Category Archives: Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare

Chinese Military Decisions and Perspectives Supporting Cognitive Confrontation

中國支持認知對抗的軍事決策與觀點

中國軍網 國防部網

2022年12月6日 星期二

外文音譯:

Modern warfare, according to the characteristics of material form, usually divides the combat domain into the physical domain, the information domain, and the cognitive domain. The three domains interact with each other to form the field and soil for military confrontation. Although cognitive domain operations occur in the cognitive domain, their operational support often spans various fields. War practice shows that with the enhanced effectiveness of hard strikes in the physical domain, cognitive formation can often be accelerated, and cognitive realization can better meet combat needs.

Cognitive offense and defense cannot be separated from physical support

Today’s world is a world where everything is interconnected. The collection of different objects connected to each other greatly enhances the function of independent individuals acting alone. Cognitive domain operations are never isolated operations between cognitive carriers. Only by integrating cognitive offense and defense into an integrated joint operations chain, closely integrating with physical domain military strike operations, and tightly integrating with the entire combat system can we fully exert combat effectiveness.

The starting point of cognition. Existence determines consciousness. Thinking and cognition is not a fairy from the sky, but a true or tortuous reflection of the real world. Without the foundation of the material world, thinking and cognition will lose the source of information, the basis for analysis and judgment, and the accuracy of decision-making and action, making it difficult for people to trust, recognize, and rely on. Even the most psychedelic science fiction wars still have references to real combat targets, specific combat objectives, and corresponding combat paths. Therefore, intelligence reconnaissance analysis has become an indispensable and important link for commanders to organize troops and plan. “Without investigation, there is no right to speak” is regarded as a golden rule that must be followed in decision-making. Battlefield simulation simulations have become an important step for the success of combat operations. In history, most of the combat commands of accomplished generals and classic combat cases that can withstand the test of history and practice are all based on full investigation and research and scientific intelligence analysis. Without the hard-core support of the real world, “human beings think about , and God laughs.”

The basis of cognitive effects. A golden rule of operations in the cognitive domain is that soft power at the cognitive level must be supported by hard strikes at the physical level in order to ensure and strengthen its role. Strong military pressure is a necessary prerequisite for cognitive means to work, and continuous victory on the battlefield is the core support for winning cognitive wars. If the United States does not have the high-pressure pressure of its super comprehensive national strength and superior technology, its “Star Wars Plan” may not really work. If cognitive domain operations lack the support of specific military operations in the physical domain, they will never produce the good effects of doubting, confusing, deterring, and defeating the enemy. To grasp the initiative in thinking and cognition and to take the initiative in cognitive domain operations, we must not only strengthen the construction of cognitive ontology, improve the ability to directly use strategies and technical means to strengthen self-protection, intervene and influence the opponent’s thinking and cognition, but also actively strive to The physical domain leverages the conduction effect of military operations in the physical domain to enhance thinking and cognition.

The starting point for cognitive realization. Marxism believes that once theory grasps the masses, it will also become material force. From the perspective of cognitive domain combat, the spiritual creation at the superstructure level of cognition will not automatically turn into material power. Only by being attached to a certain material carrier and practical grasp can it be possible to realize spiritual to material and consciousness. A critical leap into existence. Just as in World War II, if the German army had not bypassed the Maginot Line, broke through the Ardennes Forest, and launched a surprise attack into the French hinterland, it would have been impossible to demonstrate the foresight of the cognitive achievement of the “Manstein Plan”; similarly, if there had been no Allied Forces, The military’s successful landing in Normandy, which invaded the east and west, also failed to highlight the ingenuity of the “Operation Overlord Plan” strategy of “building plank roads openly and concealing warehouses secretly”. Thinking and cognition are transmitted through people to specific military actions in the physical domain, and then the specific military actions in the physical domain realize the material transformation of cognitive results, forming the fundamentals of the two-way interaction between cognitive offense and defense and military strikes in the physical domain.

The basic method of physical attack to support cognitive offense and defense

The methods and methods used by military strikes in the physical domain to support cognitive offense and defense follow the general law that matter determines consciousness and existence determines thinking. The basic methods can be divided into enhanced support, confirmation support and realization support.

Enhanced support. Military strikes in the physical domain strengthen the formation and development of thinking and cognition. Although thinking and cognition depend on the quality of the cognitive carrier itself, it will be difficult to achieve without the support of military operations in the physical domain. The most basic role of military operations in the physical domain in the cognitive domain is to provide solid support for the formation and development of thinking and cognition. Thinking and cognition can only be stable and far-reaching if it is based on real physical actions. For example, in the early days of the Korean War, when the Korean People’s Army was overwhelming, our army’s combat staff Lei Yingfu and others accurately predicted the landing of the US military based on the war situation, geographical and weather characteristics of the Korean Peninsula, especially the various actions of the US and South Korean troops at that time, etc. time and location. Similarly, Li Qiwei of the “United Nations Army” also made a judgment on the “worship offensive” based on the logistics support, weapons and equipment, and tactical use of the volunteers, and used “magnetic tactics” to fight me. These are all enhancements to the formation and development of thinking and cognition caused by combat in the physical domain.

