●Practice has proven that cognitive domain operations break the traditional online and offline data barriers. By integrating the use of telecommunications networks, the Internet, the Internet of Things and other channels, and with the help of advanced algorithms, the initiator can effectively switch between various spaces and optimize the combat style. , and even focus on private spaces and public spaces to accurately release interference information, thereby achieving effects that traditional combat methods cannot achieve.
●In future battles in the cognitive domain, the influence of rational factors such as science and logic on individual cognition is likely to be weakened, and cognitive confrontation may become a battle between emotion and emotion.
At present, the rapid development of intelligent technology is changing the logic of information dissemination in all aspects, making the impact of information on thinking and consciousness more profound and comprehensive, and human brain cognition has truly become an important field of military confrontation. In the era of intelligence, the continuous evolution of information dissemination mechanisms will systematically reshape cognitive confrontation from many aspects, thereby promoting fundamental changes in cognitive domain operations.
Artificial intelligence becomes the main driving force for cognitive domain operations
In the era of intelligence, information dissemination is based on data, and artificial intelligence technology runs through the entire process of information collection, production, and feedback. The extensive and in-depth application of artificial intelligence, a disruptive technology in the military field, will be a key support for the entire process of planning and implementation of future cognitive domain operations.
Artificial intelligence technology will run through multiple scenarios of future cognitive domain operations. In the process of deployment and rhythm control of combat operations in the cognitive domain, all parties involved in the war rely on advanced algorithms as the “regulators” and “gatekeepers” of the action. A large amount of information about battlefield operations from various combat domains provides the warring parties with Provide driving force for efficient decision-making and implementation of cognitive domain operations. Practice has proven that cognitive domain operations break the traditional online and offline data barriers. By integrating the use of telecommunications networks, the Internet, the Internet of Things and other channels, and with the help of advanced algorithms, the initiator can effectively switch between various spaces and optimize the combat style. It even focuses on private spaces and public spaces to accurately release interference information, thereby achieving effects that traditional combat methods cannot achieve.
In addition, artificial intelligence has evolved from empowering a single link to connecting all links and the entire process of combat. At present, artificial intelligence is still limited to locating target audiences in information dissemination to improve the matching rate between information and information sources. In future cognitive domain operations, artificial intelligence will play a “one-stop” role in the planning and implementation of cognitive domain operations, and will continue to strengthen the coupling between various links. Foreign militaries believe that in future operations in the cognitive domain, differentiated delivery of data can be used to activate robots to instantly create public opinion trends and influence cognitive effects. At the strategic and campaign level, based on long-term tracking data and continuously adjusted and optimized algorithm strategies, we can measure the cognitive status of different regions and groups, assist decision-makers in planning core narratives, major issues, etc., thereby regulating the implementation of actions and coordinated actions.
Autonomous confrontation has become a distinctive feature of cognitive domain operations
As intelligent programs move from collaborative and participatory dissemination to independent dissemination, and the connection ecology of intelligent terminals continues to expand, on the future battlefield, officers and soldiers will increasingly be able to receive various types of information sent by intelligent programs and intelligent terminals. In the virtual space, the interactive communication between digital twins and virtual people will affect people’s cognition in the real world. Judging from the development trend of cognitive domain operations under intelligent conditions, human intervention will gradually decrease, the collection, synthesis, and transmission of information ammunition will become more autonomous and efficient, and the formulation and execution of discourse strategies and action strategies will become more autonomous. The whole process is faster than ever. But in terms of results, people are still the ultimate target of cognitive domain operations, and the process accelerated by autonomous weapon empowerment will continue to strengthen the control of human cognition.
With the help of autonomous countermeasures tools such as intelligent programs, intelligent terminals, digital twins, and virtual humans, all parties involved in the war will have more flexibility in cognitive domain combat situation layout, time and space application, and information content design. Information authenticity confrontation will be more protrude. In future cognitive domain operations, autonomous weapons will likely break through the limitations of power and time and space, and their action patterns will become more complex. The practice of foreign military forces shows that using the Internet to carry out “sprinkler-type” communication for the general public and “drip-type” communication for specific groups will become a common pattern of cognitive domain operations. Smart programs and smart terminals can support the development of more and more complex behavior patterns due to their features such as batch copy deployment and non-intermittent operation. For example, you can focus on specific issues and target specific attack targets, quickly mobilize a large number of social robots, and take turns to spread information, or use smart devices around specific individuals to collect relevant data, and use conversational robots and virtual humans to interact with individuals for a long time and continue to induce them. achieve combat objectives.
In future cognitive domain operations, autonomous weapons covertly control the cognitive domain battlefield will become the norm. Social robots can create fake public opinions and fake hot spots as needed, thereby generating more individual perception fog; intelligent synthesis technology will lower the threshold for producing false information. This will increase the cost and difficulty of identifying counterfeiting; it will be more difficult to identify robot accounts and virtual human information sources, and “one-on-one” cognitive fraud will become increasingly common.
Emotional conflict becomes a prominent attribute of cognitive domain operations
In the era of intelligence, new technologies will broaden the scope of human cognition and deepen people’s perception. Technologies such as extended reality and the metaverse will present battlefield environments, event scenes, etc. more holographically and transparently, and the scenes will be touchable, perceptible, and interactive. The audience will be more subject to the influence of perceptual logic when recognizing the truth of events.
