The traditional style of language confrontation is a form of game in which the two parties in the struggle focus on specific issues or goals at a specific time and in a specific context, using language as the main medium of expression. In the context of cognitive domain operations, with the upgrading of Internet technology, the rapid development of modern communication technology, the innovation of emerging social media, and the improvement of natural language processing technology, coupled with human beings’ advances in cognitive science, linguistics, and communication With the new progress made in the fields of science, psychology and other fields, people have a deeper understanding and new understanding of language confrontation.
Language confrontation is becoming increasingly precise. The narrative style of discourse is the key to influencing cognition. Cognitive domain operations in the era of intelligence can conduct big data-based analysis of the audience, and through large amounts of text collection and data mining, we can find various opinions, tendencies, and positions that were previously invisible or easily ignored due to limited human power. and demands. By making good use of cognitive computing, you can better choose language types, voice patterns, discourse skills, narrative design, optimize the narrative perspective, theme, style, and the personal emotions, values, ideologies, and standpoint evaluations contained in the narrative, and more We should take into account the differences in communication modes of different languages and cultures, so as to achieve the best, fastest and most accurate strikes and counterattacks. At the same time, cognitive protection can also be provided in a foreseeable and targeted manner.
Language text design customization. Cognitive domain operations fundamentally require the use of information to exert influence, and the unique discourse used in the information text is the main basis for cognitive influence. To target the cognitive domain of people in a specific country or region, we must skillfully use the discourse expressions in the other party’s language and culture, and conduct in-depth research on the stories, myths, proverbs, aphorisms, etc. expressed in the other party’s language, especially the popular topics on the other party’s social media. , characters and their discourse characteristics, and is good at using authentic and novel language expressions of cross-cultural cognition to create a contagious language atmosphere of emotional identification. On this basis, we strive to make innovative expressions, fully grasp the different cognitions and needs of the other audience, organize multi-dimensional discourse power, and design texts in multiple languages to form new impressions and cognitions based on cognitive resonance.
The main style of language is popular. Language is the “cannonball fired at thought” in cognitive domain warfare. The use of language that is creative, expressive and in line with the laws of modern communication can cover a wide range of people and win more audiences. Therefore, popularizing the language subject style is the central link that determines the effectiveness of cognitive domain confrontation, and is also a key factor in winning recognition and winning hearts and minds in cognitive domain operations. Young people are the most active group of people in future wars and are also the main force in cognitive confrontation. The discourse forms and expressions that young people like to hear and see are the key to gaining the advantage of language confrontation in the cognitive domain.
Modeling the effects of language confrontation. Language confrontation in cognitive domain operations requires an in-depth study of the opponent’s main cultural environment, main cognitive narrative models, main cognitive shortcomings and weaknesses, and the characteristics of social media communication discourse, and masters its long-term cognitive models and the connotation of textual expressions. Rules etc. Based on artificial intelligence, modeling and analysis of the cognitive effects of language confrontation on different groups of people will help to conduct timely effect assessments, accurately grasp potential problems, and discover the fulcrum of strength. For example, it is difficult for general qualitative fuzzy assessments to grasp the micro-propagation effect of individual flexible maneuvers and the point-shooting effect of a single “discourse sniper”. The use of modeling analysis methods can provide relatively accurate conclusions. In addition, modeling analysis can also create strategic planning methods for language confrontation that combine long-term and present, macro themes and micro themes, agenda setting and random communication, drips of water piercing the stone and floods, and tolerance and tolerance with active release, which is better. to exert the combat effectiveness of language confrontation.
Cognition is the process by which people obtain, process and apply information and knowledge. At present, the cognitive domain has gradually become a new battlefield for competition, and cognitive warfare has gradually attracted attention from all countries. With the development of the technological revolution and the expansion of warfare practice, cognitive warfare is showing an accelerated evolution trend.
Cognitive technology is becoming a fundamental driving force in the evolution of warfare. Technology changes the form of warfare and also changes the way of cognitive warfare. If the large-scale popularization of information networks has promoted the information domain to become a combat domain, and the exponential growth of data and network scale is a sign of the maturity of the information domain, then the large-scale application of cognitive technology and the continuous iterative development of cognitive technology will become A sign of maturity in driving cognitive warfare. In the future, technologies such as cognitive environment, cognitive perception, cognitive control, and artificial intelligence will reflect the transformative impact that cognitive technology may have on social cognitive confrontation and military cognitive confrontation. Humanity is entering the era of universal communication, and global cyberspace is becoming highly interconnected. The Internet has become a battle space for all-round competition between state actors and non-state actors. Communication disputes and communication wars have become part of the level of high-intensity military operations. At present, major countries in the world are deploying at the forefront of cognitive technology and launching cognitive technology competitions. Through modeling and analysis, they seek to penetrate and control human brain networks, information networks and social networks; through deep calculations, actuarial calculations, clever calculations, etc., they aim to maximize Gain control over people’s cognitive world and cognitive domains.
The cognitive domain is becoming an important battlefield in hybrid warfare. In the era of intelligence, the way humans communicate is undergoing complex and profound changes. Offline communication has given way to more online communication, various new media platforms have become the main channels for the public to understand the battlefield, and large-scale social platforms have become the main battleground for cognitive game struggles. Therefore, the combat domain of future wars will continue to expand. The spatial domain will expand from land, sea, air, and space networks to deep space, deep sea, and deep ground, while the logical domain will expand from the physical domain to the information domain and cognitive domain. War is no longer limited to the physical threats of traditional wars, but is turning to social consciousness threats brought about by mass media and technological progress. Blockade and counter-blockade, dominance and counter-dominance around communication platforms will become the focus of cognitive warfare. Using information as ammunition to fight for control of international discourse has become the main method of cognitive confrontation today. From the perspective of hybrid warfare, ideological propaganda and indoctrination, penetration of values and culture, traditional public opinion psychology and legal offense and defense, and information network warfare have all become important aspects of cognitive warfare. Hybrid warfare can achieve the goal of winning in small battles or even without fighting through comprehensive gaming methods such as cognitive warfare. Attack and defense in the cognitive field will be an uninterrupted and normalized struggle, and combat effectiveness will continue to accumulate and be gradually released. .
