept planning, execution and evaluation, and promote the implementation of joint operational concepts; the “Joint Doctrine Preparation Process” aims to develop joint doctrine Standardize the preparation process and provide a clear process framework for transforming operational concepts into operational doctrine.

In terms of support means, the design, development and verification of operational concepts is a systematic project that cannot be separated from the support of various development tools and means. For example, tools such as DODAF2.0 model, IDEFO model and SYSML modeling language can provide standardized structured analysis models and logical description models for combat concept designers; model-based system engineering methods can provide combat concept designers and evaluation Verifiers provide capability models of equipment elements in the operational concept, which are used to design and build the operational concept framework. The U.S. military’s joint operations concept development uses network-based digital software, which has strong interconnection capabilities. All agencies involved in the development can share information in real time and improve development efficiency.

The mature development of operational concepts requires the cooperation of multiple parties

Developing an operational concept is a multi-disciplinary, multi-field work involving military science, philosophy, operations research, systems science and many other fields. It requires the cooperation of multiple parties to ensure that it is both advanced and forward-looking at the theoretical level and It is applicable and feasible at the practical level.

Establish a small core and large peripheral research team. The department initiating the development of operational concepts should give full play to its leading role and coordinate and schedule the research work from an overall perspective; establish a joint research and development team to give full play to the role of group wisdom and widely obtain new ideas and new ideas from all parties on the research of operational concepts. Methods and new perspectives; establish a cross-field and cross-department expert committee to supervise, review and guide related work from multiple perspectives.

Form a multi-departmental linkage working mechanism. In order to ensure smooth communication and efficient operation among various departments, it is necessary to first clarify their respective tasks and responsibilities. For example, the concept initiating department is responsible for overall planning and implementation, the laboratory is responsible for technical verification, the industrial department is responsible for equipment research and development, and the combat force is responsible for actual combat testing. Secondly, it is necessary to formulate relevant normative documents to ensure that all work is carried out in an orderly manner and to provide institutional support for the research and development of operational concepts. Finally, a demand traction mechanism, a collaborative research mechanism, an iterative feedback mechanism, etc. must be established to open up the link from research and development to practical application of combat concepts.

Promote the organic integration of theory and practice. Only through the cyclic iteration of “design research-deduction verification-actual military testing” can operational concepts be gradually adjusted, optimized and improved, and drive the development of war theory. Therefore, the development of operational concepts must pay special attention to the combination of theoretical innovation and practical application. Through the mutual driving of theory and practice, the fundamental purpose of leading the generation of new quality combat capabilities can be achieved. Specific methods include incorporating mature combat concepts into combat doctrine in a timely manner, preparing training syllabuses or teaching materials accordingly, and gradually promoting them to the troops; organizing relevant drills or tests to test the maturity and feasibility of combat concepts under conditions close to actual combat. nature, find and solve problems; use the capability indicators determined by the combat concept as a reference for equipment demand demonstration, drive the development of equipment technology, and promote the improvement of combat capabilities.

The rapid development of science and technology in the new era has brought many new opportunities and challenges to military capability building. Developing new combat concepts can help to keenly seize the military opportunities brought by scientific and technological progress, actively respond to threats and challenges caused by scientific and technological development, and timely grasp the direction and laws of the evolution of war forms, which can provide guidance for leading future war styles and seizing the opportunity to win. important support. At present, the international security situation is complex and ever-changing. To win future information-based wars, we need to regard the development of operational concepts as the starting point of national defense and military construction, actively carry out military technological innovation, promote the upgrading of weapons and equipment, achieve leapfrog development, and thus lead the new era. Military revolutionary trends.

(Author’s unit: Second Research Institute of China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation)

中國軍事原文來源:http://www.81.cn/gfbmap/content/2022-06/22/content_318888.htm