Category Archives: 國防和軍隊現代化建設

中國軍事認知域作戰:關注對手思想與情感衝突-認知域作戰的突出屬性

Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations: Focus on the Adversary Mind and Emotional Conflict – Prominent Attributes of Cognitive Domain Operations

要點提示

●實務證明,認知域作戰打破了傳統意義上的線上線下的資料壁壘,透過統合利用電信網路、網際網路、物聯網等管道,借助先進演算法,發起者可以有效切換各種空間,優選作戰樣式 ,甚至聚焦在私人空間、公共空間精準釋放乾擾訊息,以達到傳統作戰方式無法達到的效果。

●在未來的認知域作戰中,科學和邏輯等理性因素對個體認知的影響極有可能被削弱,認知對抗或將成為情感與情感的較量。

目前,智慧化科技的快速發展,正全方位變革訊息傳播的邏輯,使訊息對思維意識的影響更加深刻和全面,人的大腦認知真正上升為軍事對抗的重要場域。 智慧化時代,資訊傳播機制的不斷演進將從多面向體系化重塑認知對抗,進而推動認知域作戰發生根本性變革。

人工智慧成為認知域作戰的主要驅動力

智慧化時代,資訊傳播以數據為依托,人工智慧技術貫穿資訊收集、生產、回饋等全過程。 人工智慧這項顛覆性技術在軍事領域的廣泛深入應用,將是未來認知域作戰規劃和實施等整個過程的關鍵支撐。

人工智慧技術將貫穿未來認知域作戰多場景。 在認知域作戰行動部署、節奏把控等過程中,參戰各方依托先進算法作為行動的“調控者”“把關人”,來自各個作戰域的大量關於戰場行動的信息,為交戰各方 高效率決策和實施認知域作戰提供驅動力。 實踐證明,認知域作戰打破了傳統意義上的線上線下的資料壁壘,透過統合利用電信網路、互聯網、物聯網等管道,借助先進演算法,發起者可以有效切換各種空間,優選作戰樣式, 甚至聚焦在私密空間、公共空間精準釋放乾擾訊息,以達到傳統作戰方式無法達到的效果。

此外,人工智慧從賦能單環節朝向連結作戰各環節、全流程演變。 目前,人工智慧在資訊傳播中也局限於定位目標受眾,以提高資訊和信宿的匹配率。 未來認知域作戰,人工智慧將在認知域作戰規劃和實施各環節「一站式」發揮作用,並不斷強化各環節之間的耦合。 外軍認為,未來認知域作戰中,可利用數據差異化投送,啟動機器人瞬時製造輿論潮流,影響認知效果。 戰略戰役層面,可基於長期追蹤數據和不斷調整優化的演算法策略,計算不同地域、群體認知態勢,輔助決策者規劃核心敘事、主要議題等,從而調控行動實施和協同動作。

自主對抗成為認知域作戰的顯著特徵

隨著智慧程式從協同傳播、參與傳播到自主傳播,以及智慧終端的連結生態的不斷擴大,未來戰場上,官兵將越來越多地可以接收到智慧程式、智慧終端發送的各類訊息。 而在虛擬空間,數位孿生體、虛擬人之間的互動溝通,將會傳導作用於現實世界人的認知。 從智慧化條件下的認知域作戰的發展趨勢來看,人的介入度將逐漸降低,資訊彈藥的採集、合成、發送將更加自主高效,話語策略、行動策略的製定執行更趨自主化, 整個流程節奏空前快速。 但就結果而言,人仍是認知域作戰的最終目標,由自主化武器賦能加速的流程會持續強化對人認知的控制。

借助智慧程式、智慧終端、數位孿生體、虛擬人等自主對抗工具,參戰各方將在認知域作戰態勢佈設、時空運用、資訊內容設計等方面擁有更多彈性,資訊真偽對抗將更加 突出。 未來的認知域作戰,自主化武器將有可能突破力量與時空的限制,行動樣式更趨複雜。 外軍實踐表明,運用網路進行面向大眾的「噴灌式」傳播、面向特定群體的「滴灌式」傳播,將成為認知域作戰的常見樣式。 智慧程式、智慧終端機由於具有大量複製部署、不間歇運轉等特點,能夠支援開發更多更複雜的行動樣式。 如可圍繞特定議題、瞄準特定攻擊對象,迅即調動海量社交機器人,輪番集中擴散信息,或利用圍繞特定個體的智能設備採集相關數據,運用對話機器人、虛擬人與個體長期伴生互動、持續誘導,以 達成作戰目的。

未來認知域作戰,自主化武器隱蔽操控認知域戰場將成為常態,社交機器人可以根據需要製造假輿情、假熱點,從而產生更多的個體感知迷霧;智能合成技術將降低虛假信息製作門檻, 從而增加鑑偽成本和難度;機器人帳號、虛擬人信源將更難以甄別,而「一對一」的認知詐欺日益普遍。

情感衝突成為認知域作戰的突出屬性

智能化時代,新科技將拓寬人類的認知範圍、加深人們的感知程度。 擴展現實、元宇宙等技術將更全像、透明地呈現戰場環境、事件現場等,且場景可觸可感可交互,受眾在認知事件真相時將會更加受制於感性邏輯的影響。

得益於行動互聯網的發展,資訊傳播的迅捷度快速提高,透過大批次的資訊短時間內集中釋放,可極大壓縮個體的反應時間,使個體難以進行深度思考。 在事件全貌完整展現之前,受眾往往已形成立場傾向甚至將注意力轉向新焦點,依據碎片化線索輸出結論的模式加劇了對訊息的非理性、情緒化反應。 在未來的認知域作戰中,科學和邏輯等理性因素對個體認知的影響極有可能被削弱,認知對抗或將成為情感與情感的較量。 在訴諸理性與訴諸感性的抉擇中,參戰各方越發注重以情動人,透過感性手段激盪、佔據甚至極化目標對象心智,主導認知域對抗態勢。