Cognitive superiority is becoming a winning advantage in high-end warfare. Freedom of conduct in war is the lifeblood of the military. From a cognitive perspective, the deeper the understanding of the battlefield environment and combat opponents, the greater the freedom of action and the greater the relative advantage. However, with the exponential growth of combat data in wars, commanders have begun to face the cognitive dilemma of data swamp, data fog, and data overload. Having information advantage does not mean having cognitive advantage. An important military application direction of artificial intelligence technology is to process massive data in real time to help commanders get rid of cognitive overload and quickly form cognitive advantages. In intelligent warfare, cognitive advantages will dominate decision-making advantages, and decision-making advantages will dominate action advantages. Cognitive advantages have four key indicators: stronger information acquisition capabilities, faster artificial intelligence machine learning speed, more effective emergency handling capabilities, and higher capabilities to develop and apply new technologies and new knowledge. For example, public opinion warfare with new characteristics of data-driven intelligent communication and traditional military operations have been highly coordinated and integrated. This combat style that integrates virtual and real operations has stronger combat effectiveness than pure military operations, fundamentally changing traditional combat methods. Change. The linkage and superposition of cognitive advantages will accelerate the transformation of combat effectiveness and become the fundamental advantage for winning wars.
Cognitive theory is becoming the frontier of gaming to win the war. Cognitive warfare is a combination of soft power and hard power and is an important factor affecting national security in today’s era. At present, the competition for penetration and counter-infiltration, attack and counter-attack, control and counter-control of cognitive space is fierce. Cognitive science theory is entering the military field, and concepts such as cognitive load, cognitive enhancement, cognitive immunity, and cognitive subversion are being introduced. , has appeared frequently in the field of cognitive warfare research abroad. Foreign militaries believe that the cognitive domain is the “sixth combat domain” of human warfare, the core of the “intertwined conflict fields” in the era of great power competition, and an important direction for future military theoretical innovation. Obviously, cognitive warfare has become the strategic commanding heights for winning future wars. Cognitive theory has become the frontier of theoretical innovation. Cognitive technology will accelerate cognitive warfare and become an important “tipping point” for the intelligent military revolution. As new technologies, new theories, and new styles of cognitive warfare are being incubated at an accelerated pace, perhaps future warfare will take on a surprising new situation.
Judging from the latest local war practice, cognitive domain operations have become an important variable that profoundly affects the direction of war. In cognitive domain operations, all parties compete fiercely for control of public opinion, information guidance, and cognitive shaping. There are not only physical confrontations, but also competitions in virtual space, demonstrating the distinctive characteristics of “technology +” in the digital era. Exploring the way to win in cognitive domain operations is of great practical significance for controlling the initiative in cognitive domain operations and winning future wars.
Seizing control of the brain has become the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations
The brain is the material basis of all thinking activities and the command center that influences and controls human behavior changes. Feeling, perception and consciousness constitute the three aspects of the world that the brain reflects. How to win the right to control the brain has increasingly become the focus of research and attention by all warring parties in the field of cognitive domain operations.
Actively fight for sensory control. Feeling is the reaction caused by the characteristics of objective things in the human brain, and is the basis for various complex psychological processes. With the rapid development of brain science, molecular biology, neurochemistry and other disciplines, humans have gradually gained the ability to intervene and control the brain at the physiological level. According to foreign experimental results, inhaling oxytocin will make people more trusting of others and more empathetic, thereby affecting a person’s prosociality and moral performance. In future operations, the warring parties will use physical stimulation such as sound, light and electricity, or chemical drugs to act on the target’s hearing, vision, smell and other sensory systems. They may even directly act on the human brain to stimulate the target’s brain. Specific emotional reactions can achieve cognitive influence and control on the physiological level.
Effective competition for perceptual suppression. Perception is a psychological process formed on the basis of sensation and reflects the overall image and surface connection of objective things. Among them, the individual’s attitude, motivation, interest, as well as past experience and future expectations are the key variables that affect the individual’s perception of the perceptual target. During wartime, warring parties aim at the target’s psychological doubts, weaknesses, and needs, seize favorable opportunities, and use specific information to emotionally influence, mentally induce, or disrupt the target’s perception in order to increase the target’s perception of the target. The expectation of war risks weakens their will to resist and their determination to fight, thereby achieving the purpose of subduing the enemy with a small war, less fighting or even no fighting.
Comprehensive competition for the right to shape consciousness. Consciousness is realized through psychological processes such as feeling, perception, and thinking, and is manifested as the unity of knowledge, emotion, and intention. The fundamental purpose of war is to force the enemy to surrender. Judging from the war practice at home and abroad in ancient and modern times, in order to win the right to shape consciousness, the warring parties will do their best to mobilize all available military power and comprehensively use political, economic, cultural, diplomatic and other means to carry out political disintegration and diplomatic measures against the enemy. Isolation, guidance of public opinion, and declaration of legal principles can trigger rational thinking, ethical resonance, or value recognition of target individuals or groups, thereby changing their worldview, outlook on life, and values, forming a relatively stable and long-term cognitive influence or control, thereby achieving “complete victory.” “the goal of.
Controlling information becomes the key to cognitive domain operations
The weapon and ammunition of cognitive domain operations is information. Mastering the initiative in the generation, identification, acquisition, dissemination and feedback of information is the key to gaining battlefield advantage in the cognitive domain.
Actively implement strong psychological stimulation to promote information penetration. Modern warfare is fierce and complex, with various elements of confrontation unfolding in multi-dimensional and multi-domain contexts, and fighter jets fleeting. The forces and methods acting in the cognitive domain must keep up with the development and changes of the battlefield situation, and make extensive use of strong psychological stimulation methods such as subliminal information implantation, acousto-optical electromagnetic psychological nuisance damage, and non-contact emotional control to take the initiative to induce the target. The subject’s emotions, will, thoughts, beliefs, etc. appear chaotic, confused or radically changed, thereby achieving the purpose of controlling and influencing the cognitive system of the target subject.