Confirmation type support. Military strikes in the physical domain confirm preset thinking, precognition, and prejudgment. Cognitive attack and defense does not only occur at the cognitive level, but is the interaction between cognition and practice. War is a “place of life and death, a way of survival”. If one’s cognitive decision-making cannot be verified in many directions at the practical level, then acting rashly is the greatest irresponsibility for war. During the revolutionary war years, our military’s decision-makers were always under the control of the overall strategy and gave front-line commanders the power to act as appropriate and in accordance with the overall strategic direction principle. This is a positive confirmation of strategic thinking. During the Second World War, the Allies used “false facts” to mislead, constantly shaping and strengthening the German army’s misunderstanding of the Allied landing sites on the European continent, and finally successfully landed in Normandy with minimal cost. This was a counter-attack. To confirm.

Implementation support. Provide direct physical support for the realization of thinking, cognition, judgment and decision-making. Thinking and cognition must be transformed into actual results that change the world. The thinking and cognition acting on the opponent is not the end but a new starting point. Next, it must be acted upon in the physical world through “skilled hands” and “brave heart”. In other words In short, it is to provide direct physical action support for the value realization of thinking and cognition. This is just like Zhuge Liang’s clever plan, but without the implementation of the “Five Tiger Generals” and other Shu Han soldiers, it can only remain at the cognitive level of talking on paper. No matter how efficiently the first three parts of the “OODA” loop operate, if the execution link “A” is missing, it will be a “dead loop”. Similarly, the results of our military’s command decisions also depend on the resolute, thorough, and creative execution of the officers and soldiers. The quality and efficiency of the execution directly determines the effectiveness of the implementation of the command decisions. In this regard, physical actions at the execution level are of extremely important practical significance.

Effectively strengthen the interaction between cognitive offense and defense and physical strikes

Thinking and cognition must rely on the support of physical actions, which is an objective law that is independent of human will. It is an extremely important task to strengthen the communication and interaction between thinking and cognition and physical strikes to make our thinking and decision-making more targeted, objective and operable, so as to better transform cognitive advantages into action advantages and winning advantages. .

Be more proactive and solidify your cognitive foundation. Whether the thinking and cognition is correct depends fundamentally on its compatibility with objective reality and its applicability to combat opponents. Only thinking and cognition based on full investigation and research, seeking truth from facts and comparative advantages can stand the test of practice and actual combat. The practice of absolute, sacred, and nihilistic thinking or generals’ genius, wisdom, and inspiration is idealistic, one-sided, and harmful. This requires that we must work hard to base our thinking and cognition on the basis of extensive investigation, research and intelligence analysis, and truly understand the enemy’s situation, our situation, and other people’s situations, truly know our enemies and ourselves, know everything we should know, and adapt to local conditions. The camera moves. At the same time, we must combine reading books without words with books with words, unify indirect theory with living practice that is constantly developing and changing, and dialectically recognize past experiences and lessons and other people’s experiences and lessons, so that they become our own knowledge. Help instead of shackles, assist instead of dominate.

Be more proactive and strengthen cognitive rationality. Correct understanding that can withstand the long-term test of practice and actual combat comes from practice and is strengthened through feedback from practice. Cognitive practical experience is only the basic material for obtaining correct cognition. To form scientific cognition, we need to further eliminate the false and preserve the true in the repeated collision and verification of consciousness and matter, thinking and existence, in order to improve cognitive rationality. It is wrong and even fatal to think that true knowledge can be obtained once and for all from only local situations, fragmented information and individual periods of time. In the Battle of Chibi in ancient China, Cao Cao’s side only came to the understanding of conjoining warships from the common sense that iron cables can balance the shaking of the ship’s hull, but did not confirm it from the actual combat effects or consequences of concatenating warships. If you don’t know how to recreate, you will easily tie up the ship with iron ropes and tie yourself up, and ultimately end up in the disastrous defeat of “burning Red Cliff”. Times have changed, and the enemy situation on the modern battlefield is ever-changing. There has never been an unchanging cognitive practice, nor a once-and-for-all cognitive achievement. It can only strip away impurities and extract the essence from material to cognitive to material confirmation for re-cognition. , can we return to rationality.

Be more proactive in objectifying cognitive outcomes. Cognitive achievements are only the result of thinking and consciousness nurtured in cognitive carriers. Without timely and effective material transformation, it will be like walking at night wearing brocade clothes or hiding treasures in the mountains, and it will be difficult to demonstrate its own value. Thinking and cognition are based on physical actions, and ultimately rely on specific actions in the physical domain before they can be materialized and transformed into actual results that change the subjective and objective worlds. This requires us to not only consolidate the cognitive foundation and strengthen cognitive rationality, but also improve the operability of cognitive decision-making and planning as much as possible, opening the door for smoother materialization and transformation. At the same time, efforts must be made to improve the execution capabilities of decision-making and deployment executors, so that they can correctly understand the intention of decision-making, creatively adopt appropriate methods based on specific realities, and maximize the implementation of cognitive results and operational decision-making plans to the end. Be a good “ferryman” and “bridge across the river” that connects and transforms cognitive results with combat effectiveness.