Thanks to the development of the mobile Internet, the speed of information dissemination has increased rapidly. The centralized release of large batches of information in a short period of time can greatly shorten the reaction time of individuals, making it difficult for individuals to think deeply. Before the full picture of the incident is fully revealed, the audience has often formed a stance or even turned their attention to a new focus. The mode of outputting conclusions based on fragmented clues intensifies irrational and emotional reactions to the information. In future battles in the cognitive domain, the influence of rational factors such as science and logic on individual cognition is likely to be weakened, and cognitive confrontation may become a battle between emotion and emotion. In the decision between appealing to reason and appealing to emotion, all parties involved in the war are paying more and more attention to moving people with emotion, using emotional means to stir up, occupy and even polarize the minds of the target objects, and dominate the confrontation situation in the cognitive domain.
In the era of intelligence, cognitive leveraging relies more and more on rational competition. On the one hand, emotional arousal strategies are used to enhance cognitive resonance. In future cognitive domain operations, action initiators will selectively present cruel and fierce battle scenes, post-war tragedies, or the casualties and current status of soldiers participating in the war to the audience, thereby strongly stimulating the audience’s emotions and awakening the audience’s innermost feelings. emotional identification. As a node in the communication network, people can collect various physical data through intelligent algorithms, allowing action initiators to more accurately judge the emotional effects of information, thereby dynamically adjusting content and strengthening emotional responses. Action initiators use data calculations to select groups with similar understanding contexts and the same emotional characteristics, or select specific individuals who are susceptible to influence and have greater influence value, and target and disseminate homogeneous information flows to stimulate them. Group cognitive resonance.
On the other hand, moral coercion strategies are used to stimulate value recognition. Faced with the accumulation of fragmented and irrational cognitive response patterns, combat action initiators can occupy the moral high ground through a binary oppositional discourse system, gather a torrent of self-interested value cognition, and then achieve a coercion effect. The rich presentation formats and social channels that directly reach the public in the intelligent communication environment provide convenient means for action initiators to use this strategy. In local wars in recent years, technological evolution has gradually promoted moral coercion strategies. For example, social media has exposed past secret diplomacy to the public. Leaders and politicians of warring parties have used this method to live broadcast or make the entire decision-making process public with other countries. The details of communication among political leaders, elite groups, etc., and the discourse strategies increasingly highlight moral arbitration and criticism, thereby influencing and stimulating the international public to support one’s own value position.
The Internet of Everything expands the battlefield space for cognitive domain operations
With the development of information communication technology, social media has gradually become the main battlefield for shaping cognition. Institutions, individuals and the public on all warring parties can directly contact and interact with each other through social media, making it possible to compete for cognition around the clock.
In the era of intelligent communication, the Internet of Everything has become a new social connection model, and communication subjects and communication behaviors are everywhere. Under this influence, the cognitive domain battle space will expand to smart IoT terminals and scenarios, and extend to both the physical space and the virtual space. The Internet of Everything has led to the ubiquity of the cognitive domain battle space, which will further promote the ubiquity of combat subjects. Natural people, intelligent terminals with information sending and receiving capabilities, and even virtual characters in the online world may become combat subjects, and cognitive domain operations will participate in the war. The types of forces will be greatly expanded, and the organization method of cognitive domain operations will shift towards distributed collaboration.
In future cognitive domain operations, humans and machines deep in the hinterland of conflicts will become important forces in combat. With the support of intelligent technology, they will collaborate to draw battlefield pictures and participate in “writing” the entire process of war. Frontline soldiers continuously share their personal battlefield experiences through social networks, then push them to the world in a timely manner after personalized packaging. Individual soldier equipment and combat platforms will be responsible for collecting and transmitting battlefield images, and trigger automatic processing and release mechanisms according to preset procedures. , cooperate with physical space combat operations in various ways to compete for information and brain control. With the continuous development of communication technology, frontline soldiers and intelligent equipment can also reprocess and reprocess the information they have in a targeted manner according to superior instructions, so as to more conveniently and panoramically present the battlefield scene that one wants to express. , to achieve the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations to capture the mind and capture the will.
To Win The Information-based Intelligent War China’s People’s Liberation Army Must Find Science and Technology Integration Point To Evolve Innovation of Tactics
Find the integration point of theory and technology for innovative tactics
Tactic, that is, combat methods, refers to the strategies and techniques used in combat. To innovate tactics, we must not only think deeply about “strategies”, but also study “techniques”. If there is “strategy” but no “skill”, the mind will be more than sufficient but the strength is insufficient; if there is “skill” but no “strategy”, no matter how hard you try, you will not be able to achieve the goal. It requires both strategic guidance and technical support to be victorious in every battle. To win information-based and intelligent wars and carry out strategic innovation that puts strategy first and wins by outsmarting, we must implement both “policy” and “technique” to effectively solve problems such as the disconnect between theoretical innovation and technological application, and the derailment of combat operations and technological paths.
