Wars in different eras have different characteristics, and the “fog of war” that accompanies them is constantly changing. Often when people feel that they have basically seen the way to win through multi-faceted exploration, the next war presents new uncertainties. Local wars such as the Syrian War and the India-Azerbaijan conflict have demonstrated the multifaceted and complex nature of modern warfare from different perspectives. It can be seen that although traditional firepower warfare is still on the stage, the characteristics of intelligence have already emerged; although the combat type is still an offensive and defensive struggle, the combat guidance, environmental conditions, and specific methods of play have undergone profound changes. Wars are accelerating their evolution towards intelligence. The battlefield space has expanded from land, sea, air, space, electricity, and the Internet to space, polar regions, deep sea, and cognitive confrontations. The game competition has changed from military confrontation to multi-dimensional competitions such as politics, economy, science and technology, and public opinion. The participating forces have developed from the two warring parties to global attention and multi-dimensional intervention. Information intelligence has moved from auxiliary support to comprehensive dominance, full penetration, and full coverage. The combat unit has evolved from scale optimization to small, micro, and sophisticated, and the form is scattered and capable. Intelligence and hybrid have become basic trends. In the face of evolving wars and new uncertainties, we need to be sensitive to change and respond proactively, accumulate momentum and forge ahead in the midst of change, so as to achieve leadership and surpass others and seize the opportunity to win.
Enhance the hybrid nature of war based on the “pan-variability”. War is the continuation of politics and has never been a simple military confrontation. In the era of intelligence, visible struggles and invisible struggles coexist, battlefields with gunpowder smoke and silent battles coexist, and gray areas, hybrid warfare, and marginal conflicts coexist. In the face of fierce and complex competitive game situations, it is necessary to accelerate the construction of a hybrid warfare system with military as the cornerstone. First, enrich strategic options. Closely follow the characteristics of the times, strengthen the exploration of the characteristics and laws of non-military confrontation and the construction of power means, implement relevant preparations, and form comprehensive advantages. Secondly, enhance invisible strength. Attach importance to geopolitical, cultural, psychological and other aspects of research, and form an effective discourse system through think tank exchanges, academic promotion, cultural integration, legal construction, media propaganda and other means to influence the other party’s cognition in a silent way. Thirdly, unite the forces of peace. Take the construction of a united front in the new era as an important means of hybrid confrontation, unite all forces that can be united, and enhance international influence and appeal.
Enhance the flexibility of tactics based on the “smart change” of the battlefield. Looking at recent local wars and conflicts, due to factors such as the regional dimension and the strength of both sides, the traces of traditional warfare are still relatively obvious, but intelligent and unmanned warfare has irreversibly come to the fore. It can be foreseen that comprehensive intelligent warfare is not far away, the extension range of weapons and equipment will be farther and wider, the combat perspectives of the opposing sides will be larger and wider, and the degree of hinge fusion between the physical domain, network domain, and cognitive domain will be deeper. The battlefield with deep “smart change” calls for concepts and tactics that are adapted to it. We should accelerate the promotion of intelligent thinking, intelligent technology, and intelligent network aggregation and empowerment to form a flexible closed link with fast perception, fast decision-making, fast judgment, fast action, and fast feedback, based on “OODA” and the kill chain to beat the slow with the fast and change with change. Relying on intelligent computing power and intelligent algorithms, we design wars in advance, build various models, and innovate tactics and training methods in peacetime. In wartime, we analyze the battle situation in real time, keenly seize opportunities, and make precise decisions and actions. We use “military + technology”, “theory + experiment”, and “algorithm + tactics” to integrate the art of strategy with intelligent technology to achieve a combination of the strange and the orthodox, take the lead in rapid changes, and win by intelligence.
Enhance the plasticity of forces based on the “micro-change” of units. One of the important characteristics of modern warfare is that large systems support elite combat, and combat units are becoming increasingly miniaturized, integrated, and modular. We must focus on the combat unit, the end of combat effectiveness, and forge a “sharp knife” and “sharp blade” that is small, fine, micro, and strong to adapt to intelligent warfare. On the one hand, strengthen its ability to integrate into the system and connect all parties, rely on ubiquitous access to information networks, and achieve decentralized combat and energy concentration through flexible matching and rapid reorganization; on the other hand, strengthen its independent decision-making and improvisation capabilities, improve robustness and self-recovery, and be able to survive, respond to emergencies, and fight in extreme situations. It is possible to explore the formation of a “micro-unit” concept force, implement a flexible organization, do not fix the number of personnel, and do not restrict the field. Advanced combat theories, new combat formations, and new weapons and equipment can be tested and verified in advance, so as to explore ways to achieve cloud combat, cloud joint, cloud energy gathering, and self-combination at the end of the strike chain.
Enhance strategic bottom line based on deterrence “evolution”. Deterrence has a long history like war. With the in-depth application of intelligent technology and weapons and equipment, the connotation and extension, force means, form and effect of deterrence are changing. Although traditional nuclear deterrence is still the cornerstone of bottom line, new deterrence capabilities have been quietly formed, requiring higher determination, strength, wisdom, and strategy. Focusing on the role of deterrence in blocking the enemy invisibly in peacetime, controlling the situation at the key in times of crisis, and winning the final victory in wartime, we should focus on strengthening the strong and making up for the weak, opening up new areas, and long-term strategy to maximize the strategic value of deterrence. First, we should give equal importance to conventional and unconventional, accelerate the development of new weapons and new forces, and achieve the predetermined deterrence intention through actual combat training and actual combat deployment, supplemented by the expression and transmission of strategic will. Secondly, we should continue to study new combat concepts and new combat theories, and promote the transformation of theories from “soft” to “hard” through academic exchanges, think tank collisions, and multi-track and multi-layer confrontations, and transform them into real deterrence. Thirdly, accelerate the transformation of science and technology into the military field, increase research efforts in cloud computing, blockchain, quantum technology, etc., and strive to form a potential deterrent to opponents.