現代戰爭根據物質形態的特點,通常將作戰域分為物理域、資訊域和認知域。 這三個領域相互作用,形成軍事對抗的場域和土壤。 認知域操作雖然發生在認知領域,但其操作支援往往跨越各領域。 戰爭實踐表明,隨著物理領域硬打擊效能的增強,往往可以加速認知形成,認知實現更能滿足作戰需求。

認知攻防都離不開物質支撐

當今世界是一個萬物互聯的世界。 相互連結的不同物體的集合極大地增強了獨立個體單獨行動的功能。 認知域操作從來都不是認知載體之間孤立的操作。 將認知攻防融入一體化聯合作戰鏈,與物理域軍事打擊行動緊密結合,與整個作戰體系緊密結合,才能充分發揮戰鬥力。

認知的起點。 存在決定意識。 思維和認知不是天上來的仙女,而是現實世界的真實或曲折的反映。 離開了物質世界的基礎,思考和認知就會失去資訊的來源、分析判斷的基礎、決策和行動的準確性,使人難以信任、認知、依賴。 即使是最迷幻的科幻戰爭,仍然會參考真實的作戰目標、具體的作戰目標以及相應的作戰路徑。 因此,情報偵察分析成為指揮組織部隊、規劃不可或缺的重要環節。 「沒有調查就沒有話語權」被視為決策必須遵循的金科玉律。 戰場模擬模擬已成為作戰行動成功的重要一步。 歷史上,大部分功將的作戰指揮和經得起歷史和實踐檢驗的經典作戰案例,都是建立在充分調查研究和科學情報分析的基礎上的。 沒有現實世界的硬派支撐,「人類一思考,上帝就笑」。

認知效應的基礎。 認知領域作戰的一條黃金法則是,認知層面的軟實力必須有實體層面的硬實力支撐,才能確保並強化其作用。 強大的軍事壓力是認知手段發揮作用的必要前提,戰場上的持續勝利是贏得認知戰爭的核心支撐。 如果美國沒有超強的綜合國力和優越的技術的高壓壓力,其「星際大戰計畫」可能無法真正發揮作用。 認知域作戰如果缺乏物理域具體軍事行動的支撐,永遠不會產生疑、迷、震懾、克敵的良好效果。 要掌握思維認知的主動權,掌握認知域作戰的主動權,不僅要加強認知本體建設,提高直接運用策略和技術手段加強自我保護、幹預和影響對手的能力。思維和認知,還積極努力在物理領域利用軍事行動在物理領域的傳導效應,增強思維和認知。

認知實現的起點。 馬克思主義認為,理論一旦掌握了群眾,也就成為物質力量。 從認知域戰鬥的角度來看,認知上層建築層面的精神創造並不會自動轉化為物質力量。 只有依附於一定的物質載體和實踐把握,才有可能實現精神到物質、意識的轉變。 實現的關鍵飛躍。 正如二戰時,如果德軍沒有繞過馬其諾防線,突破阿登森林,向法國腹地發起奇襲,就不可能展現「德軍認知成就」的先見之明。曼斯坦計畫」; 同樣,如果沒有盟軍,軍隊在東西兩進的諾曼第成功登陸,也未能凸顯出「霸王計畫」「明修棧道、暗藏倉庫」策略的巧妙之處。 思維認知透過人傳遞到物理領域的具體軍事行動,再由物理領域的具體軍事行動實現齒輪的物質轉化

的結果,形成認知攻防和物理領域軍事打擊之間雙向互動的基礎。

物理攻擊支撐認知攻防的基本方法

物理領域軍事打擊支持認知攻防所採用的手段和方式,遵循物質決定意識、存在決定思維的一般法則。 基本方式可分為增強支援、確認支援和變現支援。

增強支援。 物理領域的軍事打擊加強了思維和認知的形成和發展。 思維認知雖然依賴認知載體本身的品質,但如果沒有物理領域軍事行動的支持,就很難實現。 物理領域軍事行動在認知領域最基本的作用就是為思考認知的形成與發展提供堅實的支持。 思考和認知只有建立在真實的身體行動的基礎上,才能穩定、深遠。 例如,朝鮮戰爭初期,朝鮮人民軍勢不可擋時,我軍作戰參謀雷英夫等人根據朝鮮半島戰局、地理、天氣特點,準確預測了美軍登陸,尤其是當時美軍和韓國軍隊的各種行動等等時間地點。 同樣,「聯合國軍」的李奇偉也根據志願軍的後勤保障、武器裝備、戰術運用等,對「拜拜攻勢」做出了判斷,用「磁性戰術」與我作戰。 這些都是物理領域的戰鬥對思維認知的形成與發展的增強。