智能化時代,認知撬動愈加倚重感性爭取。 一方面,以情緒喚醒策略增強認知共鳴。 未來的認知域作戰,行動發起者透過把殘酷激烈的交戰畫面、戰後慘像或參戰士兵傷亡過程與現狀有所選擇地呈現於受眾眼前,以此強烈刺激受眾情緒,喚醒受眾內心深處 的情感認同。 人作為傳播網絡的節點,透過智慧演算法可蒐集各類體徵數據,使行動發起者得以較準確地研判訊息所產生的情緒效果,進而動態調整內容,強化情緒反應。 行動發起者透過數據計算選定具有相似理解語境、相同情感特質的群體,或選定易受影響、具有較大影響價值的特定個體,透過靶向傳播同質化的信息流,從而激發其 群體認知共鳴。

另一方面,以道德裹挾策略激發價值認同。 面對累積加重的片段化、非理性認知反應模式,作戰行動發起者可透過二元對立的話語體系佔據道德高點、匯聚利己價值認知洪流,進而實現裹挾效果。 智慧傳播環境下豐富的呈現形態、直抵民眾的社群管道,為行動發起者運用此策略提供了便捷手段。 近年來的局部戰爭中,科技演進對道德裹挾策略的促進已逐步體現,如社群媒體將以往的秘密外交暴露於民眾面前,交戰各方首腦政要運用這一手段,直播或全程公開與別處決策 層、菁英群等的溝通細節,話語策略也愈發突顯道德仲裁與批判,進而影響、刺激國際民眾支持己方價值立場。

萬物互聯擴展認知域作戰的戰場空間

隨著資訊傳播技術的發展,社群媒體逐漸成為塑造認知的主要戰場,交戰各方的機構、個人與民眾透過社群媒體可以直接接觸並產生相互關聯,從而使全天候的認知爭奪成為可能。

智慧傳播時代,萬物互聯成為新的社會連結模式,傳播主體、傳播行為無所不在。 在此影響下,認知域作戰空間將擴展至智慧物聯終端、場景,並延伸至實體空間和虛擬空間兩個世界。 萬物互聯導致認知域作戰空間的泛在,將進一步推動作戰主體的泛在,自然人、具備資訊收發能力的智慧終端,甚至網路世界中的虛擬角色都有可能成為作戰主體,認知域作戰參戰 力量的類型將會大大拓展,認知域作戰的組織方式將會向分散式協同方向轉變。

未來的認知域作戰,深處衝突腹地的人與機器都將成為作戰的重要力量,在智慧化技術的支撐下,將協同繪製戰場圖景、參與「書寫」戰爭全過程。 前線士兵透過社群網路源源不絕地將個人戰場經歷,經過個人化包裝後適時推送展現給世人,單兵裝備、作戰平台將擔負戰場影像擷取、傳輸任務,並根據預設程序觸發自動處理和發布機制 ,以多種方式配合實體空間作戰行動,爭奪制資訊權和製腦權。 隨著通訊技術的不斷發展,前線士兵、智慧裝備還可以根據上級指令,有針對性地對所掌握的資訊進行再加工、再處理,從而更加便捷地、全景全像地呈現己方所要表達的戰場景象 ,實現認知域作戰攻心奪志的最終目標。

外語英語翻譯:

Important tips

●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.

中國軍事原文來源:http://www.81.cn/yw_208727/10208858.html

打贏資訊化智慧化戰爭解放軍必須找到科技融合點推進戰術創新

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

戰法,即作戰方法,指作戰中運用的策略和技術。 戰法創新,既要深謀“策”,也要鑽研“技”。 有“策”無“技”,心有餘而力不足;有“技”無“策”,雖用力而不得法。 既要有策略指導,又具備技術支撐,方能百戰百勝。 打贏資訊化智能化戰爭,開展以謀為先、以智取勝的戰法創新,必須「策」「技」並施,有效解決理論創新與技術應用脫節、作戰行動與技術路徑脫軌等問題。

思維認知「融」。 現代科技快速發展,正推動未來作戰向高端戰爭演進。 既要搶佔理論制高點,又要塑造技術新優勢,理技深度融合創新戰法,是製勝戰場的要訣。 軍人作為戰法創新的主體,必須深刻認知現代戰爭制勝機理,根植理技融合理念,拓展理技融合思維。 目前,兩個突出問題和傾向值得注意:一是科技素養不夠,容易導致對新的戰爭形態認識不深不透,僅憑以往經驗套路研究戰法,對作戰體系中哪些技術起作用、什麼技術 真管用、對敵形成技術優勢從何入手、與強敵存在哪些技術差、如何避免被敵技術壓制等知之不深,重戰法輕技術、重“智謀”輕“智能”,創新的戰法 看似管用,其實缺乏技術支撐,風險度大。 二是把握不准作戰需求,未來戰場景象描繪不夠清晰,雖然技術原理、制勝機理明白了,但對科技在作戰行動中的運用知之不夠,忽略了人的主觀能動性對作戰效能發揮起到的決定性 作用,重技術輕戰法,就技術研技術,或只鑽研技術性能而不考慮戰法運用,或只知技術功效卻不嘗試戰法創新。 凡此,應把指戰員學科技、懂科技、用科技與科技人員學軍事、懂打仗、研戰法統籌起來協調推進,建立戰技專家融合創新機制,對接研究制勝機理,協同嵌入理技融合理念 ,交互幫帶提升戰法創新素質,形成以作戰行動牽引科技運用、以科技運用支撐作戰行動的思想認識,厚實理技融合開展戰法創新的根基。