●The application of artificial intelligence in the military field is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it greatly improves combat effectiveness, but on the other hand, it also requires great attention to the potential weaknesses and loopholes of artificial intelligence.
●The use of intelligent weapons does not mean that the role of humans has declined, but rather that some of the functions of humans have been transferred and materialized into weapons. Weapons extend the human body and brain, and stimulate human creativity and initiative.
Accelerating the development of military intelligence is a strategic task proposed in the report of the 19th CPC National Congress. It is a powerful tool to promote the modernization of national defense and the army and realize the party’s goal of strengthening the army in the new era. It is also a major measure to aim at the future war situation and seize strategic opportunities. When conducting research on intelligent warfare, we should adhere to dialectical thinking, prevent research from “deviating from reality to virtuality”, “generalizing from a single case”, and “focusing on technology rather than theory”. Only by scientifically analyzing the characteristics and laws of intelligent warfare can we truly promote in-depth and practical research.
To prevent “decoupling from reality and turning to virtuality”, we need to use scientific methodology and epistemology to analyze the problem
Intelligent warfare is a highly informationized war conducted in the physical and cognitive domains through the extensive use of intelligent weapons and equipment and the corresponding combat styles and methods. It is essentially not out of the scope of informationized warfare. The trend of unmanned warfare in recent local wars only has some characteristics of intelligent warfare, and is far from being an intelligent war in the true sense. At present, there is a wave of research on artificial intelligence in all walks of life, but to some extent, there is also a phenomenon of exaggeration and exaggeration. Some people also believe that intelligent warfare will give rise to geopolitical changes, and the traditional physical space control will be replaced by “intelligence control” with artificial intelligence as the core. This view inevitably has a tendency to virtualize cognition. To this end, intelligent warfare should be rationally studied and understood using scientific methodology and epistemology.
System theory perspective. Intelligent warfare is an advanced stage of information warfare, and is essentially still a system confrontation based on information systems. Whether it is human-machine collaborative operations, real-time perception of the entire battlefield, or brain-machine integrated decision-making, the characteristics it exhibits are all conscious behaviors of the various elements of the military system with “winning the war” as the ultimate goal. The understanding of military intelligence cannot stop at “technology-only theory” and “weapon-only theory”, but should focus on the mutual connection and action characteristics between the various elements of the military system, and explore its triggering mechanism, internal laws and implementation path.
Global thinking. Qian Xuesen believes that war is an organic whole composed of many parts and cannot be separated. In all human social practices, there is no activity that emphasizes the global concept and the overall concept more than directing war, and emphasizes starting from the overall situation, using all forces rationally, and ultimately achieving the overall final effect. This is true for directing war and studying war. Intelligent warfare not only refers to the intelligence of weapons and equipment, but also includes a series of intelligence such as intelligence analysis, command and control, military training, and logistics support. Only by conducting all-round research and thinking on the relevant elements can we have a global understanding of intelligent warfare. Global thinking also requires us to consider military intelligence in the context of achieving the Party’s goal of strengthening the military in the new era and the overall national strategy, and to grasp the dialectical relationship between short-term and long-term, key and urgent needs, and actual military needs and overall military modernization.
Engineering design. To win future wars, we must have the ability to design future wars. We should use engineering thinking to classify and plan the operational concepts, operational styles, and force use of future intelligent warfare, and put forward practical military needs, phased development goals, and methods based on the current development stage of our army and targeting powerful enemies. We can follow the idea of ”proposing theories – developing concepts – experimental simulations – actual military exercises” to promote innovative breakthroughs in military theories based on intelligent warfare, incorporate them into operational regulations, and integrate them into actual combat training.
Avoid generalizing from a single example, and grasp the opposites of contradictions with the unity of opposites thinking
The ancients said: “The way to win or lose, to be safe or dangerous, is the way.” The “way” here includes not only the fundamental view of war, but also the speculative understanding of the laws of winning war. Intelligent warfare research should go beyond the limitations of one-sided descriptions such as “algorithmic warfare”, “unmanned warfare” and “self-adaptation”, and use dialectical thinking to fully understand and grasp the relationship between the various elements of future wars.
The relationship between people and weapons. With the widespread use of drones, unmanned combat vehicles, unmanned submarines, etc. in the military, “war between people” will be largely replaced by “war between machines”. The realization of combat means such as autonomous coordination and autonomous decision-making has reshaped the combat process, and the combat style with unmanned operations as a prominent feature has rewritten the rules of the battlefield. Despite this, the decisive role of people in war has not changed, but the way they act is significantly different from before. As Engels said, “It is people, not guns, who win the battle… Guns will not move by themselves, and they need a brave heart and a strong hand to use them.” Intelligent weapons undoubtedly play an important role in war, but the subject of war is still people, and people are always the most active factor in war. The use of intelligent weapons does not mean that the role of humans has declined, but rather that some of the functions of humans have been transferred and materialized into weapons. Weapons extend the human body and brain, and stimulate human creativity and initiative. Intelligent weapons cannot replace the important role of fighting spirit. The superposition of indestructible political beliefs, overwhelming heroism, the bloody spirit of daring to fight and win, as well as superb strategies and flexible strategies and tactics, these dynamic factors make it possible to win when the enemy and our strength are equal, and to have the possibility of defeating the strong with the weak when we are at a disadvantage.
The relationship between offense and defense. The application of artificial intelligence in the military field is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it greatly improves combat effectiveness, but on the other hand, it is also necessary to pay great attention to the potential weaknesses and loopholes of artificial intelligence. Intelligent warfare mainly relies on powerful algorithms and interconnected networks. Once they are attacked, fatal errors occur, or they are reversely controlled, the advantage may turn into a disadvantage. The U.S. Department of Defense has now established a special agency to assess the potential risks of military intelligence and countermeasures. While promoting military intelligence, we should pay special attention to strengthening information protection and risk management, and simultaneously develop “anti-artificial intelligence technology” to establish a two-way advantage of both offense and defense.