確認類型支援。 物理領域的軍事打擊證實了預設的思維、預知和預判。 認知攻防不僅發生在認知層面,而是認知與實踐的互動。 戰爭是「生死之地,生存之道」。 如果一個人的認知決策無法在實踐層面得到多方位的驗證,那麼輕舉妄動就是對戰爭最大的不負責任。 革命戰爭年代,我軍決策層始終處於整體戰略的掌控之中,賦予第一線指揮官依照整體戰略方向原則酌情行動的權力。 這是對戰略思維的正面肯定。 二戰期間,盟軍利用「虛假事實」進行誤導,不斷塑造並強化德軍對歐洲大陸盟軍登陸地點的誤解,最終以最小的成本成功登陸諾曼第。 這是一次反擊。 確認。

實施支援。 為思維、認知、判斷和決策的實現提供直接的物質支持。 思維和認知必須轉化為改變世界的實際結果。 作用於對手的思維和認知不是終點而是新的起點。 接下來,必須透過「巧手」和「勇敢的心」在物質世界中付諸行動。 換句話說,簡而言之,就是為思考認知的價值實現提供直接的身體行動支撐。 這正如諸葛亮的巧妙計劃,但沒有「五虎將」等蜀漢將士的實施,只能停留在紙上談兵的認知層面。 無論“OODA”循環的前三部分運行得多麼高效,如果缺少執行環節“A”,那麼這將是一個“死循環”。 同樣,我軍指揮決策的結果也取決於官兵的堅決、徹底、創造性執行。 執行的品質和效率直接決定指揮決策的執行效果。 就此而言,執行層面的身體動作具有極為重要的現實意義。

有效加強認知攻防與身體打擊的互動

思考和認知必須依靠身體動作的支持,這是不依賴人的意志的客觀規律。 加強思考認知與身體打擊的溝通互動,使我們的思維和決策更加具有針對性、客觀性和可操作性,從而更好地將認知優勢轉化為行動優勢和製勝優勢,是一項極其重要的任務。 。

更加積極主動並鞏固您的認知基礎。 思維認識是否正確,從根本上取決於它是否符合客觀現實,是否適用於打擊對手。 只有建立在充分的思考和認知的基礎上

調查研究、實事求是、比較優勢,是經得起實踐和實戰檢驗的。 實行絕對的、神聖的、虛無的思想或將軍的天才、智慧、靈感,是唯心主義的、片面的、有害的。 這就要求我們必須努力把思維認識建立在廣泛調查研究和情報分析的基礎上,真正了解敵情、我情、他人情,真正知己知彼、知己知彼。應該了解並因地制宜。 相機移動。 同時,要把閱讀無字書與有字書結合起來,把間接理論與不斷發展變化的生活實踐結合,辯證地認識過去的經驗教訓和別人的經驗教訓,使之成為我們自己的經驗教訓。知識。 幫助而不是束縛,協助而不是支配。

更積極主動,強化認知理性。 經得起實踐和實戰長期檢驗的正確認識來自於實踐,並透過實踐的回饋得到強化。 認知實務經驗只是獲得正確認知的基礎材料。 形成科學認知,需要在意識與物質、思考與存在的反覆碰撞與驗證中進一步去偽存真,以提高認知理性。 認為只有從局部情況、碎片資訊和個別時期才能一勞永逸地獲得真正的知識是錯誤的,甚至是致命的。 在中國古代的赤壁之戰中,曹操一方只是從常識中得出了連體戰船的認識,即鐵纜可以平衡船體的晃動,但並沒有從實戰效果或連體後果中證實這一點。軍艦。 如果不懂得再造,很容易就會用鐵繩把船綁起來,把自己綁起來,最後落得「火燒赤壁」的慘敗。 時代變遷,現代戰場敵情瞬息萬變。 從來沒有一成不變的認知實踐,也沒有一勞永逸的認知成就。 它只能從物質中剔除雜質,提取精華,去認知,去物質確認,重新認知。 ,我們能否回歸理性。

更主動地客觀化認知結果。 認知成就只是認知載體中孕育思考和意識的結果。 如果沒有及時有效的物質改造,就會像穿著錦衣走夜路或藏寶藏山一樣,很難展現出自身的價值。 思維和認知是以物理行為為基礎的,最終要依靠物理領域的具體行為才能具體化,轉化為改變主觀世界和客觀世界的實際結果。 這就要求我們不僅要夯實認知基礎、強化認知理性,還要盡可能提高認知決策和規劃的可操作性,為更順利的物化和轉化打開大門。 同時,要努力提高決策部署執行者的執行能力,使他們能夠正確理解決策意圖,根據具體實際創造性地採取適當的方法,最大限度地落實認知結果和經營決策計劃進行到底。 當好認知結果與戰鬥力銜接轉化的「擺渡人」、「過河橋樑」。