Extensive use of intelligent algorithms to achieve accurate push. As the Internet penetrates into every aspect of human life, everyone will leave massive amounts of data and information online. During wartime, warring parties will use modern information technologies such as big data, cloud computing, the Internet of Things, and blockchain to analyze the target’s social data, trajectory data, financial data, online shopping records, search records, personal communication records and other network data. The information is deeply mined and associated to achieve a “cognitive portrait” of the target object, and the target object’s interest preferences, behavioral trends, interpersonal relationships and value orientations are systematically analyzed, thereby three-dimensionally grasping the characteristics of relevant individuals or specific groups. Then, with the help of intelligent algorithm technology, personalized and customized cognitive information is accurately pushed to the target object, thereby affecting the target object’s attitude, emotion and value judgment towards the war, thereby promoting the realization of one’s own combat objectives and political intentions.
Effectively aggregate social support systems to achieve overall linkage. The social support system is the material and spiritual help and support that a person can obtain from others in his or her social network. It is a key factor that affects and determines the emotional support and cognitive direction of an individual. It can be said that for the success of cognitive domain operations, it is crucial to obtain the support and assistance of the target’s social support system. With the help of modern information technology, we can effectively connect to the target’s relatives, friends, classmates, partners and other specific social relations. By exerting targeted influence on the above-mentioned relations, we can gain the understanding, support and trust of the other party, and mobilize the specific relations to When the target object exerts influence, it is easier to win the trust and acceptance of the target object, and it is easier for the target object to undergo cognitive changes, thereby achieving the purpose of cognitive influence and control on the target object.
Virtual space becomes the main battlefield for cognitive domain operations
With the continuous expansion of human virtual space, virtual space is becoming the main battlefield of modern warfare, especially cognitive domain warfare, which determines the outcome of future wars to a certain extent.
Emerging communication forms have become new means of warfare in the cognitive domain. With the continuous development of mobile Internet technology, emerging communication forms represented by social media have gradually become a new platform and mainstream position for cognitive confrontation. Judging from recent local wars, the status and role of social media has become more and more prominent. All warring parties use personal blogs, forums and other platforms to publish battlefield pictures, videos, and comments in real time, which has not only become a global mobile online media terminal. It has also become the main battleground for the value perception game among different countries and different factions around the world. Emerging communication forms such as social media, with their unique decentralization and interactivity characteristics, have broken the information monopoly and information control in traditional communication methods and spawned numerous product styles. While meeting people’s information needs, they are also Unknowingly changing people’s perceptions. It is foreseeable that social media will play an increasingly prominent role in cognitive domain operations in the future.
Cyberspace has become a new space for cognitive domain operations. Under the conditions of informatization and intelligence, the threshold of network technology has been greatly reduced, making it possible to watch the game in real time around the world. Modern warfare has developed from “living room warfare” in the television era to “handheld warfare” in today’s all-media era. Online live broadcast is more intuitive and richer than any form of battlefield reporting, and “global synchronicity” has become a prominent feature. Through live broadcasts on the Internet, videos and pictures of fierce battles between the two warring parties, as well as numerous burned tanks and armored vehicles, as well as homes destroyed by the war and refugees fleeing their homes, can be visually displayed. People can see the micro-state of individual civilians and soldiers on both sides through the Internet. The “transparency” of the battlefield makes any attempt to conceal the truth and false statements more and more difficult. But on the other hand, the emergence of technologies such as intelligent voice cloning and video portrait simulation replacement means that what people see may not necessarily be “as seen” and what they hear may not be “as heard”. Cognition under online live broadcasts Domain operations add more room for possibility and imagination.
The intelligent network army has become a new force in cognitive domain warfare. The development of information networks has broken through the authenticity limitations of interpersonal communication, and it is difficult for us to determine whether the other end of the network is a real person. Based on the needs of large-scale interaction, intelligent, automated, and large-scale cyberspace robots are emerging. They are widely active in every corner of cyberspace. These intelligent network armies have the capabilities of intelligent recognition, intelligent response and even brain-like thinking. They are tireless and work around the clock. Intelligent network armies are becoming an important force in future cognitive domain operations. Judging from the current development trends of related technologies, major countries and even business organizations in the world are focusing on the potential prospects of network robots in group penetration, live broadcast follow-up, shaping public opinion, and managing network crises. In the flexible guidance of network intelligent robots, Increase research and development efforts on key technologies such as automatic acquisition of technology groups, automatic cultivation and group penetration, and provide intelligent and efficient technical support for public opinion guidance, cognitive shaping, and behavioral guidance and control by discovering and effectively utilizing the behavioral patterns of network users.
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.
The target of cognitive domain operations refers to the specific direction of cognitive domain operations. In cognitive domain operations, compared with combat objects, the problem solved by combat targets is precise targeting, which allows commanders to understand the exact coordinates of what to hit, where to hit, and to what extent. Only by deeply understanding the connotative characteristics of cognitive domain combat targets can we accurately find key targets through appearances and seize the opportunity in future operations.
Cognitive focus that affects behavioral choices
The cognitive center of gravity is the “convergence point” of the diverse thinking and cognition of cognitive subjects in war activities. As an active factor, it affects the cognitive process and behavioral results. Generally speaking, the cognitive factors that influence individual behavioral choices in war activities mainly include cognition of political attributes, cognition of interest associations, cognition of group belonging, cognition of risk and loss, cognition of emotional orientation, cognition of war ethics, etc. For war activities and the groups or individuals concerned about war activities, the cognitive focus that affects their attitudes, tendencies, and behaviors is not the same. Judging from the local wars and regional conflicts in the world in recent years, there are obvious differences in the cognitive focus of different groups or individuals. Politicians pay more attention to the recognition of political attributes and the recognition of interest connections, while those who may be involved in the war pay more attention to the recognition of risk and loss. And interest-related cognition, ordinary people pay more attention to interest-related cognition and emotion-oriented cognition, while people in other countries outside the region generally pay more attention to war moral cognition and group belonging cognition because their own interests will not suffer direct losses. In combat practice, foreign military forces are good at targeting the cognitive focus of different objects, accurately planning themes, and pushing relevant information to induce specific behavioral choices. For example, before the Gulf War, Hill Norton Public Relations Company concocted the non-existent “Incubator Incident”, using the daughter of Kuwait’s ambassador to the United States, Naila, as a “testimony” to show the “inhumanity” of the Iraqi army and induce the United States to The public’s understanding of ethics and morality further supported the US government in sending troops to participate in the Gulf War.