The relationship between inheritance and innovation. Artificial intelligence has promoted major changes in the war situation, but it has not changed the general sense of the war guidance rules and war winning mechanism. No matter how the future war is fought, we must not abandon or deviate from the precious war experience and theoretical guidance accumulated by our army in long-term practice. We must still adhere to the principle of “you fight yours, I fight mine”, uphold the principle of asymmetric strategic checks and balances, and attach importance to giving full play to people’s subjective initiative. On the other hand, we must follow the general trend of military reform, keep a close eye on the forefront of war development, promote military innovation with a sense of urgency and accelerate the application and transformation of results.
To prevent “focusing on technology and neglecting science”, it is necessary to promote technological and theoretical innovation by integrating science and technology.
An advanced army needs advanced military theory to guide it. The emergence of intelligent warfare is first of all due to the promotion of the new scientific and technological revolution, but it is inseparable from the scientific guidance of advanced military theory, especially Marxist military theory. The report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposed to comprehensively promote the modernization of military theory, which is an inevitable requirement for realizing the party’s goal of strengthening the army in the new era, and is also the meaning of intelligent warfare research. To this end, we must conscientiously implement the development idea of integrating theory and technology, and promote the simultaneous innovation of technology and theory in deepening problem research.
Conceptual integration. Modern military theories are increasingly characterized by actual combat-driven, interdisciplinary, and systemic support. To promote the integration of science and technology, we must first break through the barriers of concepts and ideas. We should adhere to the complex research approach of overall planning, system design, and system integration, based on the evolution of war forms and the actual national and military conditions and development stages, and coordinate the promotion of technological breakthroughs, concept development, tactics innovation, combat power generation and other theoretical innovations to provide scientific guidance and theoretical support for winning future wars. We should strengthen research on the winning mechanism, combat guidance, and combat style of intelligent warfare, and conduct in-depth research on the military organization form caused by intelligent warfare, especially the series of changes in organizational system, scale structure, combat organization, tactical principles, combat support, and force application, so as to make ideological and theoretical preparations for a new round of military reforms.
Integration of disciplines. Intelligent warfare research not only involves the application of artificial intelligence in the military field, but also involves multiple fields such as algorithms and materials, and multiple disciplines such as physics, chemistry, electronics, and biology, and involves a wide range of fields such as war ethics and international law. In order to achieve the integration of science and technology, technical workers are required to break away from the shackles of pure engineering thinking, establish strategic thinking and global awareness, master scientific methodology and epistemology, and use dialectical thinking to lead technology research and development. Theoretical researchers should break the boundaries of disciplines, step out of the small circle of pure academic research, actively promote the interaction between scientific research institutions and colleges, troops, and technology research and development departments, strive to achieve original results in the basic field of artificial intelligence, and enrich the theory of intelligent warfare. Make good use of data, focus on actual combat, adhere to the “three aspects”, and effectively play the leading and guiding role of theory on technology.
It is easy to break the “fog” of the battlefield, but it is difficult to break the “obsession” in your heart——
Since ancient times, achieving surprise through combat deception has been an important way to win on the battlefield. Entering the era of intelligence, the in-depth application of artificial intelligence technology has not only clearly dispelled the original war “fog”, but also created a large amount of new war “fog”. If we only rely on improving deception techniques and means, and simply superimposing and strengthening the traditional deception paradigm, it will become increasingly difficult to achieve the deception goal. From “smart deception” to “smart victory”, there is an urgent need for an overall transformation of the objects of deception, means of deception, methods of deception, and focus of deception, so as to form a new deception paradigm that meets the requirements of the intelligent era.
The target of deception has shifted from humans to human-machine hybrid agents
Clausewitz believed that three-quarters of the factors on which war is based are more or less surrounded by the “fog” of uncertainty. Combat deception is essentially the use of uncertainty in war. The more “fog” there is in war, the more room there is for maneuvering. Traditional combat deception is carried out around the opponent’s decision-making level, and people are the only target of deception. However, with the increasingly prominent role of intelligent intelligence analysis and auxiliary decision-making systems in command activities, the use of deception to achieve strategic, campaign, and tactical surprises faces major challenges. How to deceive human-machine hybrid intelligent entities composed of humans and intelligent systems has become an important factor that needs to be considered when planning and implementing deception in the intelligent era. The competition surrounding intelligent deception and anti-deception is becoming increasingly fierce.
There is a world of difference between deceiving people and deceiving intelligent systems. In the past, the “calculations” that deceived people may be exposed when facing the “calculations” of intelligent systems. Intelligent systems can efficiently integrate and process massive amounts of sensor data and Internet open source information, making a qualitative leap in the speed, depth, breadth and accuracy of battlefield situation perception, realizing a profound transformation from “sensing” to “knowing”, from “state” to “momentum”, and playing an important role in dispelling the “fog” of war. For example, on the battlefield, although both sides try to hide the truth and cover up their intentions in various ways, they still cannot escape the “eyes” of the intelligent system: the tracks left by carefully disguised tanks and armored vehicles, after being detected by the opponent’s satellites, drones, etc., will also reveal their specific locations under the analysis of the intelligent system.
On the contrary, it is very easy to deceive intelligent systems with methods that target them, but it may not be able to deceive people. A foreign research team found that by changing a few key pixels in a picture of a cat, the intelligent system can identify the cat as a dog, while the human eye will not make any recognition errors due to this change. Similar incidents are common. Some studies have pointed out that sticking a piece of paper with a special pattern on a person’s forehead can deceive the strongest facial recognition system, and this method is highly portable and can deceive other facial recognition algorithms with a slight change.