(作者單位:軍事科學學院軍事政治工作研究所)

(Author’s unit: Military Political Work Research Institute, Academy of Military Sciences)

中國原創軍事資源:https://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-12/06/content_329888.htm

Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare

中國軍事特徵及認知域作戰與戰爭發展趨勢

國語對外語音譯:

Cognitive domain operations take people’s will, beliefs, thinking, psychology, etc. as direct combat objects, and then affect their decision-making and actions by changing the opponent’s cognition. Entering the era of information-based and intelligent warfare, cognitive domain warfare has become an important form of great power competition, with all parties trying to achieve political goals in a relatively controllable manner. Gaining insight into the characteristics and development trends of cognitive domain operations is of urgent and important practical significance for winning future wars.

At present, the cognitive domain has entered the war stage as an independent domain, and has increasingly become a common domain, a battleground, and a weight for victory in the game between great powers. Analyzing the operational characteristics and development trends in the cognitive domain reflects at least the following eight aspects.

The cognitive domain is the key domain for transforming military advantage into political victory.

Military confrontation, on the surface, seems to be a confrontation between the hard power of both sides, but on a deeper level, no matter what the nature and purpose of the war, it is ultimately a contest of human wills. The key to victory is the ability to impose your will on your audience. As long as the enemy’s will to fight is deprived and defeated, the war is won. Cognitive domain warfare uses human will, spirit, psychology, etc. as the target of confrontation, strengthening one’s own will while weakening the enemy’s will, thereby achieving the political goal of conquering the heart and mind. In this sense, the cognitive domain is a key area for transforming military advantage into political victory. As the form of war accelerates to evolve towards intelligence, cognitive quality advantages bring decision-making and action advantages, which can not only occupy the commanding heights in morality and legal principles, create a favorable situation of justice and legality, but also achieve small-scale control through hybrid warfare and comprehensive game means. The purpose of fighting or even winning without fighting. Especially in the context of great power competition, the cost of war is high. All parties hope to increase the intensity of competition for cognitive domains and force their opponents to retreat in a “humane” and “economic” manner.

By changing the opponent’s perception, it can change its decisions and actions

The purpose of implementing cognitive attacks is to use an “invisible hand” to control the opponent’s will, making the opponent feel “I can’t” and “I dare not”, thereby achieving the effect of “I don’t want to”. Foreign military practice has shown that cognitive attacks on people’s will, beliefs, thinking, and psychology can be long-term cultural implantation, information suppression in the form of “information ocean + covering one’s mouth to silence”, or preemptive speech. It can also take the initiative to shape and use historical grievances to provoke the outbreak of conflicts. At present, information technology, artificial intelligence technology, and media technology have strengthened their direct effects on the cognitive domain. Using intelligence to generate software, a large amount of cognitive “ammunition” can be created to accurately act on the cognitive layer of combat targets, directly imposing “will” to rivals” and quickly change the strategic situation. Looking forward to the information-based smart battlefield, situational awareness forces and platforms are widely distributed in combat domains such as land, sea, air, and space networks. Cognitive behaviors such as planning, decision-making, and control dominate operations in each combat domain, especially the cognition of human-machine hybrids in future intelligent warfare. Advantages will dominate the battlefield. Cognitive interference, cognitive confusion, cognitive blocking and other means can be used to create a “fog” of war cognition, inducing opponents to misjudge the situation and make wrong decisions and actions.

Cognitive domain operations are full-time offense and defense, full personnel coverage, full use, full domain shaping, and full government action

Cognitive domain operations are all-round, multi-level, hyper-temporal and cross-domain, blurring the boundaries between wartime and peacetime, front and rear, crossing battlefields and national boundaries, transcending the pure military field, and widely penetrating into politics , economy, diplomacy and other social fields, showing the characteristics of “five completes”. Full-time offense and defense, there is no distinction between peacetime and wartime, and there is no difference between the front and the rear. It is expressed as being online all the time and in war all the time. Covering all personnel, anyone, including intelligent robots, may become the target of cognitive domain operations. It is used throughout the whole process of joint operations before and during the war. Before the joint military operation is launched, the cognitive shaping operation has begun and will accompany the military operation and will not stop with the military operation. Global shaping, cognitive shaping runs through all levels of strategy, operations, and tactics, and its scope covers all domains of land, sea, air, and space networks. Cross-domain empowerment has an impact on all-domain operations. As a whole-of-government action, cognitive shaping is naturally strategic and requires consistent and coordinated actions across departments, fields, military and military areas, and levels to achieve the best communication effect.

The key lies in seizing the right to define the nature of the action or activity, the right to dominate the process, and the right to judge the outcome.