Style preferences that constrain command decisions
Cognitive style directly affects decision-making behavioral preferences. Cognitive style refers to an individual’s typical way of cognition, memory, thinking, and problem solving. According to command decision-making style preferences, commanders can be divided into calm cognitive styles and impulsive cognitive styles. Commanders with a calm cognitive style value accuracy but not speed in the decision-making process. They make high-quality decisions, but they are prone to falling into comparative analysis of various intelligence information sources and overemphasize the accuracy and objectivity of information analysis. Commanders with a calm cognitive style are often easily disturbed by numerous and diverse information stimulations during cognitive offensive and defensive operations on the battlefield, and their mental energy is easily disrupted and dissipated, which may delay combat opportunities. Commanders with an impulsive cognitive style value speed but not accuracy. They make decisions quickly but with low quality. They are easily agitated and prone to conflicts with team members. Commanders with an impulsive cognitive style are also prone to over-interpretation of ambiguous external security environments, and constantly look for “evidence” to strengthen and verify individual erroneous thinking, narrowing individual attention and leading to biased command decisions. In combat practice, foreign militaries pay more attention to analyzing the decision-making style of the commanders of combat opponents, and then select specific information to psychologically influence them. For example, during the U.S. invasion of Panama, when they besieged Panamanian President Noriega’s hiding place, the U.S. military repeatedly played rock and heavy metal music and used language that stimulated and humiliated Noriega to carry out cognitive attacks and psychological attacks, which devastated Noriega physically and mentally. Gradually collapse.
Backdoor channel to control thinking and cognition
Once a computer is infected with a “Trojan horse” virus, it will send a connection request to the hacker’s control terminal at a specific time. Once the connection is successful, a backdoor channel will be formed, allowing the hacker to control the computer as he wishes. Similarly, the human brain also has cognitive “backdoors” that can also be controlled by others. Cognitive psychologists have found that by sending information to the target object’s audio-visual perception channel, carefully pushing the information content recognized and accepted by the target object, catering to the target object’s existing experience memory, complying with the target object’s thinking habits, and stimulating the target object’s emotions Pain points can be controlled to interfere with the target object’s cognition and promote its instinctive emotional and behavioral reactions. With the support of cutting-edge cognitive science and technology, using two modes of automatic start-up and controlled processing of brain information processing, the target object can easily fall into a “cognitive cocoon”. In cognitive domain operations, individuals are immersed in a massive amount of artificially constructed information and are continuously provided with “evidence” to prove that their judgment and cognition are “correct”. Over time, an individual’s cognitive vision becomes smaller and smaller, and his ability to perceive the external environment gradually decreases. Eventually, he will not be able to see the truth of things, and he will be addicted to the “cognitive cocoon” and cannot extricate himself. In operations in the cognitive domain, foreign military forces often respond to the opponent’s cognitive bias on a certain issue and continue to push situational information and intelligence information through multiple channels that support the opponent’s “correct perception”, allowing the opponent to make command decisions. Mistakes and deviations occur.
attention-inducing sensory stimulation
Effective sensory stimulation is the primary prerequisite to attract the attention of the target object. The human brain will detect stimuli within the range of perception and respond in various ways. Experimental research in cognitive psychology has found that dynamic, dangerous, interest-related, survival safety, contrast and other types of information are more likely to attract the attention of the human brain. In the era of intelligence, the target object’s psychological cognitive process often follows the rules of “attracting attention, cultivating interest, actively searching, strengthening memory, actively sharing, and influencing others”. In combat, foreign troops often use exclusive revelations, intelligence leaks, authoritative disclosures, on-site connections, etc., and skillfully use exaggeration, contrast, association, metaphor, suspense, foil and other techniques to push information that subverts common sense, cognitive conflict, and strong contrast. information to attract the attention of the target audience. For example, the “Rescue of Female Soldier Lynch Incident” portrayed by the US military in the Iraq War and the “Gaddafi Golden Toilet” in the Libyan War were mostly based on stories familiar to the audience. The purpose and point of view were integrated into the storyline, which attracted a large number of audiences. people’s attention. In addition, the human brain also processes stimuli outside the range of sensory perception. In recent years, the military of Western countries has attached great importance to the research of subliminal information stimulation technology, and has developed subliminal visual information implantation technology, subliminal auditory information implantation technology, subliminal information activation technology, nervous system subconscious sound control technology, etc. , and continue to expand the application scope of neurocognitive science and technology in the military field.
A meta-value concept that generates cognitive resonance
In cognitive theory, cognitive resonance refers to information that crosses the cognitive gap between the two parties and can arouse the ideological, psychological and cognitive resonance of both parties, thereby achieving the deconstruction and reconstruction of the other party’s cognitive system. In cognitive domain operations, this cognitive energy concentration effect is not a concentration of power in a simple sense, but an internal accumulation of the combined force of the system. Under the diffusion of modern information media, this cognitive resonance effect can quickly spread to all parts of the world in a short period of time, and produce secondary indirect psychological effects or more levels of derivative psychological effects, showing a cumulative and iterative effect. Once the state exceeds the psychological critical point, it will show a state of psychological energy explosion, thereby changing the direction or outcome of the event. The targets that can induce this kind of cognitive resonance include value beliefs, moral ethics, common interests, etc. In a war, if one party touches or violates human meta-values, common emotional orientation, etc., it can easily trigger collective denunciation, bear the accusation of violating human morality, and fall into a moral low. For example, a photo from the Vietnam War showed a group of Vietnamese children, especially a 9-year-old girl, running naked on the road after being attacked by napalm bombs from the US military. In 1972, this photo caused a huge sensation after being published, setting off an anti-war wave in the United States and even around the world, accelerating the end of the Vietnam War.