It can be seen that deceiving people and deceiving intelligent systems are two different “deception methods”. After the deep application of artificial intelligence in the field of intelligence analysis and auxiliary decision-making, from the formulation of strategic deception plans to the design of battlefield camouflage patterns, how to deceive both the human brain and the computer and keep the human-machine hybrid intelligent body “in the dark” will be an important issue that needs to be focused on and solved in order to win the initiative in war.
The fraudulent methods have shifted from being mainly human-based to a combination of human and machine.
The organization and implementation of traditional combat deception is mainly manual, especially large-scale strategic deception, which requires a lot of manpower, material and financial resources. For example, in World War II, the Allies formulated a series of deception plans to ensure the success of the Normandy landing: setting up a fake radio network and a simulated landing fleet, and imagining that the US 1st Army Group with 50 divisions and 1 million people was actively preparing to cross the channel and land in the direction of Calais; using the air force to bomb Calais and Normandy, but the former was bombed more than 1 times more than the latter, etc. The application of artificial intelligence in deception can fundamentally change this situation. With humans as the main guide and intelligent means as the auxiliary, it can quickly generate massive amounts of false information, confusing the real with the fake, and create a thicker war “fog” for the opponent.
The use of intelligent means can improve the quality of deception. On the one hand, intelligent decision-making aids can be used to formulate deception plans, optimize the design of deception forces, deception deployment, deception processes, etc., to achieve systematic deception with the best overall effect; on the other hand, intelligent intelligence analysis systems can be used to pre-test the deception effect, “using one’s own spear to attack one’s own shield”, find out the loopholes and contradictions in the plan, and then improve the deception plan to make it logically self-consistent and seamless.
The use of intelligent means can expand the scale of deception. The increasingly mature deep fake technology can synthesize realistic fake pictures, handwriting, audio, video, etc. in large quantities, and has broad application prospects in strategic, campaign, and tactical deception. For example, in strategic campaign deception, corresponding technical means can be used to confuse opponents by forging fake radio stations and fake commanders, and even to fake an active command post in a certain battle direction; in tactical deception, battlefield camouflage can be used to attach special patterns to high-value equipment to make the opponent’s intelligent system recognize it incorrectly.
The use of intelligent means can reduce the cost of deception. With the support of technologies such as virtual reality and deep fakes, unexpected deception effects can often be achieved with the help of synthetic optics, acoustics and other means, and they are low-cost and low-investment, which is more cost-effective than traditional strategic deception methods. For example, setting up false targets such as bait unmanned combat platforms, using electronic feints and electronic camouflage to send false signals can effectively restrain the opponent’s power, produce high returns at low cost, and thus gain the upper hand.
The use of intelligent means can optimize the accuracy of deception. Traditional combat deception is usually stereotyped, with prominent characteristics of broadcast, extensive, and generalized. For this reason, in the era of intelligence, we should focus on collecting data on opponent decision makers in peacetime and use big data for precise analysis to “know the enemy” more deeply and specifically. On this basis, deep fake technology can be used in wartime to customize the content of deception, realizing precise deception from targeting groups to targeting individuals.
The method of deception has shifted from mainly deceiving to mainly confusing and seducing.
“Playing cards” and “playing chess” are two game modes with completely different battlefield transparency. In the “playing cards” mode, both sides only know the cards that the opponent has played, but do not know the cards in the opponent’s hand, let alone what cards the opponent will play next; while in the “playing chess” mode, the deployment of both sides’ forces on the chessboard is completely transparent, but the opponent’s intentions and the next move are unknown. It is not difficult to see that from cold weapon wars, hot weapon wars, mechanized wars, informationized wars, and then to intelligent wars, the form of war confrontation is increasingly changing from the “playing cards” mode to the “playing chess” mode.
In a war of “playing cards”, blind deception is very useful. Through strict disguise and strict confidentiality, the opponent’s channels of information can be blocked as much as possible, making it impossible for the opponent to detect one’s own intentions and actions, thereby achieving surprise. In the past, when the means of obtaining information were limited and information on the battlefield situation was scarce, there were many examples of wars that used “hiding the truth” and “showing falsehood” to achieve surprise. However, at present, with the help of advanced reconnaissance technology, full-dimensional and full-spectrum reconnaissance has been realized, and the battlefield is becoming more and more transparent. Complete concealment without any revealing features is difficult to achieve. Once the concealment state is switched to the action state, the probability of being discovered by the opponent will be greatly increased. Blind deception can only become an auxiliary deception method.
In the war of “chess”, the following two deception methods are usually used: one is confusing deception, that is, using intelligent means to send a large amount of true and false mixed and difficult to identify information, increasing the ambiguity of information and the difficulty of analysis, making it difficult for the opponent to judge or misjudge. The second is inducement deception, that is, by sending high-definition misleading information, the opponent is led into a preset trap. The combination of these two methods and the cooperation of blinding deception together constitute a hybrid deception that is difficult for the opponent to guard against.
The focus of deception shifts from human perception to human cognition
As the main subject of war, people are important variables that influence the war situation, which implies uncertainty and uncontrollability. From the perspective of psychology, cognitive neurology and other aspects, the “black box” of the mind still cannot be revealed. Deception by deception targets people’s eyes and ears, taking advantage of human sensory weaknesses, while deception by deception and temptation directly targets people’s minds, taking advantage of human weaknesses.
From past cases, even with the most advanced intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance technology and the most intelligent analysis methods, it is impossible to make up for and overcome human weaknesses. In many cases, it is not that the intelligence department failed to recognize the opponent’s deception, but that the decision-makers are unwilling to believe the facts. On the eve of the Soviet-German War in World War II, although more and more evidence showed that Germany was planning to invade the Soviet Union, the Soviet decision-makers believed that the war would not come for the time being. Therefore, when the war broke out, the Soviet army was not well prepared for the response, and the initial defensive actions were very passive.