The struggle in the cognitive game involves multiple opposing parties and seems complicated. The key lies in the struggle around the “three powers” in the cognitive domain. First, fight for the right to define the nature of the event. That is, how to view this incident, whether it is just or unjust, legal or illegal. Usually, preemptive definitions are adopted, group alliances are formed to force definitions, information is suppressed and unilateral definitions are used, and issues are set and applied to definitions, etc., to guide and shape the public to form qualitative perceptions. Second, compete for dominance over the event process. That is, how to do something, how not to do it, who did it right and who did it wrong, usually by setting up a trap and other methods, trying to dominate the development direction of the target event according to the state that one’s own side expects. Fast and slow, pause, continue and end. Third, compete for the right to judge the outcome of the incident. That is, how to evaluate this matter, who is the gainer and who is the loser, who is the immediate loser, who is the long-term loser, etc. All parties try to control the outcome of the incident by amplifying the advantages to themselves and the disadvantages to the enemy. The purpose is to use the extended effect of the incident to continue to hurt the enemy and benefit themselves.

Morality and legal principles are the focus of contention between all parties

Military operations have always paid attention to the principle of “discipline and reputation”. Although the shape of war is evolving at an accelerated pace, the essential nature of war as subordinate to politics will not change; the nature of war and the support of people’s hearts are still the key factors that affect the outcome of a war. On the battlefield in the cognitive domain, by occupying the commanding heights of politics, morality, and law, we can win the hearts and minds of the people and moral support, create a public opinion atmosphere in which moral support is abundant, and then seize the opportunity to defeat the enemy. In every war or conflict, whether it is the strong or the weak, the attacker, the defender, or a third party, all parties will try their best to seize cognitive dominance and the initiative of public opinion. They will do everything they can to wrap themselves up with morality, focus on declaring a just position, and try to find ways to defend themselves. Qualify the war, justify the action, eliminate resistance, increase support, and create a favorable situation in which “righteous” fights “unjust”. The strength balance between the two sides in the war is different, and the cognitive confrontation methods aimed at occupying the moral and legal high ground will also be different. Recent wars have shown that when a party has strong soft and hard power, that is, it has strong military strength, many allies and partners, and a large share of international voice, it often declares war in a high-profile manner; when military actions may trigger chain reactions, it is often handled in a vague manner. The word “war”.

Information is the basic “ammunition” for cognitive attack and defense

In the Internet information age, human communication methods continue to undergo complex and profound changes. On-site interactions have gradually given way to online connections. Some large-scale social platforms have become the main battleground for the cognitive game and the main channel to influence public cognition. Information is used as ammunition to compete for international network blockade rights and discourse control rights. Becoming one of the main actions in today’s cognitive confrontation. On these platforms, various short videos have become the “first scene” for the public to understand the war situation, and information travels faster than artillery shells. The use and blocking, dominance and regulation of platforms have become the focus of battles in the cognitive domain. All parties strive to spread and amplify their own propaganda, denounce and suppress the other party’s propaganda by manipulating social platforms, forming a “I say more, you say more” There is a situation of “less”, “what I said is right and what you said is wrong” and “only I can say it and you are not allowed to say it”. As users of large-scale social platforms, the public is influenced by and influenced by others in the process of “listening”, “speaking” and even “acting”, and unknowingly becomes the agents and attack props of those behind the scenes.

Military operations play a key supporting role in shaping cognition

The history of human war shows that military warfare is always the basic support of political contests, while psychological warfare is the effectiveness multiplier of military warfare. What cannot be retrieved on the battlefield cannot be expected to be retrieved at the negotiation table, let alone in the field of public opinion. In modern warfare, cognitive communication operations always go hand in hand with joint military operations. Mental warfare and military warfare influence and support each other. The trend of military warfare becoming mental warfare and mental warfare becoming military warfare is more obvious. From the perspective of war practice, it is absolutely impossible without military strength, but military actions alone are not omnipotent. Multiple victories on the battlefield are not a sufficient condition for victory in war. During the Vietnam War, although the United States “won every battle, it lost the entire war.” At the beginning of the 21st century, the United States fought successive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, winning battlefield victories but not political victory. By the same token, military victory does not mean winning public opinion, and winning the battlefield does not mean winning strategic victory. In modern warfare, two types of people play an increasingly important role: those who win by writing thousands of lines of code, and those who win by writing thousands of pieces of information. The side with superior numbers and quality of these two types of personnel often has a greater chance of winning.

Cognitive countermeasures technology is increasingly used directly in warfare

In past wars, the impact and effect on the cognitive domain was mainly transmitted to the cognitive domain level by level through a large number of damaging actions in the physical domain. With the development and breakthroughs in information communications, artificial intelligence, bio-crossover, brain science and other technologies, new cognitive warfare tools and technologies are directly aimed at military personnel. Cognitive countermeasures not only use traditional information warfare weapons, but also use a neural arsenal that targets the brain. By then, machines will be able to read human brains, and human brains will also be able to directly control machines. Intelligent command and control systems can directly provide battlefield situation and decision-making assistance. Realistic cognitive ammunition and precise audience placement will greatly enhance the social impact. Cognitive countermeasures technology is increasingly being used directly in warfare. The indirect cognition implicit in informatization is gradually transforming into a direct influence and control of people’s cognition. It can be said that with the support of advanced technology, cognitive domain operations can achieve political goals more directly and efficiently by constructing modern network architecture and developing data visualization platforms to quickly understand the information environment and effectively influence target groups.