作戰設計「融」。 世界上從來沒有完全相同的兩場戰爭,戰法創新可以繼承借鑒,不能複製翻版。 目前,軍事理論創新步伐加快、先進科技發展日新月異,戰爭形態深刻變革,呈現出混合多元、變幻莫測的顯著特徵,顛覆性技術、創新性概念、重塑性理論層出不窮。 理技融合設計未來作戰,才能找準提升戰法創新的起點。 要以敢領世界先的勇氣突破思維定勢,用超前眼光、獨特視角創新作戰理論,開發並落地作戰概念,構想作戰場景,創新戰法打法,先把未來戰場的「底圖」勾勒 好,以此對接現代科技應用、牽引先進技術研發。 同時,設計未來作戰不能超越科技極限過於遙遠地“空想”,應立足於一定時期內的科技可行性,在具有現實或可預期科技運用支撐、擁有技術實現路徑的前提下創新戰法,將技術 阻斷、技術突襲、技術壓制、技術調控嵌入作戰行動。

技高一籌「融」。 在現代戰爭中,人是決定性因素的地位沒有變,而科技對戰爭勝負的影響更加凸顯,爭奪科技勝勢在很大程度上決定戰爭勝負,必須始終把科技運用嵌入作戰鏈條、貫穿作戰全程 ,以技術效應支撐戰法運用,以技術優勢驅動作戰效能發揮。 當前,戰法創新中的理技融合,主要矛盾並非技術中少理論,而是理論中缺乏技術,最迫切的是著力推進前沿科技向作戰理論融合滲透。 要加強以武器裝備平台為依託的實質融合,著眼於最大限度地啟動作戰效能,廣泛進行基於行動效能釋放的裝備作戰運用研究、裝備作戰試驗鑑定,透過模擬推演、數據分析來偵測作戰行動的有效性 ,以「數算」驗證「勝算」。 要加強基於作戰任務選擇「最優解」技術手段的深度性融合,從研究作戰對手、確定行動方法,到擬製作戰預案、組織對抗演訓,都要充分考慮敵我技術力量對比,貫徹非對稱 作戰思想,把以優制劣、避強擊弱作為基本原則,謀求技術壓制並防敵壓制,謀求技術阻斷並防敵阻斷,謀求技術顛覆並防敵顛覆,最大限度發揮技術優勢,竭 全力限制敵方技術發揮,以此塑造有利態勢、支撐戰法運用。

集智聚力「融」。 資訊化智能化時代,不論是理論研究,或科技創新,都呈現出開放連結、交叉滲透的顯著特徵。 理技融合進行戰法創新,開放共享是重要的成長點。 推進人機一體式戰法創新,人出智謀、機器來算,以算的結果反推修訂戰法成果,在人機交互中實現理技融合;推進指技人才團隊式戰法創新,組建“ 科學家+指揮官」「戰鬥員+技術員」混合群體,實行聯調聯試、聯演聯訓、聯算聯謀,以戰法的科學性、技術的先進性謀求聯戰聯勝;推進開源眾 籌式戰法創新,軍內軍外結合,線上線下互動,以更開闊的視野、更靈活的形式,集中廣大官兵和各類專業化人才的聰明智慧,開展戰法創新領域的「創客 ”活動,發展匯聚新戰法“資源池”“成果庫”,以實現理技融合的最大效益。

實踐迭代“融”。 理論成果在實務運用中得到檢驗和昇華,科技手段在作戰行動中顯現功能與效益。 戰法創新非一日之功,理技融合也應迭代進步、滾動發展。 要注重整合應用資訊科技與智慧技術,虛擬構設未來作戰景象,在感觸與體驗智慧化作戰環境中創新戰法;要深入開展戰法創新成果虛擬模擬論證,透過虛擬實驗、模擬檢驗,充分驗證 戰法設計的可行性、作戰行動的有效性;要結合演訓活動進行技術性能檢測,透過武器裝備與資訊系統的聚能與釋能實際狀況分析,充分檢驗技術應用的功效與缺陷所在。 從而,在複盤研討、反覆論證、資料檢驗中動態發現與解決問題,理論不適用的修改理論,技術行不通的升級技術,讓戰法引進新領域技術,讓技術顛覆傳統式戰法,實現 技戰一體有機結合,持續推動戰法創新螺旋上升滾動發展。

Modern English:

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.

中國國防部原文來源: http://www.mod.gov.cn/gfbw/jmsd/888沒有湯適合你.html

中國軍隊做好戰爭準備,科學研究旨在實現戰場統治

Chinese Military Readies for War with Scientific Research Designed to Achieve Domination on the Battlefield

4月下旬,軍事科學院戰爭研究院順利完成上報兩項作戰重大問題研究工程的立項論證建議書。 這是研究院著眼履行核心職能,科研攻關始終瞄準備戰打仗的具體實踐。

戰爭研究院是全軍專門研究戰爭、設計戰爭的科學研究機構。 作為新組成單位,大項任務多、臨時任務多、論證申報任務多是他們科學研究工作的主要特徵。 年初,針對人少事急、科研任務壓茬推進的實際情況,該研究院黨委對照戰鬥力標準,把旨在強軍勝戰的科研工作擺在重要位置。 他們依據備戰急需、打仗急用、部隊急盼的標準,調整確立了戰爭與作戰問題研究、條令法規編排等方向的重點科研任務,壓減了10餘項偏離主責主業的課題,新增 了一批戰爭形態、作戰風格等聚焦備戰打仗的課題研究。 該研究院領導介紹,院黨委要求班子成員在重大科研任務中既掛帥又出征,做到主要精力向重點任務投放,力量配備、經費支持等向作戰研究傾斜。