War practice shows that in the era of intelligence, even if the opponent has obvious military technology advantages and can achieve one-way transparency on the battlefield through advanced intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance technology, the enemy can still take advantage of the cognitive weaknesses of the opponent’s decision-making layer to implement counter-intuitive deception and cover up the true intentions and actions. This also shows that the focus and center of deception in the era of intelligence should not be entirely on how to deliberately cover up the traces of military actions, but should focus more on targeting the opponent’s decision-making layer and inducing it to make decisions and actions that the enemy wants to see.
Yuan Yi Zhao Di
(Author’s unit: Institute of War Studies, Academy of Military Science)
●The essence of the metaverse is a highly developed virtual world that exists in parallel with the real world but also reacts to the real world.
●Parallel with the real world, reaction to the real world, and integration of multiple high technologies are the three major characteristics of the future metaverse.
●The metaverse provides a new way of thinking to understand and discover the operating behaviors, states and laws of complex real systems, as well as a new means to explore objective laws and transform nature and society.
● Strengthening the follow-up research on the role of the metaverse in cognitive warfare and highlighting the exploration of the mechanism of the role of the metaverse in cognitive warfare will help enrich and promote the construction of cognitive warfare theory.
The essence of the metaverse is a highly developed virtual world that exists in parallel with the real world but reacts to the real world. When virtual technologies such as digital, Internet, augmented reality and modern communications, blockchain, artificial intelligence and other technologies develop to a certain stage, the metaverse will emerge. Being parallel to the real world, reacting to the real world, and integrating multiple high technologies are the three major characteristics of the future metaverse. The operation of the metaverse conforms to the natural law of human understanding and transformation of the world. It directly acts on human thinking and cognition but is not bound by the essential attributes of thinking and cognition, which determines that it carries the operating laws of the real world, provides a new way of thinking to understand and discover the operating behavior, state and laws of complex systems in reality, and a new means to explore objective laws and transform nature and society. At the same time, it is itself a complex cognitive body, so it has immeasurable cognitive warfare application value.
The basic mechanism of cognitive warfare in the metaverse
The difference between the metaverse and other technologies is that it builds a complete digital world. Its operation is not supported by a single or a few technologies, but by a complex high-tech complex. This complex is built by humans, is a product of cognition, and continues to develop and evolve with the development of human cognitive practice. Its cognitive application has a unique regular mechanism.
System enhancement mechanism. The digital world constructed by the metaverse is itself a highly developed cognitive world. In this special cognitive world, technology not only exists as an additional role such as support and guarantee, but also directly participates in the shaping of cognition itself as a basic element of cognition. In other words, the technology that constitutes the metaverse itself has a distinct cognitive background, which not only supports the operation of cognition but also realizes the self-construction, revolution and transcendence of cognition; it not only provides a series of necessary technical services, but also creates a holographic technical soil for human cognition to operate independently and fight independently. The effect of the metaverse on cognition is not one-dimensional, but full-dimensional; not single-line, but full-system; not independent, but immersive; not fragmentary, but continuous; not cyclical, but full-life process. How far the thinking cognition develops, how far the metaverse develops, and thus it can shape people’s thinking cognition more comprehensively, deeply and lastingly. Therefore, humans have used high technology to create “Avatar”, a complex system combining man and machine, and have also created a life form on “Pandora” that can think independently, recognize itself, and think and act on its own. This life form, which was created by humans and is independent of humans, has achieved self-improvement and development in the new universe.
The mechanism of mutual construction of technology and knowledge. Unlike the one-way effect of individual technologies such as artificial intelligence and information networks on thinking and cognition, the metaverse provides a space for mutual construction of technology and cognition, and influence and counter-influence. In this space, we can simulate, demonstrate, simulate, and verify the process and results of this two-way mutual construction and promotion, so as to understand cognition more accurately and efficiently, improve cognitive warfare methods, and directly engage in real cognitive confrontation. The metaverse provides a parallel cognitive space that digitally twins real combat scenes, where cognitive warfare can be promoted efficiently, enhanced at a fast pace, and presented in a panoramic manner. It is reported that the US military uses virtual technology to verify the performance of new weapons and equipment, test the effectiveness of the use of new tactics, and conduct combat simulation training, relying on the deployment of forces, combat terrain, human characteristics, and other scenes similar to actual combat constructed in virtual spaces such as the metaverse. At the same time, more and more countries and armies are conducting direct cognitive attacks and defenses with their opponents through virtual spaces, confusing their minds, misleading their directions, and eroding their will.
Active reflection mechanism. As a virtual existence parallel to the real world, the metaverse is not a simple digital copy of the three-dimensional space, but has its own operating rules and can actively act on the real world. This active action is the focus of the cognitive application of the metaverse. The metaverse space game reflects the characteristics of cognitive warfare. The war results deduced in the metaverse through virtual simulation may directly affect the real world, extending to the conscious cognitive competition game through sensory touch, thereby winning the dominant position in cognitive warfare. In the cognitive perspective, the metaverse is both a new cognitive space and the main battlefield of cognition, as well as an extended domain of cognition and a new cognitive component. At present, the military of many countries uses sandbox operations, war games and even computer simulations to formulate and test strategies and tactics, revise the application of tactics, improve training methods, and improve weapons and equipment. This is a typical example of the virtual world reacting to reality. With the continuous development and integration of the metaverse technology group, cognitive confrontation will inevitably shift more and faster from the real world to a hybrid world combining virtuality and reality.
The basic characteristics of cognitive warfare in the metaverse
Existence determines consciousness, and technology drives creation. The metaverse has many characteristics, such as parallelism with the real world, initiative in the real world, and comprehensiveness that integrates multiple technologies. These prominent characteristics determine the different characteristics and laws of its effects on thinking and cognition.