“Integration” of thinking and cognition. The rapid development of modern science and technology is promoting the evolution of future combat to high-end warfare. It is necessary to seize the theoretical commanding heights and create new technological advantages. In-depth integration of science and technology and innovative tactics are the keys to victory on the battlefield. As the main body of innovation in tactics, military personnel must have a deep understanding of the winning mechanism of modern warfare, root the concept of integrating science and technology, and expand the thinking of integrating science and technology. At present, two outstanding problems and tendencies are worth noting: First, insufficient scientific and technological literacy, which can easily lead to an in-depth understanding of new forms of warfare. Only relying on past experience and routines to study tactics, and which technologies are effective and which technologies in the combat system. I don’t know much about how effective it is, where to start to form a technological advantage over the enemy, what are the technical differences with powerful enemies, how to avoid being suppressed by the enemy’s technology, etc. We emphasize tactics over technology, emphasis on “wisdom” over “intelligence”, and innovative tactics. It seems to work, but in fact it lacks technical support and is highly risky. The second is that the combat needs are not accurately grasped, and the future battlefield scene is not clearly described. Although the technical principles and winning mechanisms are understood, the application of science and technology in combat operations is not known enough, and the decisive role of human subjective initiative in combat effectiveness is ignored. Function, focusing on technology over tactics, researching technology based on technology, or only studying technical performance without considering the application of tactics, or only knowing the efficacy of technology without trying to innovate tactics. In this regard, officers and soldiers should learn, understand, and use science and technology and science and technology personnel should learn military affairs, understand warfare, and study warfare methods in a coordinated and coordinated manner, establish an integration and innovation mechanism for combat technology experts, conduct joint research on winning mechanisms, and collaboratively embed the concept of science and technology integration , interactively help and improve the quality of tactical innovation, form an ideological understanding that combat operations drive the application of science and technology, and use science and technology application to support combat operations, and lay a solid foundation for integrating theory and technology to carry out tactical innovation.
Combat design “integration”. There are never two identical wars in the world. Innovation in tactics can be inherited and learned from, but cannot be copied. At present, the pace of military theoretical innovation is accelerating, advanced science and technology are developing at a rapid pace, and the form of warfare is undergoing profound changes, showing the distinctive characteristics of being mixed, diverse, and unpredictable. Subversive technologies, innovative concepts, and reshaping theories are emerging one after another. Only by integrating science and technology to design future operations can we find and improve the starting point for tactical innovation. We must have the courage to lead the world and break through the stereotypes, use forward-looking and unique perspectives to innovate combat theories, develop and implement combat concepts, conceive combat scenarios, innovate tactics, and first outline the “base map” of the future battlefield. Well, in this way, we can connect the application of modern science and technology and promote the research and development of advanced technology. At the same time, the design of future operations cannot be too far-fetched and “utopian” beyond the limits of science and technology. It should be based on the feasibility of science and technology within a certain period of time, and on the premise of having the support of realistic or foreseeable technology application and having a path for technological implementation, innovate tactics and integrate technology. Interdiction, technological surprise, technological suppression, and technological control are embedded in combat operations.
“Integration” with superior skills. In modern wars, the status of people as the decisive factor has not changed, but the impact of technology on the outcome of wars has become more prominent. The fight for technological victory determines the outcome of wars to a large extent. The use of science and technology must always be embedded in the combat chain and throughout the entire combat process. , use technical effects to support the application of tactics, and use technical advantages to drive combat effectiveness. At present, the main contradiction in the integration of theory and technology in the innovation of tactics is not the lack of theory in technology, but the lack of technology in theory. The most urgent thing is to promote the integration of cutting-edge technology into combat theory. It is necessary to strengthen the substantive integration based on weapons and equipment platforms, focus on activating combat effectiveness to the maximum extent, carry out extensive research on the combat application of equipment based on operational effectiveness release, equipment combat testing and identification, and test the effectiveness of combat operations through simulation deductions and data analysis. , verify the “probability of winning” with “number calculations”. It is necessary to strengthen the in-depth integration of technical means to select “optimal solutions” based on combat tasks. From studying combat opponents and determining action methods to formulating combat plans and organizing confrontation exercises, we must fully consider the technical strength comparison between the enemy and ourselves, and implement asymmetric The operational philosophy takes the superiority of the inferior and the avoidance of the strong to attack the weak as the basic principle, seeks technological suppression and prevents the enemy from suppressing it, seeks technological blockage and prevents the enemy from blocking it, seeks technological subversion and prevents the enemy from subverting it, maximizes the use of technological advantages, and does everything possible. Make every effort to limit the enemy’s technological performance in order to create a favorable situation and support the use of tactics.
Gather wisdom and strength to “integrate”. In the era of informationization and intelligence, both theoretical research and scientific and technological innovation show the remarkable characteristics of open linkage and cross-penetration. The integration of science and technology carries out strategic innovation, and open sharing is an important growth point. Promote the innovation of man-machine integrated tactics, where people use their ingenuity and machines do calculations, and use the calculation results to revise the results of tactics, and realize the integration of science and technology in human-computer interaction; promote the innovation of team-based tactics for finger-technical talents, and form a ” A mixed group of “scientists + commanders” and “combatants + technicians” implements joint debugging and testing, joint exercises and training, and joint calculations and calculations, and seeks joint victory with the scientific nature of tactics and advanced technology; promotes open source and mass Tactics innovation, integration within and outside the military, online and offline interaction, with a broader vision and more flexible form, pool the wisdom of officers and soldiers and various professional talents to carry out “makers” in the field of tactics innovation “Activities, develop and gather new tactics “resource pools” and “results libraries” to achieve maximum benefits from the integration of science and technology.
Practice iterative “integration”. Theoretical achievements have been tested and sublimated in practical applications, and scientific and technological means have demonstrated their functions and benefits in combat operations. Innovation in tactics is not something that can be accomplished in a day, and the integration of science and technology should also be iteratively progressed and developed on a rolling basis. It is necessary to focus on the integrated application of information technology and intelligent technology, to virtually construct future combat scenarios, and to innovate tactics while feeling and experiencing the intelligent combat environment; it is necessary to carry out in-depth virtual simulation demonstrations of the innovative results of tactics, and fully verify them through virtual experiments and simulation tests. The feasibility of tactical design and the effectiveness of combat operations; technical performance testing must be carried out in conjunction with drills and training activities, and the efficacy and flaws of technical applications must be fully tested by analyzing the actual energy collection and release of weapons, equipment and information systems. Therefore, problems can be discovered and solved dynamically during review discussions, repeated demonstrations, and data testing, and we can modify theories where the theory is not applicable and upgrade technologies where technology is not feasible, so that tactics can introduce new field technologies, and technology can subvert traditional tactics and achieve success. The organic combination of technology and combat continues to promote the spiral and rolling development of tactical innovation.