同時,研究院持續深化「小核心、大外圍」協同攻關,不斷創新科學研究組織模式。 他們在研究院內部進行軍事理論人員和軍事科技人員「捆綁式」研究,打通科研壁壘;與軍事醫學研究院、國防工程研究院等兄弟單位互派專家參與重大專案研究,實現優勢互補;組織科研 人員參加各類重大演訓活動,找準科研需求;舉辦多邊軍事交流活動,使科研人員及時了解最新軍事科技動態。 此外,他們也積極與地方科研院所合作,將地方優質科研資源為己所用,形成研究戰爭、設計戰爭、運籌戰爭、驗證戰爭的閉合迴路。

去年以來,該研究院先後完成百餘項科研課題,在核心作戰概念開發、聯合作戰實驗等研究上取得重要突破,提交國家高端智庫研究報告、重要問題評估報告等60餘份,推出一批戰略 性強、原創性強、前瞻性強的創新成果。

Modern English:

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.

解放軍原文參考:http://military.people.com.cn/n1/2019/0514/c1888沒有湯給你.html

中國軍隊對外軍網絡空間作戰力量的分析與認識——解放軍態勢感知系列

Chinese Military Analysis and Understanding of Foreign Military Cyberspace Combat Forces – People’s Liberation Army Situational Awareness Series

从世界主要国家网络空间作战力量建设情况看,美军作为最早公开宣布建设网络空间作战力量的军队,具备较强实力,在战争实践中多次实施了网络空间作战行动。欧盟、俄罗斯等组织和国家也展开了网络空间作战力量建设,并进行了一些实战行动。研究分析世界主要国家和地区军队网络空间作战力量建设的成功经验做法,对我国网络空间发展具有重要借鉴和启示意义。

随着网络信息技术的迅猛发展及在军事上的广泛运用,网络空间已成为继陆、海、空、天 4 个疆域之后的新兴作战疆域,网络空间作战也成为全域联合作战不可分割的重要组成部分,并成为夺取和保持作战主动权、控制权和制胜权的关键。美国、俄罗斯、日本等世界主要国家纷纷制定网络空间安全和发展战略,组建网络空间作战部队,研发先进网络技术和武器装备,加紧抢夺这一新的战略制高点。

1 美国引领网络空间建设

无论是网络空间概念和理论研究,还是其他相关技术研究和应用实践,美国都是网络空间发展的策源地和引领者,带动了各个国家与地区的网络空间发展。美军网络部队是世界上最早建立的“成建制”网络作战部队,历经克林顿时期初建防御、小布什时期网络反恐、奥巴马时期慑战并举和特朗普政府时期“前出防御”等阶段,已发展成为拥有 133 支网络任务分队、各军种数万人规模的网络作战部队。

1.1 强化战略威慑地位

美国为争夺网络空间的主控权和发展权,主动应对未来战争形态变化的新要求,将网络空间确立为与陆、海、空、天并列的新兴作战疆域,将其作为战略威慑力量摆到战略地位。

美国颁布的网络空间相关重要战略文件如表 1所示。2011 年,美国先后发布《网络空间国际战略》《网络空间可信身份识别国家战略》和《国防部网络空间行动战略》3 大战略文件,首次提出将网络空间视为第五作战域,将对网络空间的利用和控制提升为基本国策。

近年来,美军立足大国竞争,进一步提升网络空间的战略地位,网络空间作战的作战体系结构基本形成。2018 年,美军先后发布新版《国防部网络战略》[1] 以及《网络空间作战》联合条令,明确网络空间作战本身可作为独立作战样式达到创造战术、战役或战略效果,也可实现与其他领域作战样式的集成,通过协同作战以提升联合作战效能;2020 年,美网络空间日光浴委员会发布《来自未来的警告》报告,提出“前出防御”战略,建议由美国国防部将其拓展至国家层面,该战略是以持续交锋为主要行动模式,以行为塑造、获益拒止和成本强加为根本途径的国家网络空间分层威慑战略。

1.2 领导体制分工明确

美国将国家网络安全业务总体分成国土安全业务、国防业务、情报业务、执法业务 4 个部分,如图 1 所示。其中,国土安全业务由国土安全部主导,主要负责协调重要基础设施的网络空间安全,保护政府与商用网络和系统;国防业务由国防部主导,由美军网络司令部牵头,各军兵种提供组成部队力量,兼具攻击、防御、军事信息基础设施运维管理 3 大职能,是美网络安全力量的核心;情报业务由国家安全局主导,主要负责探测国外网络空间恶意活动,同时向国土安全局和国防部提供能力支援;犯罪执法则涉及司法部等多个部门及其下属机构。

表 1 美国颁布的网络空间相关重要战略文件

图 1 美国网络空间组织管理协调框架

美军网络司令部成立于 2009 年,原隶属于美军战略司令部,2017 年 8 月,美军网络司令部升级为第 10 个独立的美军联合作战司令部,将作战指控职责划归至网络司令部,并由国家安全局局长兼任司令官。对于美军网络作战,尤其是实时性要求很高的作战来说,此举措理顺了指挥控制关系,升级后的美国网络司令部与其他机构间的组织关系如图 2 所示。

图 2 升级后的美国网络司令部与其他机构间的组织关系

美军网络司令部接受美国总统、国防部长指挥,对国家网络任务部队总部、网络空间联合部队总部、军种网络空间部队总部和国防部信息网络联合部队总部等拥有作战控制权;各总部对配属的国家任务分队、作战分队、防护分队和支援分队等拥有作战控制权。