Cross-domain construction. The formation, development and evolution of cognition are rarely determined by a single factor, but are often the result of the combined effect of multiple factors. The metaverse originates from the real world and is presented in the virtual space. It has the characteristics of multi-domain interconnection that runs through the real and virtual worlds. As the saying goes, “a lot of gossip can melt gold, and accumulated criticism can destroy bones.” This cross-domain characteristic that spans different fields and opens up related spaces can best influence and shape people’s thinking and cognition from different angles. The most typical case is that game developers are increasingly focusing on using virtual stories based on historical facts and real feelings to attract and infect people. The United States has used this cross-domain shaped surreal “real” experience to spread values. At present, the most representative “metaverse” themed science fiction work is “Ready Player One” directed by Spielberg. The play focuses on depicting the era background of the birth of the “metaverse” and the huge contrast between the real status and virtual status of the protagonist. Through the plot and special effects shots, it delicately portrays the real sense of human participation, thereby spreading the American ideology, especially the values of gaining wealth, status, love and friendship through “bloodless” struggle in the virtual world.
Integrated influence. The important fulcrums of cognitive warfare are strategy and technology. With the development of science and technology and the progress of society, the proportion of technology in cognitive warfare is increasing and its role is becoming more and more prominent. It can be said that cognitive warfare without scientific and technological support is cognitive warfare without power, and cognitive warfare with advanced technology is more likely to win. As a complex system integrating multiple cutting-edge technologies, the metaverse has a natural advantage in the use of cognitive warfare. Many people, including adults, are deeply trapped in the virtual world and indulge in online games. It is very important that the virtual space gives game operators a super-time and space experience and a sense of achievement. If martial arts novels are fairy tales for adults, then the metaverse, which can “do whatever you want”, creates a super fairy tale world, which has an immeasurable impact on people’s thinking, cognition, value pursuit, moral concepts, emotional will, and behavior patterns.
Compromising influence. A big difference between the metaverse and other technical means is that it constructs a virtual world that originates from the real world but reacts to the real world. In this complex domain space, people’s thinking and cognition go back and forth between the real world and the virtual space, verify each other, repeatedly confirm, and constantly correct, thereby generating new thinking and cognition, and exerting a dynamic influence on both worlds. This two-way interactive compromising influence, on the one hand, is conducive to the formation and development of correct thinking and cognition, making the cognition of the real world more imaginative with the wings of the virtual world’s thoughts, and at the same time, it also makes the cognition of the virtual space find the material support of the real world and become more scientific. On the other hand, if it is not operated properly, it is likely to cause great safety hazards and ethical problems. In recent years, the U.S. military has relied on artificial intelligence and virtual technology to remotely control drones to attack opponents, which is a typical example of the virtual world reacting to the real world. This attack is far away from the tragic scene of face-to-face fighting, which greatly dilutes the drone operator’s awe of life and lowers the threshold for remotely controlling the opponent. At the same time, due to the imperfect reconnaissance and identification technology, incidents of accidental shooting, injury, and killing of civilians, friendly forces, and even their own troops often occur.
The basic style of cognitive warfare in the metaverse
Metaverse cognitive warfare is based on reality and leads future development. It involves both the virtual and real worlds, penetrates multiple fields, covers multiple technologies, and has a variety of combat styles. There is great uncertainty, but it is not without rules. Comprehensive analysis shows that there are three basic styles.
Platform confrontation. In terms of its relationship with human thinking and cognition, the metaverse itself is a complex cognitive actor, a derivative of human thinking and cognition, and an important component and platform of cognitive warfare. When hostile countries and armies regard the metaverse as an important position for cognitive warfare, cognitive offensive and defensive operations between different camps within the metaverse exist in reality. On this platform, all technologies, resources and forces of the metaverse are integrated and operated with thinking and cognition as the center. Metaverse operations are prominently manifested as cognitive offensive and defensive operations aimed at disrupting, delaying, blocking, destroying and eliminating the existence and operation of the opponent’s metaverse. In this field, whoever has higher-end strategic planning, more flexible tactical application, more advanced technical force and more solid material support will be able to gain the initiative in metaverse cognitive warfare.
System attack. The metaverse is a cognitive system composed of a series of cutting-edge technologies, and systemicity is its inherent attribute and vitality guarantee. Advanced technologies such as digital foundation, efficient communication, blockchain identity authentication, holographic AR imaging, artificial intelligence, and high-performance Internet constitute a unified body with tight structure, functional coupling, and complete system. The components are indispensable for the formation and development of thinking cognition and offensive and defensive confrontation. It is difficult to imagine that the metaverse still has the possibility of existence without the support of advanced technology groups such as high-level digitization, high-quality communication, and high-speed computing. Using superior forces to force or use asymmetric tactics to attack and block the key nodes and technological operation chains of the opponent’s metaverse system, hinder its operation, suppress its functions, and destroy its existence is an important style and efficient path of metaverse cognitive warfare.
Divert the flow. An important value and significance of the existence and development of the metaverse lies in serving and supporting the related activities of the real world. Under normal circumstances, the metaverse can demonstrate, display, review and predict the related activities of the real world in a digital form. Once the communication between the virtual and real worlds is disturbed or the self-operation of the metaverse is disordered, it is easy to cause the situation reflected to be untrue, the information analyzed to be distorted, the conclusions derived to be invalid, and the suggestions provided to be wrong, causing the related activities of the real world to deviate. It is based on this that we can concentrate our efforts on inducing attacks on the internal operation of the opponent’s metaverse or the communication technology devices of the two worlds, and use extremely confusing and deceptive information and scenes to divert the flow, confuse their cognition, interfere with their judgment, and mislead their decision-making. Therefore, we should strengthen the tracking research on the cognitive warfare of the role of the metaverse, highlight the exploration of the cognitive warfare mechanism of the role of the metaverse, and strengthen and promote the construction of cognitive warfare theory.