In late April, the Institute of War Research of the Academy of Military Sciences successfully completed the submission of project demonstration proposals for two major combat issue research projects. This is a concrete practice of the institute focusing on fulfilling its core functions and always aiming at scientific research and preparation for war.
The War Research Institute is a scientific research institution specializing in the study and design of war in the entire military. As a newly established unit, the main characteristics of their scientific research work are many major tasks, many temporary tasks, and many demonstration and application tasks. At the beginning of the year, in response to the actual situation where there were few people and urgent tasks and scientific research tasks were being pushed forward, the party committee of the institute put the scientific research work aimed at strengthening the army and winning the war in an important position in accordance with the combat effectiveness standards. Based on the criteria of urgent need for war preparation, urgent need for war, and urgent need of troops, they adjusted and established key scientific research tasks in the research of war and combat issues, and the compilation of doctrines and regulations, etc., and reduced more than 10 topics that deviated from their main responsibilities and main business, and added new A batch of research on war forms, combat styles and other topics focusing on war preparation and combat were carried out. According to the leader of the institute, the party committee of the institute requires team members to both take command and go out on major scientific research tasks, so that the main energy should be devoted to key tasks, and force allocation and financial support should be tilted towards combat research.
At the same time, the institute continues to deepen the collaborative research of “small core and large periphery” and continuously innovates the scientific research organization model. They carry out “bundled” research by military theoretical personnel and military scientific and technological personnel within the institute to break down barriers to scientific research; they exchange experts with sister units such as the Military Medical Research Institute and the National Defense Engineering Research Institute to participate in major project research to achieve complementary advantages; organize scientific research Personnel participate in various major exercises and training activities to identify scientific research needs; multilateral military exchange activities are held to keep scientific researchers informed of the latest military science and technology trends. In addition, they also actively cooperate with local scientific research institutes to use local high-quality scientific research resources for their own use, forming a closed loop of researching war, designing war, operating war, and verifying war.
Since last year, the institute has completed more than 100 scientific research projects, made important breakthroughs in the development of core operational concepts and joint operational experiments, submitted more than 60 national high-end think tank research reports and important issue assessment reports, and launched a number of strategies. Innovative results that are highly innovative, original and forward-looking.
美军网络作战武器装备研发始终按照军商民结合、兼收并蓄的方法进行。网络空间作战装备与常规作战装备不同,其主要是以代码为基础、以设计为核心的研制生产形式,供应链的层级关系并不明晰。如今,美国具有以美国国防部高级研究计划局(Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency,DARPA)为核心的军方研究力量,以诺斯罗普·格鲁曼、雷声、洛克希德·马丁等传统防务公司为主,互联网、电子、软件、信息安全等领域公司兼收并蓄的研制力量。
From the perspective of the construction of cyberspace combat forces in major countries in the world, the U.S. military, as the first army to publicly announce the construction of cyberspace combat forces, has relatively strong strength and has carried out cyberspace combat operations many times in war practice. Organizations and countries such as the European Union and Russia have also launched cyberspace combat force building and carried out some actual combat operations. The study and analysis of the successful experience and practices of the major countries and regions in the world in the construction of military cyberspace combat forces has important reference and enlightenment significance for the development of cyberspace in my country.
With the rapid development of network information technology and its wide application in the military, cyberspace has become an emerging combat domain following the four domains of land, sea, air, and space, and cyberspace operations have also become an inseparable and important component of all-domain joint operations part, and become the key to gaining and maintaining the operational initiative, control and victory. The United States, Russia, Japan and other major countries in the world have formulated cyberspace security and development strategies, established cyberspace combat forces, and developed advanced network technologies and weapons and equipment, stepping up to seize this new strategic commanding height.
The United States leads the construction of cyberspace
Whether it is cyberspace concept and theoretical research, or other related technology research and application practice, the United States is the source and leader of cyberspace development, driving the development of cyberspace in various countries and regions. The U.S. military’s cyber force is the earliest “established” cyber combat force in the world. It has gone through stages such as the establishment of defense during the Clinton era, cyber counter-terrorism during the Bush era, simultaneous deterrence and war during the Obama era, and “forward defense” during the Trump administration. It has developed into a network combat force with 133 network task teams and tens of thousands of people in various services.
1.1 Strengthening the strategic deterrent position
In order to compete for the control and development of cyberspace, the United States actively responds to the new requirements of changes in the shape of future wars, and establishes cyberspace as an emerging combat domain alongside land, sea, air, and space, and places it as a strategic deterrent. Strategic Position.
The important strategic documents related to cyberspace promulgated by the United States are shown in Table 1. In 2011, the United States successively issued three major strategic documents, the “International Strategy for Cyberspace”, the “National Strategy for Trusted Identity in Cyberspace” and the “Strategy for Cyberspace Operations of the Department of Defense”. The use and control of cyberspace has been elevated to a basic national policy.