作战期间,美军网络司令部根据美国总统、国防部长指令开展网络作战行动,对所属部队实施作战控制,并向联合作战司令部提供定制的兵力包进行支援。兵力包由网络司令部所属网络作战部队、作战支援人员和其他网络空间力量组成。网络司令部对兵力包拥有作战控制权,并视情况将作战控制权指派给下属司令部。接受兵力包的指挥官拥有战术控制权,对网络空间作战时机和节奏进行控制。

1.3 组织力量规模庞大

美军网络部队是世界上最早建立的“成建制”网络作战部队,很早就开始征召网络人才,组建网络部队,并举行秘密演习。当前,美军基本形成了由网络司令部负责作战,各军种及国防信息系统局等国防部业务局负责建设的总格局。与陆、海、空作战领域不同,网络空间作战域的特殊性要求管理(军政)与作战(军令)这两条链条必须进行更紧密的合作。

美军网络空间战略作战力量主要是网络司令部下辖的 133 支网络任务分队,约 6200 名现役和文职人员。根据国防部 2013 年指示,该部队由各军种抽组力量组建(陆军 41 支,海军 40支,空军 39 支,海军陆战队 13 支)而成,2016年具备初始作战能力,2018 年具备全面作战能力,其主要遂行国防部信息网络运维防护行动、进攻性网络空间作战和防御性网络空间作战等任务。133 支网络任务分队根据肩负任务类型不同,编为国家网络任务部队、作战任务部队和网络防护部队 3 种类型部队。当前,美网络任务部队正扩充规模,2024 年将完成 21 支网络防护分队组建,使网络任务分队数量增至 154 支。

美军网络空间战术作战力量主要由美网络司令部下辖的陆军、海军、空军和海军陆战队4 大网络司令部的网络空间部队构成(总人数约为 8 万人),承担各军种网络防护和作战支援任务,在联合作战中为网络任务部队的进攻、防御和运维行动提供支撑。各军种网络司令部也正加紧网络作战力量的扩充与整合工作,为网络任务部队行动和各军种网络防护提供支撑。

1.4 作战能力系统全面

在装备研发上,美军遵循“边建边用、建用一体”的原则,不断加大网络战武器系统和装备的研发力度,开展网络作战关键技术的研究工作,在网络防御、网络攻击、监测预警、指挥控制和训练评估等方面开展了多个研究计划,并先后投入了数百亿美元用于研制开发各种网络空间作战装备,进而推动和改进网络作战技术水平,提升服务保障能力和作战效率。

网络防御最具代表性的装备包括“网络诱骗”系统、“网络狼”软件系统、网络攻击报警系统和网络漏洞扫描仪等,同时,美军还非常重视对“主动网络防御”概念的应用,这促使网络攻击溯源技术取得了长足的发展。网络攻击拥有“震网”“火焰”等威力强大的多种计算机病毒;战场网络攻击比较有代表性的是空军“舒特”系统和海军 EA-18G“咆哮者”飞机。侦察感知具备获取敌方通信、内容、网络协议、硬件地址、口令、身份鉴别过程、网络漏洞等信息的能力,通过实施“棱镜”“主干道”“码头”“核子”等一系列监控项目和“爱因斯坦”“普罗米修斯”等计划,形成大规模的情报生产能力,力图构建全球范围内的网络空间态势感知体系。

1.5 装备研制力量兼收并蓄

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。

美军方、政府科研机构和传统防务公司的网络空间研究方向通常覆盖网络空间侦察(态势感知)、监视、攻击、防御、测试验证、综合集成中的一方面或多个方面;而互联网、电子、软件、信息安全等领域公司,则在各自领域开展网络空间技术研究与装备研制生产。另外,由于网络空间作战装备的研发产品主要是软件,是一种逻辑层产品,这导致网络空间基础研究与装备研制生产之间的界限模糊,各大院校和政府科研机构,甚至一些小型科研团队及个人,也是美国网络空间工业的重要组成部分。网络空间研制生产能力主要力量结构如图3 所示。

图 3 美国网络空间研制生产能力主要力量结构

其中,大中型军工企业是美国网络空间装备分系统 / 子系统 / 技术领域研发的中坚力量。近几年,美国传统大中型军工企业以“兼并重组”为主要手段,迅速进入网络安全领域,形成了以诺斯罗普·格鲁曼、雷声、波音、洛克希德·马丁等几家综合性公司为龙头的网络安全国防产业,在 DARPA 和各军种网络空间项目的竞标中,这些大中型军工企业通常占据主承包商位置。

2 欧洲紧随其后蓄势待发

欧洲网络空间工业的起步晚于美国,主要侧重于对网络空间防御和网络空间安全问题的研究。近几年,欧洲各国政府和国防 / 电子企业也纷纷投入到网络空间安全领域,通过逐步完善战略政策,公私联合,引导网络空间技术研发,现已初步形成了跨越整个欧洲及其他国家和地区的网络空间防御体系。具体表现为以下几个层面。

研发层面,欧洲各国既唯美国马首是瞻,又借助北约、欧盟等跨国平台实现欧洲内部、欧洲与美国之间的融合互补,最终形成了共性与特性兼具的、仅次于美国的网络空间安全能力。

组织管理层面,由于欧洲国家大多规模较小,便于管理,因此成就了相对高效、一体化、能力强大的网络空间管理机制。同时,由于欧洲国家众多,存在竞争,因此,一些有关网络空间安全方面的国家级合作实施有时也存在阻力。