(Author’s unit: Military Political Work Research Institute of the Academy of Military Sciences)
Chinese Military From “Cyber Warfare” to “Mosaic Warfare”
Theory is the precursor to action. Strengthening innovation in combat concepts and promoting innovation in combat guidance have always been important ways for militaries around the world to cultivate military advantages. In recent years, the U.S. military has successively proposed cutting-edge combat theories such as “cyber warfare” and “mosaic warfare” in order to realize that the “production relationship” of combat mode can be more adaptable to the development of “productivity” of combat capabilities. By comparing and analyzing these two combat theories, the world can get a glimpse of the changes in the US military’s combat capability building thinking, especially the understanding of the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare”, so that it can be targeted and find effective checks and balances.
● From threat response to war design——
Actively shape and promote the improvement of combat capabilities
“Threat-based” or “capability-based” are two basic ways to build military combat capabilities. “Threat-based” embodies demand traction and focuses on solving practical problems in the near and medium term, which is the basic law that should be followed in the construction of military combat capabilities; “capability-based” embodies goal traction, aims at future strategic missions, and supports strategic concepts with new combat theories, which is the key to military operations. The only way to achieve innovation and transcendence in capabilities. The development from “cyber warfare” to “mosaic warfare” reflects the differences and evolution of the inherent laws of the above two approaches, and also reflects the changes in the US military’s ideas and concepts for promoting combat capability building in recent years.
The concept begins to change. Cyberspace was originally created to solve human communication needs. Later, it gradually evolved into a new combat domain independent of land, sea, air and space. From this, the “cyberspace” with the core of fighting for cyberspace dominance was derived. war”. In contrast, “mosaic warfare” is a new operational concept actively developed and designed by the US military in order to maintain its strategic advantage and directly target competitors. Its formation process reflects the integration of demand-driven and capability-driven, strategic, proactive, and Traction is more prominent.
New ideas for technology application. “Cyber warfare” emphasizes the development of new generation technologies to support the transformation and implementation of combat concepts. “Mosaic warfare” breaks out of this model and does not overemphasize the research and development of new generation equipment technology. It pays more attention to the rapid transformation of common military and civilian technologies and the incremental iteration of mature technologies. The basic idea is to “mosaic” various combat system units into single-function, flexibly assembled units based on existing equipment and through module upgrades and intelligent transformation in accordance with the application concepts of service platforms such as online ride-hailing and crowdfunding development. , easy-to-replace “building blocks” or “pixels” to build a dynamically coordinated, highly autonomous, and seamlessly integrated combat system, embodying new technology-driven ideas.
Path development new design. “Cyber warfare” is an accompanying concept of the cyberspace. Wherever the cyberspace develops, “cyber warfare” will follow. Generally speaking, we first consider the “objective” material conditions before making the “subjective” conceptual design. , has strong dependence on path development. “Mosaic warfare” first evolved from “subjective” to “objective”. By developing a force design model that can dynamically adjust the functional structure, it can adapt to different operational needs and changes in the battlefield environment.
It can be seen that compared with previous combat concepts such as “cyber warfare”, “mosaic warfare” has clearer goals, more mature technology, and more reliable paths, reflecting the change in thinking actively shaped by the US military.
● From network center to decision-making center——
Group intelligence to achieve optimal energy release of the system
Artificial intelligence technology is a key variable in the information age and a core increment in the development of the “mosaic warfare” system. “Cyber warfare” emphasizes “network center”, while “mosaic warfare” tightly focuses on the core of artificial intelligence technology, adjusts the key to victory from “network center” to “decision center”, and changes the combat system architecture from system level to Platform-level alliances are transformed into functional-level and element-level integration, seeking to use group intelligence technology to achieve the optimal release of system energy on the premise that the network is fully energy-gathered, giving new connotations to the winning mechanism of war in the intelligent era.
Use “fast” to control “slow” and gain the upper hand in cognition. In future wars, the battlefield situation will change rapidly, and the weight of the time element will continue to rise. “Fast” versus “slow” can create a nearly dimensionally reduced combat strike effect. “Mosaic Warfare” uses data information technology and artificial intelligence technology to improve the single-loop decision-making speed of one’s own “OODA” loop, expand the breadth of parallel decision-making, reduce the granularity of group-loop decision-making, speed up the progress of system operations, and overall create a model that is always one step ahead of others. The “first move” posture aims to firmly control the dominance of cognitive decision-making on the battlefield.
Use “low” to control “high” and accumulate cost advantages. Different from the traditional combat concept of pursuing high-end weapon platforms, “mosaic warfare” focuses on using artificial intelligence technology to tap the potential and increase efficiency of existing weapon platforms and combat resources. By loading and running intelligent algorithms and specific functional modules on many mid- to low-end weapon platforms, they can achieve combat performance comparable to that of high-end weapon platforms. This overall improves the cost-effectiveness of the input-output of the weapon platform, thereby accumulating cost advantages.
Use “dispersion” to control “gathering” and seek sustainable survival. “Mosaic warfare” emphasizes the use of decentralized ideas and asymmetric checks and balances, using an open system architecture to decentrally configure various functions such as reconnaissance, positioning, communication, and strike on various manned/unmanned platforms to achieve Distributed deployment of power. At the same time, intelligent algorithms are used to improve the self-organization, self-coordination, and independent attack capabilities of each platform, so as to achieve centralized firepower. When some combat platforms are eliminated, disrupted, or stripped away, the entire combat system can still operate normally, thus enhancing the battlefield survivability of the force cluster.
Use “dynamic” to control “quiet” and improve system flexibility. “Mosaic warfare” emphasizes further breaking through barriers in each combat domain. By turning fixed “kill chains” in different combat domains into dynamically reconfigurable “kill nets”, the “OODA” large ring is disassembled into small rings, and a single ring is differentiated into multiple rings. According to changes in the combat process and combat needs, rely on intelligent networking to realize on-the-go splitting, on-the-go deployment, and on-the-go combination of combat forces. In this way, on the one hand, it can enhance the flexibility and adaptability of the combat system; on the other hand, it can also offset the node aggregation effect of complex networks, making it difficult for opponents to find key nodes to defeat one’s own system.