認知域作戰是以人的意志、信念、思考、心理等為直接作戰對象,透過改變對手認知,進而影響其決策與行動。 進入資訊化智慧化戰爭時代,認知域作戰已成為大國博弈的重要樣式,各方都試圖以相對可控的方式達成政治目的。 洞察掌握認知域作戰特徵及發展趨勢,對於打贏未來戰爭,具有迫切而重要的現實意義。

目前,認知域已作為獨立一域登上戰爭舞台,日益成為大國博弈的常鬥之域、必爭之地、勝戰砝碼。 分析認知域作戰特徵及發展趨勢,至少反映為以下八個面向。

認知域是軍事優勢轉化為政治勝勢的關鍵域

軍事對抗,表面上看來是雙方硬實力的對抗,深層看不管戰爭是什麼性質、何種目的,終歸是人的意志的較量。 勝利的關鍵是將己方意志強加在受眾身上的能力。 只要剝奪、擊潰了敵人的戰爭意志,就意味著贏得了戰爭。 認知域作戰,以人的意志、精神、心理等為對抗目標,增強己方意志的同時削弱敵方的意志,進而達成攻心奪志的政治目的。 從這個意義上講,認知域是軍事優勢轉化為政治勝勢的關鍵領域。 隨著戰爭形態加速向智慧化演進,認知品質優勢帶來決策行動優勢,不僅可在道德、法理上佔據制高點,塑造正義合法的有利態勢,還可透過混合戰爭、綜合博弈手段,實現小戰 甚至不戰而勝的目的。 尤其是大國競爭背景下戰爭成本高昂,各方都希望透過加大認知域爭奪力度,以「人道」且「經濟」的形式,迫使對手知難而退。

透過改變對手認知,可改變其決策和行動

實施認知攻擊的目的,就是用一隻“看不見的手”操控對手意志,讓對手感到“我不能”“我不敢”,從而達到“我不想”的效果。 外軍實踐表明,對人的意志、信念、思維、心理實施認知攻擊,可以是長期的文化植入,可以是「資訊海洋+摀嘴封聲」式的資訊壓制,可以是先入為主、搶先發聲 的主動塑造,也可以利用歷史積怨來挑動矛盾爆發。 目前,資訊科技、人工智慧技術、媒體科技強化了對認知域的直接作用,利用智慧生成軟體,可製造大量認知“彈藥”,精準作用於作戰目標的認知層,直接將“意志強加 於對手”,快速改變戰略態勢。 展望資訊化智慧化戰場,態勢感知力量與平台廣泛分佈於陸海空天網等作戰域,規劃、決策、控制等認知行為主導各作戰域行動,尤其是未來智能化戰爭中人機混合的認知 優勢將主導戰場,可以透過認知幹擾、認知混淆、認知阻斷等手段,製造戰爭認知“迷霧”,誘使對手誤判態勢,做出錯誤決策和行動。

認知域作戰是全時攻防、全員覆蓋、全程使用、全域塑造、全政府行動

認知域作戰呈現出全方位、多層次、超時空、跨領域等特點,模糊了戰時和平時、前方和後方的界限,跨越了戰場和國界,超越了單純的軍事領域,廣泛滲透於政治 、經濟、外交等各社會領域,表現為「五全」特質。 全時攻防,沒有平時戰時之分,沒有前方後方之別,表現為全時在線、全時在戰。 全員覆蓋,任何人甚至包括智慧機器人,都可能成為認知域作戰的目標對象。 全程使用,貫穿聯合作戰的戰前戰中戰後,聯合軍事行動未展開,認知塑勢行動已開始,並且伴隨軍事行動而行,不隨軍事行動停而停。 全域塑造,認知塑造貫穿戰略、戰役、戰術各層,作用範圍涵蓋陸海空天網各域,跨域賦能,對全域行動都有影響。 全政府行動,認知塑造自然具有戰略性,需要跨部門、跨領域、跨軍地、跨層級一致協調行動,以求達到最佳傳播效果。

關鍵在於奪控行動或活動的性質定義權、過程主導權、結局評判權

認知賽局鬥爭,涉及多個對抗方,看似紛繁複雜,關鍵在於圍繞認知域的「三權」展開爭奪。 其一,爭奪事件性質定義權。 即這個事件該怎麼看,是正義的還是非正義的,是合法的還是非法的。 通常採取先發制人搶先定義、建群結盟強行定義、資訊壓制單方定義、設定議題套用定義等,引導塑造民眾形成定性認知。 其二,爭奪事件過程主導權。 即這事該怎麼幹、不該怎麼做,誰做的是對的、誰做的是錯的,通常採取設局布阱等方式,試圖按照己方所期望出現的狀態,主導目標事件發展方向、 快慢、暫停、繼續與終結。 其三,爭奪事件結局評判權。 即對這事該怎麼評,誰是獲利方、誰是受損方,誰是眼前的失利者、誰是長遠的受損者,等等。 各方都試圖透過掌控事件結局的評判權,放大於己有利之處、放大於敵不利之處,目的是利用事件延伸效應,持續傷敵利己。