In recent years, based on competition among major powers, the U.S. military has further enhanced its strategic position in cyberspace, and a combat system structure for cyberspace operations has basically taken shape. In 2018, the U.S. military successively released the new version of the “DoD Cyber Strategy” [1] and the “Cyberspace Operations” joint doctrine, clarifying that cyberspace operations themselves can be used as an independent combat style to achieve tactical, operational or strategic effects, and can also be integrated with other fields. The integration of combat styles improves the effectiveness of joint operations through coordinated operations; in 2020, the U.S. Cyberspace Sunbathing Committee released the “Warning from the Future” report, proposing the “defense forward” strategy, and recommending that the U.S. Department of Defense expand it to the national level , the strategy is a national cyberspace layered deterrence strategy based on continuous confrontation as the main mode of action, and behavior shaping, benefit denial, and cost imposition as the fundamental approaches.
1.2 The leadership system has a clear division of labor
The United States divides its national cyber security business into four parts: homeland security business, national defense business, intelligence business, and law enforcement business, as shown in Figure 1. Among them, the homeland security business is dominated by the Department of Homeland Security, which is mainly responsible for coordinating the cyberspace security of important infrastructure and protecting government and commercial networks and systems; the national defense business is dominated by the Department of Defense, led by the US Cyber Command, and various military services provide troops It has three major functions of attack, defense, and military information infrastructure operation and maintenance management. It is the core of the US cyber security force; the intelligence business is dominated by the National Security Agency, which is mainly responsible for detecting malicious activities in foreign cyberspace. The Ministry of Defense provides capability support; criminal law enforcement involves multiple departments including the Department of Justice and its subordinate agencies.
Table 1. Important strategic documents related to cyberspace promulgated by the United States
Figure 1. Management and coordination framework of cyberspace organizations in the United States
The U.S. Cyber Command was established in 2009 and was originally affiliated to the U.S. Strategic Command. In August 2017, the U.S. Cyber Command was upgraded to the 10th independent U.S. Joint Operations Command, and the responsibility for combat command was assigned to the Cyber Command. And the director of the National Security Agency also serves as the commander. For the U.S. military’s network operations, especially operations with high real-time requirements, this move straightens out the command and control relationship. The organizational relationship between the upgraded U.S. Cyber Command and other agencies is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. The organizational relationship between the upgraded US Cyber Command and other agencies
The U.S. Cyber Command is under the command of the President and Secretary of Defense of the United States, and has operational control over the headquarters of the National Cyber Mission Force, the Headquarters of the Joint Cyberspace Forces, the Headquarters of the Cyberspace Forces of the Services, and the Headquarters of the Joint Forces of the Department of Defense Information Network; Mission detachments, combat detachments, protection detachments and support detachments have operational control.
During the operation, the U.S. Cyber Command conducts cyber operations in accordance with the instructions of the U.S. President and Secretary of Defense, implements operational control over its subordinate forces, and provides customized force packages to the Joint Operations Command for support. The force package is composed of cyber combat forces, combat support personnel and other cyberspace forces under the Cyber Command. Cyber Command maintains operational control of force packages and delegates operational control to subordinate commands as appropriate. The commander receiving the force package has tactical control over the timing and tempo of cyberspace operations.
1.3 Large scale of organizational strength
The U.S. military’s cyber force is the first established “organized” cyber combat force in the world. It has long recruited cyber talents, formed a cyber force, and held secret exercises. At present, the U.S. military has basically formed a general pattern in which the Cyber Command is responsible for operations, and the military services and the Defense Information Systems Agency and other Ministry of Defense business bureaus are responsible for the construction. Different from the land, sea, and air combat domains, the particularity of the cyberspace combat domain requires that the two chains of management (military administration) and operations (military orders) must cooperate more closely.
The U.S. military’s cyberspace strategic combat force is mainly composed of 133 cyber mission teams under the Cyber Command, with about 6,200 active duty and civilian personnel. According to the instructions of the Ministry of National Defense in 2013, the force was formed by drawing forces from various services (41 from the Army, 40 from the Navy, 39 from the Air Force, and 13 from the Marine Corps). It mainly performs tasks such as the operation and maintenance protection operations of the Ministry of National Defense information network, offensive cyberspace operations, and defensive cyberspace operations. The 133 cyber mission teams are organized into three types of troops: national cyber mission troops, combat mission troops, and network protection troops, according to the different types of tasks they undertake. Currently, the U.S. Cyber Task Force is expanding its scale. By 2024, 21 cyber protection teams will be formed, increasing the number of cyber task teams to 154.
The cyberspace tactical combat force of the U.S. military is mainly composed of the cyberspace forces of the four major cybercommands of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps under the U.S. Cyber Command (the total number is about 80,000 people), and they are responsible for network protection and combat support of various services. The mission provides support for the offensive, defensive, and operation and maintenance operations of the cyber mission force in joint operations. The network commands of various services are also stepping up the expansion and integration of network combat forces to provide support for the operations of network mission forces and the network protection of various services.
1.4 Comprehensive combat capability system
In terms of equipment research and development, the U.S. military adheres to the principle of “building while using, and integrating construction and use”, continuously intensifies the research and development of cyber warfare weapon systems and equipment, and conducts research on key technologies for cyber warfare. A number of research programs have been carried out in early warning, command and control, and training and evaluation, and tens of billions of dollars have been invested in the research and development of various cyberspace combat equipment, thereby promoting and improving the level of network combat technology, enhancing service support capabilities and operational capabilities. efficiency.