系统研发层面,由于欧洲很多国家的数字化、软件化、网络化水平非常高(甚至高于美国),导致其与美国一样面临非常大的网络空间防御压力,因此,其网络空间发展以确保网络空间安全为主。近几年,在以防御为主的网络空间思想的引领下,逐步加强网络空间技术,特别是网络空间安全技术的研发,同时,在原有信息技术基础设施的研究基础上推陈出新,在物联网等领域扩大投入和部署。当各国纷纷投入网络空间安全市场时,一些主要欧洲国家的网络空间安全产品已经占有较大的市场份额,开拓出一定规模的全球市场。

3 俄罗斯网络空间发展思路别具一格

相比西方国家,俄罗斯一直关注全面、大范围的信息空间,对作为信息空间子域的网络空间,没有像美国这样的深入和系统的研究。但由于俄罗斯长期对信息安全领域的关注和工业积累,使其在网络空间领域具有较好的基础。具体表现为以下几个层面。

战略规划层面,俄罗斯曾发布了一系列旨在保护国家各个方面信息安全的法律文件,例如《俄罗斯联邦信息安全学说》《俄罗斯社会信息发展战略》等,但在现有的法律文件中,没有涵盖信息空间与网络空间的关系体系,“网络安全”这一术语并未从“信息安全”的概念中分离。随着网络安全风险的不断增大,俄罗斯自 2010 年开始,将保护网络空间安全的重点放在关键信息基础设施方面,先后颁布了《俄罗斯联邦武装力量在信息空间活动的构想观点》《2020 年前俄罗斯联邦国际信息安全领域国家政策框架》《俄罗斯联邦网络安全战略构想(草案)》《俄罗斯联邦信息安全学说(第二版)》及《俄罗斯联邦关键信息基础设施安全法》等法律文件,从多个层面阐述了俄罗斯为推动网络空间发展的战略目标,以及为保护关键信息基础设施、指导网络空间发展所实施的重要举措。组织机构层面,2013 年 8 月,俄罗斯政府宣布在俄罗斯武装部队下面组建一个专门的信息战机构,且决定组建网络安全司令部和一个武装部队新机构,目的是提高该国的网络作战能力。

应用实践层面,美国 2010 年出版的《网络指挥官手册》中显示,全球网络作战的唯一实例是 2007—2009 年发生在爱沙尼亚、格鲁吉亚和吉尔吉斯斯坦的信息网络攻击事件,这 3 次小规模的攻击都是俄罗斯所为,可以认为俄罗斯在网络安全领域拥有独一无二的实战经验。

研发力量层面,俄罗斯拥有实力突出的网络安全防御公司,例如,卡巴斯基实验室是全球信息安全领域的一家重要企业,俄罗斯技术集团旗下的“俄罗斯技术信息”公司也是俄罗斯核心的网络安全公司。由于

透明度有限,很难从公开渠道发现俄罗斯具备网络攻击装备研发能力的公司,但并不代表俄罗斯没有这样能力的公司,此外,俄罗斯黑客组织在全球都享有“盛名”,此行为推动了民间网络空间装备的研制、生产和交易。

4 日本掀起网络空间发展热潮

日本是全球信息技术最先进的国家之一,同时也受到越来越多从针对个人到针对公共部门及基础设施的网络空间威胁,因此日本很早就开始关注网络空间安全议题。日本将这些威胁归为“信息安全”范畴,并在 2005 年成立了国家信息安全中心以应对威胁。随着美国提出的“网络空间”概念被广泛接受,日本也于 2010年前后开始从国家层面专门强调“网络空间”,并将网络安全作为影响国家安全的重要议题。具体表现为以下几个层面。

战略规划层面,2013 年,日本政府发布首份《网络安全战略》,该战略从国家层面推动网络安全建设与发展,明确提出了要将日本建设成为网络安全强国。2015 年 8 月、2018 年 7 月,日本政府先后出台了 2 份升级版《网络安全战略》,主要是为 2020 年东京奥运会和残奥会的网络安全防护提供准备。

组织机构层面,2010 年,日本防卫厅组建了一支由陆、海、空自卫队计算机专家构成的5 000 人左右的“网络战部队”,让其专门从事网络系统的攻防。日本“网络战部队”的主要任务是负责研制开发可破坏其他国家网络系统的跨国性“网络武器”,并承担自卫队计算机网络系统防护、病毒清除、程序修复等任务;开发战术性“网络武器”,并研究网络战的有关战术等;支援“网络特攻队”的反黑客组织、反病毒入侵等任务。国际研究人士指出,从日本“网络战部队”身上,可以看到美军“超级黑客部队”的影子。

应用实践层面,日本在网络攻防演习中,更注重贴合实战背景,从而提升演习的实用性和针对性。在 2014 年“3·18”演习中,预设场景为 2020 年东京奥运会期间日本关键基础设施遭遇网络攻击。在 2019 年日美举行的“山樱”联合演习中,预设场景为日本东京都和西南地区遭受导弹袭击等多项事态并发,该演习旨在检验指挥控制系统在网络和电磁攻击下的运转情况并研习对策。

系统研发层面,日本在构建网络作战系统中强调“攻守兼备”,拨付大笔经费投入网络硬件及“网络战部队”建设,分别建立了“防卫信息通信平台”和“计算机系统通用平台”,实现了自卫队各机关、部队网络系统的相互交流和资源共享。

5 启示建议

从世界主要国家网络空间作战力量建设情况看,美国、俄罗斯、日本及欧盟等世界主要国家和组织通过战略规划指导、组织机构建设、作战力量组建、系统装备研发等手段,不断强化军队网络空间作战力量建设,这对我国网络空间发展具有一定借鉴参考意义。