The cognitive gap that splits the cognitive system
In daily life, seemingly hard steel is easily broken due to the brittleness of the material due to factors such as low-temperature environments, material defects, stress concentration, and so is the cognitive system. Cognitive gaps refer to the cracks, pain points, weaknesses and sensitivity points in the cognitive thinking of the target object. It is mainly manifested in the individual’s worry that he or she is unable to cope with or adapt to the environment, and under the influence of anxiety, it constitutes cognitive vulnerability. . The experience of security threats, loose group structure, confusion of beliefs and ideals, and the loss of voice of authoritative media, etc., will all cause cognitive conflicts and tears among the target objects. In cognitive domain operations, sometimes a seemingly powerful opponent has a lot of mental gaps and psychological weaknesses hidden behind it. Often a news event can shake the opponent’s cognitive framework and burst the cognitive bubble. In addition, this kind of cognitive and psychological conflict will also cause moral damage and psychological trauma to individuals. In recent years, U.S. and Western military forces performing overseas missions have faced “enemies disguised as civilians” appearing anytime and anywhere. Their uncertainty about the battlefield environment has continued to increase. They generally lack a sense of the significance of combat and are filled with guilt and guilt. A large number of soldiers develop war post-traumatic stress disorder, self-injury on the battlefield, post-war suicides and crime surge, and the number of suicides among war veterans even exceeds the number of battlefield deaths.
(Author’s unit: School of Political Science, National Defense University)
Judging from the latest local war practice, cognitive domain operations have become an important variable that profoundly affects the direction of war. In cognitive domain operations, all parties compete fiercely for control of public opinion, information guidance, and cognitive shaping. There are not only physical confrontations, but also competitions in virtual space, demonstrating the distinctive characteristics of “technology +” in the digital era. Exploring the way to win in cognitive domain operations is of great practical significance for controlling the initiative in cognitive domain operations and winning future wars.
Seizing control of the brain has become the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations
The brain is the material basis of all thinking activities and the command center that influences and controls human behavior changes. Feeling, perception and consciousness constitute the three aspects of the world that the brain reflects. How to win the right to control the brain has increasingly become the focus of research and attention by all warring parties in the field of cognitive domain operations.
Actively fight for sensory control. Feeling is the reaction caused by the characteristics of objective things in the human brain, and is the basis for various complex psychological processes. With the rapid development of brain science, molecular biology, neurochemistry and other disciplines, humans have gradually gained the ability to intervene and control the brain at the physiological level. According to foreign experimental results, inhaling oxytocin will make people more trusting of others and more empathetic, thereby affecting a person’s prosociality and moral performance. In future operations, the warring parties will use physical stimulation such as sound, light and electricity, or chemical drugs to act on the target’s hearing, vision, smell and other sensory systems. They may even directly act on the human brain to stimulate the target’s brain. Specific emotional reactions can achieve cognitive influence and control on the physiological level.
Effective competition for perceptual suppression. Perception is a psychological process formed on the basis of sensation and reflects the overall image and surface connection of objective things. Among them, the individual’s attitude, motivation, interest, as well as past experience and future expectations are the key variables that affect the individual’s perception of the perceptual target. During wartime, warring parties aim at the target’s psychological doubts, weaknesses, and needs, seize favorable opportunities, and use specific information to emotionally influence, mentally induce, or disrupt the target’s perception in order to increase the target’s perception of the target. The expectation of war risks weakens their will to resist and their determination to fight, thereby achieving the purpose of subduing the enemy with a small war, less fighting or even no fighting.
Comprehensive competition for the right to shape consciousness. Consciousness is realized through psychological processes such as feeling, perception, and thinking, and is manifested as the unity of knowledge, emotion, and intention. The fundamental purpose of war is to force the enemy to surrender. Judging from the war practice at home and abroad in ancient and modern times, in order to win the right to shape consciousness, the warring parties will do their best to mobilize all available military power and comprehensively use political, economic, cultural, diplomatic and other means to carry out political disintegration and diplomatic measures against the enemy. Isolation, guidance of public opinion, and declaration of legal principles can trigger rational thinking, ethical resonance, or value recognition of target individuals or groups, thereby changing their worldview, outlook on life, and values, forming a relatively stable and long-term cognitive influence or control, thereby achieving “complete victory.” “the goal of.
Controlling information becomes the key to cognitive domain operations
The weapon and ammunition of cognitive domain operations is information. Mastering the initiative in the generation, identification, acquisition, dissemination and feedback of information is the key to gaining battlefield advantage in the cognitive domain.
Actively implement strong psychological stimulation to promote information penetration. Modern warfare is fierce and complex, with various elements of confrontation unfolding in multi-dimensional and multi-domain contexts, and fighter jets fleeting. The forces and methods acting in the cognitive domain must keep up with the development and changes of the battlefield situation, and make extensive use of strong psychological stimulation methods such as subliminal information implantation, acousto-optical electromagnetic psychological nuisance damage, and non-contact emotional control to take the initiative to induce the target. The subject’s emotions, will, thoughts, beliefs, etc. appear chaotic, confused or radically changed, thereby achieving the purpose of controlling and influencing the cognitive system of the target subject.
Extensive use of intelligent algorithms to achieve accurate push. As the Internet penetrates into every aspect of human life, everyone will leave massive amounts of data and information online. During wartime, warring parties will use modern information technologies such as big data, cloud computing, the Internet of Things, and blockchain to analyze the target’s social data, trajectory data, financial data, online shopping records, search records, personal communication records and other network data. The information is deeply mined and associated to achieve a “cognitive portrait” of the target object, and the target object’s interest preferences, behavioral trends, interpersonal relationships and value orientations are systematically analyzed, thereby three-dimensionally grasping the characteristics of relevant individuals or specific groups. Then, with the help of intelligent algorithm technology, personalized and customized cognitive information is accurately pushed to the target object, thereby affecting the target object’s attitude, emotion and value judgment towards the war, thereby promoting the realization of one’s own combat objectives and political intentions.