The most representative equipment for network defense includes “network deception” system, “cyber wolf” software system, network attack alarm system and network vulnerability scanner. At the same time, the US military also attaches great importance to the application of the concept of “active network defense”. It has promoted the rapid development of network attack traceability technology. Cyber attacks include a variety of powerful computer viruses such as “Stuxnet” and “Flame”; battlefield cyber attacks are more representative of the Air Force’s “Shuter” system and the Navy’s EA-18G “Growler” aircraft. Reconnaissance perception has the ability to obtain information such as enemy communications, content, network protocols, hardware addresses, passwords, identity authentication processes, and network vulnerabilities. Programs such as “Einstein” and “Prometheus” have formed large-scale intelligence production capabilities and are trying to build a global cyberspace situational awareness system.
1.5 Equipment research and development forces are all-inclusive
The research and development of the U.S. military’s network combat weapons and equipment has always been carried out in accordance with the method of combining military, commercial and civilian, and inclusive. Cyberspace combat equipment is different from conventional combat equipment. It is mainly a code-based, design-centric development and production form, and the hierarchical relationship of the supply chain is not clear. Today, the United States has a military research force with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) as the core, and traditional defense forces such as Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and Lockheed Martin. The company is the mainstay, and the company has an eclectic research and development force in the fields of Internet, electronics, software, and information security.
The cyberspace research directions of the U.S. military, government scientific research institutions, and traditional defense companies usually cover one or more aspects of cyberspace reconnaissance (situational awareness), surveillance, attack, defense, test verification, and comprehensive integration; while the Internet, electronics, Companies in the fields of software and information security carry out cyberspace technology research and equipment development and production in their respective fields. In addition, since the research and development products of cyberspace combat equipment are mainly software, which is a logical layer product, this has led to a blurred boundary between basic research in cyberspace and equipment development and production. Teams and individuals are also an important part of the US cyberspace industry. Figure 3 shows the main power structure of cyberspace R&D and production capabilities.
Figure 3 The main force structure of US cyberspace R&D and production capabilities
Among them, large and medium-sized military enterprises are the backbone of the research and development of the US cyberspace equipment subsystem/subsystem/technical field. In recent years, the traditional large and medium-sized military enterprises in the United States have rapidly entered the field of network security through “mergers and reorganizations” as the main means, and formed several companies such as Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin. Comprehensive companies are the leading network security defense industry. In the bidding of DARPA and various military cyberspace projects, these large and medium-sized military enterprises usually occupy the position of main contractors.
2 Europe follows closely behind
The European cyberspace industry started later than the United States, mainly focusing on research on cyberspace defense and cyberspace security issues. In recent years, European governments and national defense/electronic companies have also invested in the field of cyberspace security. Through the gradual improvement of strategic policies, public-private alliances, and guidance of cyberspace technology research and development, a network that spans the entire Europe and other countries and regions has been initially formed. Cyberspace defense system. Specifically, it is manifested in the following levels.
At the level of research and development, European countries not only follow the lead of the United States, but also rely on NATO, the European Union and other transnational platforms to achieve integration and complementarity within Europe and between Europe and the United States, and finally formed a cyberspace security capability with both commonality and characteristics, second only to the United States .
At the level of organization and management, since most European countries are small in scale and easy to manage, they have achieved a relatively efficient, integrated, and powerful cyberspace management mechanism. At the same time, due to the large number of European countries and the existence of competition, there are sometimes obstacles to the implementation of national-level cooperation on cyberspace security.
At the level of system research and development, due to the very high level of digitalization, softwareization, and networking in many European countries (even higher than the United States), they are facing great pressure in cyberspace defense just like the United States. Therefore, their cyberspace development is to ensure cyberspace Safety first. In recent years, under the guidance of cyberspace thinking that focuses on defense, the research and development of cyberspace technology, especially cyberspace security technology, has been gradually strengthened. Expand investment and deployment in the field. When countries are investing in the cyberspace security market one after another, the cyberspace security products of some major European countries have already occupied a relatively large market share and opened up a certain scale of global market.
Russia’s cyberspace development ideas are unique
Compared with Western countries, Russia has always paid attention to comprehensive and large-scale information space, and has not conducted in-depth and systematic research on cyberspace as a subdomain of information space like the United States. However, due to Russia’s long-term attention to the field of information security and industrial accumulation, it has a good foundation in the field of cyberspace. Specifically, it is manifested in the following levels.
At the level of strategic planning, Russia has issued a series of legal documents aimed at protecting information security in all aspects of the country, such as the “Russian Federation Information Security Doctrine”, “Russian Social Information Development Strategy”, etc., but in the existing legal documents, it does not cover The relational system between information space and cyberspace, the term “cyber security” is not separated from the concept of “information security”. With the continuous increase of network security risks, Russia has focused on the protection of cyberspace security on key information infrastructure since 2010, and successively promulgated “Conceptual Viewpoints of Russian Federation Armed Forces in Information Space Activities” and “2020 Legal documents such as the National Policy Framework in the Field of International Information Security of the Russian Federation, the Strategic Conception of the Russian Federation Network Security (Draft), the Doctrine of Information Security of the Russian Federation (Second Edition) and the Law on the Security of Key Information Infrastructures of the Russian Federation It expounds Russia’s strategic goals to promote the development of cyberspace at multiple levels, as well as the important measures implemented to protect key information infrastructure and guide the development of cyberspace. At the organizational level, in August 2013, the Russian government announced the formation of a specialized information warfare agency under the Russian Armed Forces, and decided to form a cyber security command and a new agency of the armed forces, with the aim of improving the country’s cyber combat capabilities.