5.1 深化顶层设计,提升网络空间战略地位

网络空间使国家利益的边界得到极大的延伸和扩展,网络日益成为国家政治、经济、文化和社会活动的基础平台,成为实体经济的命脉和整个社会赖以正常运转的神经系统。由此可见,网络安全已不仅仅是网络自身的安全问题,其影响已辐射至国家安全和国家利益的方方面面,因此,有必要从国家战略层面整体谋划部署国家的网络安全问题。我国应借鉴国外网络空间战略经验,从国家层面制定网络空间战略、强化网络安全立法、构建国际合作体系,从国家层面整体谋划部署国家网络安全发展。

5.2 夯实能力基础,发展网络空间对抗能力

近年来,随着我国信息化建设的推进,国家网络基础设备的全面普及,来自国内外的网络安全威胁呈现多元化、复杂化、频发高发趋势,对我网络空间安全构成重大威胁,导致我国政府机构、关键基础设施的重要信息系统可能面临大规模的敏感信息外泄和信息系统瘫痪等安全风险。为保障网络空间信息基础设施的完整性、可用性,须提高其生存能力,对网络威胁做到快速响应,并在合适的时机主动发起攻击。基于此,我国必须从理论、技术和人才等方面出发,夯实网络空间能力基础,为未来可能出现的网络空间对抗和防御提供保障。

5.3 加强力量建设,构建网络空间支撑体系

如今,网络空间已成为新兴作战域,必须建设强大的网络空间作战部队,夺取这一新兴作战域的控制权,才能有效维护网络空间的国家安全和发展利益。自 2009 年 6 月美军网络司令部组建以来,美军的网络军事力量建设取得较大成效,形成了美国网络安全的有力军事保障,同时也对其他国家网络空间构成巨大威胁。我们必须加快网络空间部队建设步伐,不断提升全民的网络安全意识和信息防护能力,并加强国防动员建设,培养预备力量,打造有足够作战能力的网络作战力量体系,才能有效遏制抗衡对手对我国的网络威胁。

6 结 语

网络空间因其具有不受时空限制、不受作战目标约束、作战力量支撑来源广泛、作战过程突变性较强等特点,成为军队谋求发展的重要作战力量。近年来,美国、俄罗斯、日本及欧盟等世界主要国家和组织致力于推动网络空间作战力量建设,以抢夺在该领域的优势地位。我国应加快推进军队网络空间力量建设,提升我国网络空间作战能力,以谋求未来信息化战争的制胜权。

引用格式:李硕 , 李祯静 , 王世忠 , 等 . 外军网络空间作战力量发展态势分析与启示 [J]. 信息安全与通信保密 ,2022(5):90-99.

作者简介 >>>

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.

  1. 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.

  1. 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.

Reference: https://www.163.com/dy/article/

圖解十八大報告之九:“國防和軍隊現代化建設”

Graphic illustration of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: “National Defense and Military Modernization”

【編者按】:在黨的十八大開幕式上,胡錦濤代表第十七屆中央委員會向大會作了題為《堅定不移沿著中國特色社會主義道路前進,為全面建成小康社會而奮鬥》的報告。

黨的十八大報告旗幟鮮明、思想深刻、求真務實、部署全面,提出一系列新提法、新觀點、新部署和新要求,例如“兩個加快”、“三個自信”、“四化同步”、“五位一體”……為了能讓廣大網友全面、深刻理解和掌握十八大報告中的要點及精華,本網特從十八大報告的十二部分中擷取了典型“關鍵詞”,每天一期,連續推出,供網友學習參考。

键词:富国 军民融合式发展。十八大报告提出“走中国特色军民融合式发展路子,坚持富国和强军相统一”, 明确了建设巩固国防和强大军队是我国现代化建设的战略任务。同时也进一步明确了国防和军队建设在中国特色社会主义事业总体布局中的地位,指引国防和军队建设步入着力提升国家战略能力、与国家经济社会建设同步发展的轨道。

□ 相关新

高清专题:图解十八大报告

图解十八大报告之一:科学发展观 五位一体

图解十八大报告之二:八个坚持 三个公平 三个自信

图解十八大报告之三:两个翻一番 五个加快

图解十八大报告之四:四化同步 三个平等 创新驱动

图解十八大报告之五:推进政治体制改革

图解十八大报告之六: 三个坚持 三个倡导 以德治国

图解十八大报告之七:社会建设 两个同步 两个公平

图解十八大报告之八:美丽中国 两个坚持 三个发展

党的十八大报告全文

专题:中国共产党第十八次全国代表大会

独家解读:详解党的十八大报告十二部分

专题:学习宣传贯彻落实党的十八大精神

Modern English Translation:

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.

□  Related news:

HD topic: Illustrating the report of the 18th CPC National Congress

Illustrated one of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Five in One of Scientific Development

Illustration of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Eight adhere to three fairness and three self-confidence

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Two doubled and five accelerated

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Four modernizations, three equal innovation drivers

Illustrated report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China No. 5: Promoting political reform

Illustration of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Three Adhere to Three Advocate the Rule of Virtue

Illustration 7 of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Two simultaneous two fairs in social construction

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China No. 8: Beautiful China, two adhere to three developments

The full text of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China

Topic: The 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China

Exclusive interpretation: Detailed explanation of the twelve parts of the report of the 18th CPC National Congress

Topic: Studying, propagating and implementing the spirit of the 18th National Congress of the Party

【编者按】:在党的十八大开幕式上,胡锦涛代表第十七届中央委员会向大会作了题为《坚定不移沿着中国特色社会主义道路前进,为全面建成小康社会而奋斗》的报告。

党的十八大报告旗帜鲜明、思想深刻、求真务实、部署全面,提出一系列新提法、新观点、新部署和新要求,例如“两个加快”、“三个自信”、“四化同步”、“五位一体”……为了能让广大网友全面、深刻理解和掌握十八大报告中的要点及精华,本网特从十八大报告的十二部分中撷取了典型“关键词”,每天一期,连续推出,供网友学习参考。