“Mosaic warfare” provides a reference prototype for intelligent warfare. But at the same time, as an idealized force design and application framework, “mosaic warfare” also needs supporting support such as technology, doctrine, and policies that are closely related to it. There is still a long way to go before it can be fully realized. Compared with traditional warfare, The situation of system coexistence will exist for a long time.
● From element integration to system reorganization——
Dynamic structure to enhance the flexibility of the combat system
Structure and relationships often determine functions and properties. “Cyber warfare” and “mosaic warfare” are built on the same material foundation in the information age and follow the same evolutionary paradigm, but the principles and effects of system construction are different. The architecture formed by “cyber warfare” can be statically deconstructed, while “mosaic warfare” dynamically combines functional units according to certain construction rules to form an elastic architecture with self-organizing and adaptive characteristics, similar to a “dynamic black box”. Conventional The means are difficult to track and predict. This flexible structure often “emerges” new capabilities to empower and increase the efficiency of the combat system.
The integrated development of network and cloud makes combat space and time more dynamic and malleable. The Internet and cloud are the basic environment for the operation of the information combat system. They have reshaped the process elements of intelligence, command, attack, and support in traditional operations, and at the same time derived new combat time and space. “Cyber warfare” mainly focuses on the cyberspace, and its combat time and space are relatively static. “Mosaic warfare” is not limited to a single combat space. Under the development trend of information infrastructure network moving with the cloud and integrating cloud and network, the tangible and intangible space can be further hinged, the boundaries of combat space and time are more flexible, and the allocation of combat resources is more flexible. The combat architecture is more dynamic.
Data flows across domains, making combat control more seamlessly coordinated. In the command and control link, “cyber warfare” focuses on the command and control of combat units by joint combat command institutions, and the cross-domain exchange and flow of data is mainly concentrated on theater battlefields. “Mosaic warfare” further lowers the level of joint operations to the tactical end. Through the independent cross-domain exchange and seamless flow of data at the tactical level, various data islands can be gathered into data clusters on demand, thereby generating significant “overflow” “” effect makes the dynamic, discrete, agile, and parallel characteristics of the combat command and control loop more obvious, and is more conducive to realizing agile connection and efficient coordinated actions of various combat units on demand.
The algorithm penetrates all dimensions, making the system run more autonomously and efficiently. Algorithms are the mapping of human consciousness in cyberspace, forming two basic forms: compiled codes transformed by intentions and neural networks transformed by knowledge. In “Cyber Warfare”, compiled code is used extensively and neural networks are only used locally. In the “mosaic war”, the algorithm has expanded to two key functions: shaping rules and providing engines, and the breadth and depth of its application are more prominent. The shaping rules mainly focus on compiled code, supplemented by neural networks, to construct the process framework and operating logic of the “mosaic warfare” system, laying a structural foundation for its uncertainty, adaptability and “emergent” capabilities; providing the engine mainly integrates intelligence The algorithm model is distributed to edge elements for operation, forming a knowledge diffusion effect, thereby comprehensively improving the intelligent autonomous combat capabilities of the “mosaic warfare” system.
The independent release of energy at the edge makes the combat style more flexible and diverse. The edge is an abstract model of various manned/unmanned combat functional units and is also the direct source of the “emergence” of system capabilities. In the “cyber warfare” system, edge elements are closely coupled with the superior and subordinate command and control processes and are in a state of precise control. In the “Mosaic Warfare” system, the perception, interaction, reasoning, and decision-making capabilities of edge elements are greatly improved. Its “OODA” loop does not need to be linked back to the higher-level command organization, which is conducive to supporting the formation of a decentralized combination of high-low and manned/unmanned. The optimized combat cluster form can give edge elements more self-organizing authority, which significantly enhances battlefield confrontation advantages.
It can be seen that if “cyber warfare” is called a sophisticated war machine, “mosaic warfare” can be regarded as a complex “ecology” that can stimulate the dynamic growth of combat capabilities. New technologies generated by network clouds, data, algorithms, and edge devices Changes promote the formation of a dynamic and complex “architecture”. This structure in turn regulates elements, platforms, and systems in reverse, constantly emerging new capabilities, and playing an important role in empowering and evolving the combat system.
● From system breach to compound confrontation——
Analyze the pros and cons and seek effective checks and balances
“Mosaic warfare” represents, to a certain extent, the possible direction for the development of future joint operations. We should fully study and grasp the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare”, shape the information and communication field as a new domain that breaks the time and space boundaries of traditional wars, create a new concept of cloud-enabled operations, and build a strong defense information infrastructure support capability. Highlight the security and defense capabilities of military information networks, enhance the basic support capabilities for the operation of strategic and campaign command institutions, and continuously improve the network information system.
On the other hand, the emergence of the “mosaic warfare” theory makes it difficult for traditional combat methods to seize and control limited target nodes to achieve the system-breaking effect of destroying points and breaking links. However, it should be noted that any system has its inherent contradictions. Even the seemingly “impeccable” decentralized structure of “mosaic warfare” can still find ways to effectively crack it. For example, grasp the complexity characteristics of the system, use its correlation and dependence, highlight the functional suppression of the communication network, build a network and electricity composite attack path, and achieve the disassembly and isolation of each unit of the combat system; grasp the dissipative characteristics of its structure, Make use of its dependence on external information to highlight the camouflage and misleading of information data, prompting the combat system to transform into abnormal states such as information closure and information overload; grasp its group autonomy characteristics, use its dependence on key technologies to highlight the confrontation against intelligent algorithms Reduce efficiency and inhibit the intelligent driving force of each combat unit; grasp its functional non-linear characteristics, take advantage of its unknown vulnerabilities, highlight differentiated strike assessment on the battlefield, and explore and discover imbalance points in the combat system with higher efficiency and faster speed , looking for key weaknesses in the system to break.