Effectively aggregate social support systems to achieve overall linkage. The social support system is the material and spiritual help and support that a person can obtain from others in his or her social network. It is a key factor that affects and determines the emotional support and cognitive direction of an individual. It can be said that for the success of cognitive domain operations, it is crucial to obtain the support and assistance of the target’s social support system. With the help of modern information technology, we can effectively connect to the target’s relatives, friends, classmates, partners and other specific social relations. By exerting targeted influence on the above-mentioned relations, we can gain the understanding, support and trust of the other party, and mobilize the specific relations to When the target object exerts influence, it is easier to win the trust and acceptance of the target object, and it is easier for the target object to undergo cognitive changes, thereby achieving the purpose of cognitive influence and control on the target object.
Virtual space becomes the main battlefield for cognitive domain operations
With the continuous expansion of human virtual space, virtual space is becoming the main battlefield of modern warfare, especially cognitive domain warfare, which determines the outcome of future wars to a certain extent.
Emerging communication forms have become new means of warfare in the cognitive domain. With the continuous development of mobile Internet technology, emerging communication forms represented by social media have gradually become a new platform and mainstream position for cognitive confrontation. Judging from recent local wars, the status and role of social media has become more and more prominent. All warring parties use personal blogs, forums and other platforms to publish battlefield pictures, videos, and comments in real time, which has not only become a global mobile online media terminal. It has also become the main battleground for the value perception game among different countries and different factions around the world. Emerging communication forms such as social media, with their unique decentralization and interactivity characteristics, have broken the information monopoly and information control in traditional communication methods and spawned numerous product styles. While meeting people’s information needs, they are also Unknowingly changing people’s perceptions. It is foreseeable that social media will play an increasingly prominent role in cognitive domain operations in the future.
Cyberspace has become a new space for cognitive domain operations. Under the conditions of informatization and intelligence, the threshold of network technology has been greatly reduced, making it possible to watch the game in real time around the world. Modern warfare has developed from “living room warfare” in the television era to “handheld warfare” in today’s all-media era. Online live broadcast is more intuitive and richer than any form of battlefield reporting, and “global synchronicity” has become a prominent feature. Through live broadcasts on the Internet, videos and pictures of fierce battles between the two warring parties, as well as numerous burned tanks and armored vehicles, as well as homes destroyed by the war and refugees fleeing their homes, can be visually presented. People can see the micro-state of individual civilians and soldiers on both sides through the Internet. The “transparency” of the battlefield makes any attempt to conceal the truth and false statements more and more difficult. But on the other hand, the emergence of technologies such as intelligent voice cloning and video portrait simulation replacement means that what people see may not necessarily be “as seen” and what they hear may not be “as heard”. Cognition under online live broadcasts Domain operations add more room for possibility and imagination.
The intelligent network army has become a new force in cognitive domain warfare. The development of information networks has broken through the authenticity limitations of interpersonal communication, and it is difficult for us to determine whether the other end of the network is a real person. Based on the needs of large-scale interaction, intelligent, automated, and large-scale cyberspace robots are emerging. They are widely active in every corner of cyberspace. These intelligent network armies have the capabilities of intelligent recognition, intelligent response and even brain-like thinking. They are tireless and work around the clock. Intelligent network armies are becoming an important force in future cognitive domain operations. Judging from the current development trends of related technologies, major countries and even business organizations in the world are focusing on the potential prospects of network robots in group penetration, live broadcast follow-up, shaping public opinion, and managing network crises. In the flexible guidance of network intelligent robots, Increase research and development efforts on key technologies such as automatic acquisition of technology groups, automatic cultivation and group penetration, and provide intelligent and efficient technical support for public opinion guidance, cognitive shaping, and behavioral guidance and control by discovering and effectively utilizing the behavioral patterns of network users.
Most of the local wars and armed conflicts in recent years have been “hybrid” confrontations carried out in multiple dimensions and fields, emphasizing the use of military, political, economic and other means to implement systematic control in the dimension of comprehensive decision-making, creating all kinds of chaos in the dimension of international communication, and creating various chaos in the dimension of international communication. Conduct targeted strikes in the strategic focus dimension, actively shape the battlefield situation, and seek to seize the strategic initiative. In future wars, in order to successfully fight political and military battles and military and political battles, we should deeply grasp the characteristics and laws of offensive and defensive operations in the cognitive domain and improve our ability to fight the “five battles” well.
Be proactive in cognitive operations, shape the situation and control the situation, and fight proactively. Before the war begins, cognition comes first. With the continuous development and evolution of war forms, the status and role of cognitive domain operations continue to be highlighted. Aiming to win future wars, cognitive deployment should be carried out in advance. Through strategies, information, technology and other means and carriers, the physiological, psychological, values and other cognitive factors of target objects should be affected, intervened and manipulated, and cognitive attack and defense should be used to cover military operations and accurately Efficiently dominate cognitive space. Fully understand the importance of being first, grasp the definition and interpretation power of “narrative” flexibly and autonomously, emphasize pre-emption to win the initiative in the cognitive narrative struggle dimension, create a favorable situation in which legal principles are in hand and morality is on our side, and occupy the moral commanding heights.
Cognitive operations focus on attacking the heart, and implement layered strategies to fight precise battles. “Those who are good at fighting will benefit others without killing them.” In future wars, the combat space will extend to the deep sea, deep space, deep network and other fields, and the battlefield space and time will present the characteristics of being extremely far, extremely small, extremely intelligent and uninhabited, invisible, and silent. We should keep a close eye on cognitive gaps to improve effectiveness, and use methods such as big data simulation, artificial intelligence matching, and psychological model evaluation to analyze and control the key information of cognitive subjects to achieve effective penetration and early deterrence of cognitive subject information. Closely focus on cognitive blind spots to enhance penetration, target the ideological consensus points, psychological connection points, and spiritual pillar points that maintain the unity of powerful enemy alliances to carry out effective strikes, and use their cognitive differences and interest conflicts to achieve differentiation and disintegration at all levels.