At the level of application practice, the “Network Commander’s Handbook” published by the United States in 2010 shows that the only example of global network operations is the information network attacks that occurred in Estonia, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan from 2007 to 2009. These three small-scale attacks They are all done by Russia. It can be considered that Russia has unique practical experience in the field of network security.
In terms of research and development capabilities, Russia has a network security defense company with outstanding strength. For example, Kaspersky Lab is an important company in the field of global information security, and the “Russian Technological Information” company under the Rostec Group is also a core network security company in Russia. because
Transparency is limited, and it is difficult to find Russian companies capable of researching and developing cyber attack equipment from public channels, but this does not mean that Russia does not have such capabilities. In addition, Russian hacker organizations enjoy a “famous reputation” around the world. Research, production and trade of equipment.
4 Japan set off a wave of cyberspace development
Japan is one of the countries with the most advanced information technology in the world. At the same time, it is also subject to more and more cyberspace threats ranging from targeting individuals to public sectors and infrastructure. Therefore, Japan has long paid attention to cyberspace security issues. Japan classifies these threats under the umbrella of “information security” and established the National Information Security Center in 2005 to address the threat. As the concept of “cyberspace” proposed by the United States has been widely accepted, Japan also began to emphasize “cyberspace” at the national level around 2010, and regarded cybersecurity as an important issue affecting national security. Specifically, it is manifested in the following levels.
At the level of strategic planning, in 2013, the Japanese government issued the first “Network Security Strategy”, which promotes the construction and development of network security at the national level, and clearly proposes to build Japan into a powerful country in network security. In August 2015 and July 2018, the Japanese government successively issued two upgraded versions of the “Cyber Security Strategy”, mainly to prepare for the network security protection of the 2020 Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games.
At the organizational level, in 2010, the Japanese Defense Agency established a “cyber warfare force” of about 5,000 people composed of computer experts from the land, sea, and air self-defense forces to specialize in the attack and defense of network systems. The main task of Japan’s “cyber warfare forces” is to develop transnational “cyber weapons” that can destroy the network systems of other countries, and undertake tasks such as self-defense force computer network system protection, virus removal, and program repair; develop tactical “cyber weapons” “, and study the relevant tactics of cyber warfare; support the anti-hacking organization and anti-virus intrusion tasks of the “Network Special Attack Team”. International researchers pointed out that from the Japanese “cyber warfare forces”, we can see the shadow of the US military’s “super hacker force”.
At the level of application practice, Japan pays more attention to the actual combat background in network offensive and defensive exercises, so as to improve the practicality and pertinence of the exercises. In the “March 18” exercise in 2014, the preset scenario was that Japan’s key infrastructure encountered cyber attacks during the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. In the “Yamazakura” joint exercise held by Japan and the United States in 2019, the preset scenario was that Tokyo and the southwest region of Japan were attacked by missiles and other events concurrently. The exercise aimed to test the operation of the command and control system under cyber and electromagnetic attacks situation and study countermeasures.
At the level of system research and development, Japan emphasizes “both offense and defense” in building a network combat system, allocates a large amount of funds to invest in network hardware and “network warfare troops”, and establishes a “defense information communication platform” and a “common computer system platform” respectively. It facilitates the mutual communication and resource sharing of various organs and military network systems of the Self-Defense Force.
5 Apocalyptic Suggestions
From the perspective of the construction of cyberspace combat forces in major countries in the world, major countries and organizations in the world, such as the United States, Russia, Japan, and the European Union, have continuously strengthened military cyberspace operations through strategic planning guidance, organizational structure construction, combat force formation, and system equipment research and development. This has certain reference significance for the development of my country’s cyberspace.
5.1 Deepen the top-level design and enhance the strategic position of cyberspace
Cyberspace has greatly extended and expanded the boundaries of national interests. The Internet has increasingly become the basic platform for national political, economic, cultural and social activities, the lifeblood of the real economy and the nervous system on which the entire society depends. It can be seen that network security is not only a security issue of the network itself, but its impact has radiated to all aspects of national security and national interests. Therefore, it is necessary to plan and deploy the country’s network security issues from the national strategic level. my country should learn from the experience of foreign cyberspace strategies, formulate cyberspace strategies at the national level, strengthen cybersecurity legislation, build an international cooperation system, and plan and deploy national cybersecurity development as a whole at the national level.
5.2 Consolidate the foundation of capabilities and develop cyberspace countermeasures
In recent years, with the advancement of my country’s informatization construction and the comprehensive popularization of national network infrastructure equipment, network security threats from home and abroad have shown a trend of diversification, complexity, and frequent occurrence, posing a major threat to China’s cyberspace security, leading to my country’s Important information systems of government agencies and critical infrastructure may face security risks such as large-scale leakage of sensitive information and paralysis of information systems. In order to ensure the integrity and availability of cyberspace information infrastructure, it is necessary to improve its survivability, respond quickly to cyber threats, and initiate attacks at the right time. Based on this, our country must proceed from the aspects of theory, technology, and talents to consolidate the foundation of cyberspace capabilities and provide guarantees for possible cyberspace confrontation and defense in the future.
5.3 Strengthen strength building and build a cyberspace support system
Today, cyberspace has become an emerging combat domain. It is necessary to build a powerful cyberspace combat force and seize control of this emerging combat domain in order to effectively maintain national security and development interests in cyberspace. Since the establishment of the U.S. Cyber Command in June 2009, the U.S. military has made great achievements in the construction of cyber military power, forming a strong military guarantee for U.S. cyber security, and at the same time posing a huge threat to the cyberspace of other countries. We must speed up the construction of cyberspace forces, continuously improve the cybersecurity awareness and information protection capabilities of the whole people, strengthen national defense mobilization, cultivate reserve forces, and build a network combat force system with sufficient combat capabilities, so as to effectively contain and counter the opponent’s attack on our country. cyber threat.