道義和法理是各方爭奪的焦點

軍事行動歷來講究「師出有名」。 雖然戰爭形態加速演變,但是戰爭從屬於政治的本質屬性不會改變;戰爭性質和人心向背,仍是影響戰爭勝負的關鍵因素。 認知域戰場上,佔據了政治、道義、法理的製高點,就能夠贏得民心、道義支持,營造得道多助的輿論氛圍,進而掌握制敵先機。 每次戰爭或衝突,無論是強者或弱者,無論是進攻方防守方或第三方,各方都會全力搶佔認知主導權、輿論主動權,千方百計用道義包裝自己、注重宣示正義立場,設法為 戰爭定性、為行動正名,以消除阻力、增加助力,塑造以「有道」伐「無道」的有利態勢。 戰爭雙方實力對比不同,瞄準佔據道德法理制高點進行的認知對抗方式也會不同。 近幾場戰爭表明,當一方軟硬實力均很強大時,即軍事實力強、盟友夥伴眾多、國際話語權佔有率大,常常高調宣戰;當軍事行動有可能引發連鎖反應時,則常常模糊處理 「戰」的提法。

資訊是認知攻防的基本“彈藥”

網路資訊時代,人類溝通方式持續發生複雜深刻變化。 現場互動互動逐漸讓位給網路線上連線,一些大型社群平台成為認知博弈鬥爭的主陣地、影響民眾認知的主管道,以資訊為彈藥進行國際網路封鎖權、話語控制權爭奪成為當今認 知對抗的主要行動之一。 在這些平台上,各種短視頻成為公眾了解戰況的“第一現場”,訊息比砲彈跑得快。 圍繞平台的使用與封鎖、主導與規製成為認知域作戰爭奪的焦點,各方努力透過操控社交平台來傳播、放大己方宣傳,聲討、壓制對方宣傳,形成「我說的多、你說的少 」「我說的對、你說的錯」「只能我說、不讓你說」的局面。 民眾作為大型社群平台的使用者,在「聽」與「說」甚至「做」的過程中,受別人影響,也影響別人,不知不覺地成為幕後推手的代理人和攻擊道具。

軍事行動對認知塑造有關鍵支撐作用

人類戰爭史表明,兵戰永遠是政治較量的基礎支撐,心戰則是兵戰的效能倍增器。 戰場上拿不回來的東西,不能指望在談判桌上拿回來,更不能指望在輿論場上拿回來。 現代戰爭中,認知傳播行動總是與聯合軍事行動如影隨形,心戰與兵戰互相影響、互為支撐,兵戰心戰化和心戰兵戰化趨勢更為明顯。 從戰爭實踐看,沒有軍事實力是萬萬不能的,但僅有軍事行動又不是萬能的。 戰場上的多次勝利,並不是奪取戰爭勝利的充分條件。 越戰中,美雖「贏得了每次戰鬥,卻輸掉了整場戰爭」。 21世紀初,美國連續打的伊拉克戰爭、阿富汗戰爭,贏得了戰場勝利,也沒有贏得政治勝勢。 同樣的道理,軍事上的勝勢不等於贏得輿論上的強勢,贏得戰場勝利也不意味著贏得戰略的勝利。 現代戰爭中,兩類人員的角色越來越大,一類人員透過編寫成千上萬行程式碼謀勝,一類人員透過編寫成千上萬條資訊謀勝。 這兩類人員數品質都佔優的一方,取勝的機率往往就大。

認知對抗技術越來越直接運用於戰爭

過去戰爭中,對認知域的影響和作用,主要是透過物理域的大量毀傷行動,逐級逐層傳遞到認知域。 隨著資訊通訊、人工智慧、生物交叉、腦科學等技術的發展和突破,新的認知戰工具和技術直接瞄準軍事人員。 認知對抗不僅使用傳統的資訊戰武器,也使用以大腦為作戰目標的神經武器庫。 屆時,機器將可以讀懂人腦,人腦也將能夠直接控制機器,智慧指控系統可以直接提供戰場態勢和決策輔助,逼真的認知彈藥和精準的受眾投放將極大增強社會影響效果。 認知對抗技術越來越直接運用於戰爭,原來資訊化所隱含的間接認知,正逐步轉變為直接對人的認知進行影響與控制。 可以說,先進科技的支撐,使認知域作戰透過建構現代網路架構、開發資料視覺化平台,快速了解資訊環境並有效影響目標人群,可以更直接且有效率地達成政治目的。

原始國語中文資源:https://www.sohu.com/a/577196886_358040#google_vignette