键词:高度关注三个空安全。党的十八大报告强调要高度关注海洋、太空、网络空间安全,这对我们加强军事战略指导、维护国家安全提出了新的要求。海洋是国际交往的大通道和人类可持续发展的战略资源宝库,当今世界正在兴起新一轮海洋开发浪潮;太空是国际战略竞争新的制高点,太空军事优势对现代战争进程和结局具有决定性影响;网络空间是信息时代的基本标志,正在成为影响国家安全和发展的新兴战略领域,成为渗透、影响甚至决定其他作战空间的重要作战空间。我们要充分认清海洋、太空、网络空间安全形势,加强海洋、太空、网络空间安全问题研究,抓好相关力量和手段建设,为维护国家利益提供有力的战略支撑。

□ 相关新

高清专题:图解十八大报告

图解十八大报告之一:科学发展观 五位一体

图解十八大报告之二:八个坚持 三个公平 三个自信

图解十八大报告之三:两个翻一番 五个加快

图解十八大报告之四:四化同步 三个平等 创新驱动

图解十八大报告之五:推进政治体制改革

图解十八大报告之六: 三个坚持 三个倡导 以德治国

图解十八大报告之七:社会建设 两个同步 两个公平

图解十八大报告之八:美丽中国 两个坚持 三个发展

党的十八大报告全文

专题:中国共产党第十八次全国代表大会

独家解读:详解党的十八大报告十二部分

专题:学习宣传贯彻落实党的十八大精神

Modern English Translation:

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.

□  Related news:

HD topic: Illustrating the report of the 18th CPC National Congress

Illustrated one of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Five in One of Scientific Development

Illustration of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Eight adhere to three fairness and three self-confidence

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Two doubled and five accelerated

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Four modernizations, three equal innovation drivers

Illustrated report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China No. 5: Promoting political reform

Illustration of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Three Adhere to Three Advocate the Rule of Virtue

Illustration 7 of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Two simultaneous two fairs in social construction

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China No. 8: Beautiful China, two adhere to three developments

The full text of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China

Topic: The 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China

Exclusive interpretation: Detailed explanation of the twelve parts of the report of the 18th CPC National Congress

Topic: Studying, propagating and implementing the spirit of the 18th National Congress of the Party

【编者按】:在党的十八大开幕式上,胡锦涛代表第十七届中央委员会向大会作了题为《坚定不移沿着中国特色社会主义道路前进,为全面建成小康社会而奋斗》的报告。

党的十八大报告旗帜鲜明、思想深刻、求真务实、部署全面,提出一系列新提法、新观点、新部署和新要求,例如“两个加快”、“三个自信”、“四化同步”、“五位一体”……为了能让广大网友全面、深刻理解和掌握十八大报告中的要点及精华,本网特从十八大报告的十二部分中撷取了典型“关键词”,每天一期,连续推出,供网友学习参考。

键词:两大核心坚持。一是坚决听从党中央的指挥,这是我党历来的重要思想。二是国防和军队现代化。现代化是军队建设的中心任务。随着时代条件和战争形态加速演变,信息化已经成为军队现代化的本质规定性。正是基于对军队现代化时代内涵的准确把握,党的十八大报告提出要坚定不移把信息化作为军队现代化建设发展方向,推动信息化建设加速发展。

键词:现代化建设。我们必须看到,与国家安全和发展需求相比,国防和军队现代化水平还存在较大差距。国防和军队建设的主要矛盾,仍然是现代化水平与打赢信息化条件下局部战争的要求不相适应、军事能力与履行新世纪新阶段我军历史使命的要求不相适应。十八大报告中这一重要论断体现了党中央对国家安全环境新特点新趋势的深刻把握,体现了国防建设必须坚持以国家核心安全需求为导向的内在逻辑和基本规律,也反映了全党全军全国各族人民对新形势下国防和军队建设的新期待。

□ 相关新

高清专题:图解十八大报告

图解十八大报告之一:科学发展观 五位一体

图解十八大报告之二:八个坚持 三个公平 三个自信

图解十八大报告之三:两个翻一番 五个加快

图解十八大报告之四:四化同步 三个平等 创新驱动

图解十八大报告之五:推进政治体制改革

图解十八大报告之六: 三个坚持 三个倡导 以德治国

图解十八大报告之七:社会建设 两个同步 两个公平

图解十八大报告之八:美丽中国 两个坚持 三个发展

党的十八大报告全文

专题:中国共产党第十八次全国代表大会

独家解读:详解党的十八大报告十二部分

专题:学习宣传贯彻落实党的十八大精神

Modern English Translation:

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.

□  Related news:

HD topic: Illustrating the report of the 18th CPC National Congress

Illustrated one of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Five in One of Scientific Development

Illustration of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Eight adhere to three fairness and three self-confidence

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Two doubled and five accelerated

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Four modernizations, three equal innovation drivers

Illustrated report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China No. 5: Promoting political reform

Illustration of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Three Adhere to Three Advocate the Rule of Virtue

Illustration 7 of the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China: Two simultaneous two fairs in social construction

Graphical report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China No. 8: Beautiful China, two adhere to three developments

The full text of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China

Topic: The 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China

Exclusive interpretation: Detailed explanation of the twelve parts of the report of the 18th CPC National Congress

Topic: Studying, propagating and implementing the spirit of the 18th National Congress of the Party

Original Communist Party of China url: http://cpc.people.com.cn/n/2012/1227/c164113-20027402-3.html