6 Conclusion
Cyberspace has become an important combat force for the military to seek development because of its characteristics such as not being restricted by time and space, not being constrained by combat objectives, having a wide range of sources of support for combat forces, and strong mutations in the combat process. In recent years, major countries and organizations in the world, such as the United States, Russia, Japan, and the European Union, have been committed to promoting the construction of cyberspace combat capabilities in order to seize the dominant position in this field. my country should accelerate the construction of military cyberspace forces and enhance our country’s cyberspace combat capabilities in order to seek the right to win future information warfare.
Citation format: Li Shuo, Li Zhenjing, Wang Shizhong, et al. Analysis and Enlightenment of the Development Situation of Foreign Military Cyberspace Combat Forces [J]. Information Security and Communication Secrecy, 2022(5):90-99.
At the opening ceremony of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Hu Jintao, on behalf of the 17th Central Committee, presented the title of “Unswervingly Marching on the Road of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and Striving for the Full Construction of a Well-off Society” Report.
The report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China is clear-cut, profound, truth-seeking, pragmatic, and comprehensive. It puts forward a series of new formulations, new viewpoints, new deployments and new requirements, such as “two accelerations”, “three confidences”, and “four modernizations”. “Synchronization”, “Five in One”… In order to allow netizens to fully and profoundly understand and master the key points and essence of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, this website has extracted typical “keys” from the twelve parts of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. “Words”, one issue every day, is continuously released for the reference of netizens.
Key words: “Prosperous country and strong military-civilian integrated development” . The report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China put forward “taking the path of military-civilian integration with Chinese characteristics, and insisting on the unity of rich country and strong military”, and it is clear that building and consolidating national defense and a strong military is a strategic task for China’s modernization drive. At the same time, it has further clarified the status of national defense and army building in the overall layout of the socialist cause with Chinese characteristics, and guided national defense and army building on the track of focusing on improving national strategic capabilities and developing in sync with the country’s economic and social construction.
At the opening ceremony of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Hu Jintao, on behalf of the 17th Central Committee, presented the title of “Unswervingly Marching on the Road of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and Striving for the Full Construction of a Well-off Society” Report.
The report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China is clear-cut, profound, truth-seeking, pragmatic, and comprehensive. It puts forward a series of new formulations, new viewpoints, new deployments and new requirements, such as “two accelerations”, “three confidences”, and “four modernizations”. “Synchronization”, “Five in One”… In order to allow netizens to fully and profoundly understand and master the key points and essence of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, this website has extracted typical “keys” from the twelve parts of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. “Words”, one issue every day, is continuously released for the reference of netizens.
Keywords: Highly concerned about the safety of the “three spaces” . The report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China emphasized the need to pay close attention to the security of oceans, space, and cyberspace, which puts forward new requirements for us to strengthen military strategic guidance and maintain national security. The ocean is a major channel for international exchanges and a treasure house of strategic resources for the sustainable development of mankind. A new wave of ocean development is emerging in the world today; space is the new commanding height of international strategic competition, and space military advantages have a decisive influence on the process and outcome of modern warfare; Cyberspace is the basic symbol of the information age. It is becoming an emerging strategic area that affects national security and development, and an important combat space that penetrates, influences, and even determines other combat spaces. We must fully understand the security situation of oceans, space, and cyberspace, strengthen research on ocean, space, and cyberspace security issues, and do a good job in building related forces and methods to provide strong strategic support for safeguarding national interests.
At the opening ceremony of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Hu Jintao, on behalf of the 17th Central Committee, presented the title of “Unswervingly Marching on the Road of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and Striving for the Full Construction of a Well-off Society” Report.
The report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China is clear-cut, profound, truth-seeking, pragmatic, and comprehensive. It puts forward a series of new formulations, new viewpoints, new deployments and new requirements, such as “two accelerations”, “three confidences”, and “four modernizations”. “Synchronization”, “Five in One”… In order to allow netizens to fully and profoundly understand and master the key points and essence of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, this website has extracted typical “keys” from the twelve parts of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. “Words”, one issue every day, is continuously released for the reference of netizens.
Keywords: “persistence” at the two cores . The first is to resolutely obey the instructions of the Party Central Committee. This is an important thought of our Party. The second is the modernization of national defense and the army. Modernization is the central task of army building. With the accelerating evolution of the conditions of the times and the forms of warfare, informatization has become the essential requirement of military modernization. It is precisely based on an accurate grasp of the connotation of the era of military modernization that the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposes to unswervingly regard informatization as the development direction of military modernization and promote the accelerated development of informatization.
Keywords: modernization . We must be aware that there is still a big gap in the level of national defense and military modernization compared with national security and development needs. The main contradiction between national defense and army building is still the incompatibility of the modernization level with the requirements of winning local wars under the conditions of informationization, and the incompatibility of military capabilities with the requirements of fulfilling our military’s historical mission in the new century and new stage. This important conclusion in the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China reflects the Party Central Committee’s profound grasp of the new characteristics and trends of the national security environment, the internal logic and basic laws that must be guided by the country’s core security needs in national defense construction, and also reflects the entire party’s The people of all ethnic groups throughout the army have new expectations for national defense and army building under the new situation.