Based on cognitive combat strategies, we must penetrate the entire territory and fight for deterrence and control. In future wars, the strategic competition and tactical confrontation between the two warring parties will be extremely fierce. We should pay close attention to the decision-making process and make comprehensive efforts to increase the opponent’s decision-making dilemma and form our own decision-making advantages. On the one hand, we must pay more attention to key nodes such as the enemy’s decision-making center, command hub, reconnaissance and early warning system, and use advanced strike methods to physically destroy these nodes. On the other hand, we must pay more attention to the “soft kill” effects of cognitive shaping, cognitive induction, cognitive intervention and cognitive control, and embed cognitive domain operations into “hard destruction”, which not only creates a strong deterrent through precise strikes with high-tech weapons, but also integrates new qualities The combat power is expanded to the cognitive dimension, thus forming an asymmetric check and balance advantage.
Cognitive combat information is king, expand the field and fight for support. Future wars cannot be separated from strong information support, and system integration should be accelerated to gain data advantages. First of all, speed up the construction of cognitive offensive and defensive operations theory library, database, talent library, case library, and tactics library, dynamically collect and update the current status of the enemy’s cognitive offensive and defensive operations capabilities, and provide all-round support for cognitive offensive and defensive operations. Secondly, speed up the creation of the integrated media communication matrix, improve the self-owned platform system, speed up the deployment of network platforms, focus on system integration and collaboration, break down the “barriers” of information interconnection as soon as possible, and achieve cognitive integration and sharing, and comprehensive results. Thirdly, accelerate the coupling and linkage of information and cognitive domain operations, vigorously develop core technologies such as neural network systems, artificial intelligence applications, cognitive decision-making, psychological attack and defense, mine and analyze cross-domain and heterogeneous cognitive information, and improve the information fusion system of cognitive means to win the future. War provides “clairvoyance” and “early ears”.
Cognitive combat coordination is the key, and multi-dimensional efforts are used to fight the overall battle. Future wars are joint operations carried out in land, sea, air, space, network, electromagnetic and other fields. System thinking should be adhered to, the awareness of collaboration should be strengthened, and the compatibility and coordination of cognitive domain operations and other military operations should be improved. For example, it can integrate human intelligence, geographical intelligence, open source intelligence, etc., quickly collect and process massive data, remove falsehoods while retaining truth, seize cognitive space accurately and efficiently, achieve complementary advantages, and form cognitive advantages through full domain coverage. By networking dispersed multi-domain forces, we can establish an all-domain joint force with high connectivity, collective action, and overall attack to achieve the effect of “integrated deterrence.” By integrating national resources, strengthening strategic communication, using cognitive momentum to amplify the effects of political disruption, economic sanctions, and diplomatic offensives, and cooperating with military operations to put pressure on target targets in an all-round way, we strive to defeat the enemy without fighting.
(Author’s unit: University of Aerospace Engineering)
——Analysis of the combat effectiveness generation model in the integration of “three modernizations”
●The transformation of the combat power generation model is not “you sing and I will appear”, but a process of interaction between the new combat power factors and the original combat power factors. This interaction process changes due to the different characteristics of the new combat power factors.
●As intelligent unmanned weapons platforms continue to enter the war arena, artificial intelligence decision-making and algorithmic confrontation have added new intelligent factors to the generation of combat effectiveness. The confrontation method of the combat system has also shifted from information-led firepower platforms to human-based and The swarm intelligence of networks and machines leads to a cognitive confrontation that promotes the “information × (firepower + mobility)” combat power generation model and evolves to a more advanced stage of “[information × (firepower + mobility)]” intelligence.
Currently, modern warfare is at the juncture of the integration of mechanization, information, and intelligence (hereinafter referred to as the “three modernizations”). Exploring the inherent laws of the combat power generation model under the conditions of the integration of the “three modernizations” is essential for gaining insight into new war winning mechanisms and mastering the initiative on future battlefields. Rights are of great significance.
The evolution of “Firepower+”: Fusion
The transformation of the combat effectiveness generation model is not “you sing and I come on stage”, but a process of interaction between the new combat effectiveness factors and the original combat effectiveness factors. This interaction process changes due to the different characteristics of the new combat effectiveness factors.
Superposition patterns before the age of mechanization. Throughout the history of mankind, the generation model of combat power has been evolving in a “+” manner. From the superposition of physical strength and skills of people in the Stone Age, to the addition of the penetrating power of swords in the cold weapon age, to the injection of firepower in the gunpowder age, and the generation of mobility in the mechanization age, the generation model of military combat effectiveness follows the superposition method. A display method of “physical strength + penetration power + firepower + mobility” has been formed. This combat power generation mode characterized by superposition gives an army of large numbers an overwhelming advantage on the battlefield. In the meantime, although the power of information has always played a decisive role on the battlefield, such as “know yourself and the enemy, you can fight a hundred battles without danger” reflects the importance of information on the ancient battlefield. However, due to various conditions, “knowing yourself” cannot fully guarantee “knowing yourself” and “knowing the enemy” It is even more difficult. Information power has become the most uncontrollable link in the combat effectiveness factor, thus playing a subordinate role in the generation of combat effectiveness.
Information multiplier model in the information age. In the era of network information, the ubiquitous network provides all-encompassing information and promotes the ubiquity of information. It also draws people into the “network-information” space in the process of information interaction; and the information unit Embedding, the dispersion of smart dust, and the deployment of micro-nano sensors transform mechanical systems such as tanks, fighter planes, artillery, and ships into “information-physical” systems. In this process, information power, firepower, and mobility are linked across boundaries, and a multiplicative relationship in addition to superposition is created in the generation mode of combat power, showing a new method of “information × (firepower + mobility)”. This combat power model in which information power acts as a multiplier factor is determined by, first, the characteristics of information power permeating firepower and mobility; secondly, by the fact that information power has a higher status than firepower and mobility; thirdly, by the fact that information power has It may be determined by the multiplication factor of combat effectiveness or the sharp reduction in load. This follows the uncertainty of information power and depends on the degree of matching between the information and the battlefield situation.
Intelligence index model in the era of intelligence. Humanity has never stopped exploring the laws of combat effectiveness generation. In recent years, as intelligent unmanned weapons platforms continue to enter the war arena, artificial intelligence decision-making and algorithmic confrontation have added new intelligent factors to the generation of combat effectiveness. The confrontation method of the combat system has also changed from information-led firepower platforms to one based on In the cognitive confrontation that can be won by the swarm intelligence of people, networks and machines, it promotes the combat power generation model of “information × (firepower + mobility)” and evolves to a more advanced stage of “[information × (firepower + mobility)] intelligence” . The core of this combat power generation model that uses “intelligence” as an exponential factor is to move from the original confrontation of firepower, mobility, and information to the highest level of human confrontation – cognitive confrontation. Although this combat power generation model has not yet been used in actual combat on a large scale at this stage, it will become the protagonist in high-intensity confrontations in the future. Its impact on combat power originates from artificial intelligence and appears in three aspects: First, it transforms human beings into To be freed from the “information dilemma” that becomes more and more mined; secondly, to give unmanned system weapons autonomous attack and defense capabilities; thirdly, machine learning and algorithm optimization provide brand-new solutions that are different from humans in command and decision-making.
The essence of “information ×”: empowerment
When the firepower and mobility of the mechanization era encounter physical limits, information becomes a penetrating factor in the generation of combat effectiveness. It travels through the physical domain, cognitive domain and social domain in the form of signals, knowledge and instructions, resulting in information interaction, information dissemination, Effects such as information power empower other combat effectiveness factors.
Information empowers command and control, taking it to a new level of “art + science”. The information on the traditional battlefield is limited by the means of perception, transmission and processing, and is in an incomplete, inaccurate and non-real-time state. The confrontation of command and control activities in this information state can only rely on the commander’s strategy to give “art” “Vitality on. Under the conditions of the integration of “three modernizations”, the information on the battlefield is extremely rich, and the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of the information have been greatly improved, thus promoting command decision-making from pure human brain planning to machine calculation and model optimization. , a new level of rule adaptation; the commander reduces the subjective speculation or assumption due to lack of information, and enters a new level of prediction from the original “current situation” to the prediction of “future situation”; the confrontation of the combat platform is injected with The computational component of mathematical model calculations greatly improves the “scientific” component of combat command.
Information empowers firepower, leading it to a new form of “precise release.” Traditional information empowers firepower, mainly providing firepower units with summary information about targets. This is why fire coverage, fire extension and fire suppression are required on traditional battlefields. Under the conditions of “three modernizations” integration, information on the battlefield empowers firepower. When tracking and positioning targets, it provides the firepower platform with centimeter-level target position information and target movement trajectories and other mathematical information; when planning combat missions, commanders use The flow and flow of information on the ubiquitous network associate the most suitable forces and weapons for the mission in the system, forming a dynamic “combat power circle” based on information stakeholders, greatly reducing the redundant load on the operation of the combat system and achieving the accuracy of the combat system. Matching; during a fire strike operation, the information unit embedded in the fire platform will compare and analyze the real-time change information of the target’s incoming trajectory, as well as information about the evasion strategies that the target may adopt, with the fire strike method, timing and strategy of the fire platform. , to achieve “information-firepower” interaction in the entire process of target finding, attitude adjustment, attack timing, etc.
Information empowers mobility, leading it to a new state of “instant access”. The mobility in the traditional combat system mainly refers to the maneuvering speed of land platforms, sea platforms, and air platforms. Affected by command relationships, deployment areas, and response delays, the mobility of platforms is often limited. Weapons and equipment under the conditions of “three modernizations” integration are in a real-time network online state, and the mobility of all weapon platforms converges into something similar to a “resource pool.” When the combat system senses external threat information, it is closest to the place where the threat occurs. The weapons that are most suitable for responding to threats and the fastest to perceive threats are extracted by the mission planning system to perform real-time combat operations. This greatly improves the instantaneous response capability of the combat system. Under the “pooling” effect, the mobility of different combat platforms transcends the separation of time, space and command relationships, and becomes a new state of “instantly accessible” mobility.
Infusion of “Intelligence Index”: Leap Change
The injection of intelligence index in the combat power generation mode “[Information The three aspects of the combat system include combat structure, computing resources and combat models.
Adaptive adjustment of combat structures generates intelligence. The combat system under the conditions of the integration of “three modernizations” is a complex system based on the network. In this complex system, there are a large number of network access nodes, and the characteristic of user connection is decentralization. These characteristics make the combat system always go from a chaotic state to a stable state during operation. Then due to external stimulation, the operating state of the system is unbalanced and enters a new chaotic state. The interaction of various elements of the system , mutual relations, and mutual coordination, the system gradually enters a new stable state again. Of course, a combat system is not a complex system that can grow freely. This self-consistency or adaptive adjustment comes not only from the commander’s decision-making, mission planning, action control, and combat coordination of the forces and weapons in the system, but also from the actions of each member based on their actions. The pre-agreed rules make relevant responses autonomously, as well as the relevant rules that each member learns or evolves by themselves in the process of operating according to the rules. In the process of self-consistency, the combat system resolves the conflicts between related elements, clears the pain points, breakpoints and blocking points in the system, brings it into a state of integration and symbiosis, and stimulates the combination of elements to produce new structures. force.
Adaptive allocation of computing resources produces intelligence. The more you win, the less you win. “Calculation” on the traditional battlefield relies on the commander’s planning, planning, prediction and strategy. It faces three problems: first, the subject of calculation is one or a very small number of individual commanders; second, the calculation process The first is the linear superposition of combat-related information; the third is the conclusion that the calculation result is static and lags behind the situation. The computing power of the combat system on the battlefield under the integration of “three modernizations”, in addition to the commander’s mental calculations, also benefits from the “cloud + edge + terminal” computing resource deployment model, that is, large cloud computing centers provide powerful high-end Computing power support, the “combat cloud” configured at the edge of the combat system provides customized computing power support, and the intelligent end with embedded information units performs primary processing of the target signals of the sensing platform. This computing resource allocation model is well adapted to the characteristics of the battlefield where information is abundant, network transmission resources are limited, and different combat units have very different information processing needs. Computing resources and computing tasks are well integrated. When matched, commanders, combat personnel, intelligence centers, combat platforms, etc. can all receive effective computing power support, which greatly increases the probability of “multi-probability victory” on the battlefield.
Adaptive optimization of combat models generates intelligence. Strategies in human brain confrontation are often affected by human physiological characteristics, such as nervousness, inertial thinking, danger avoidance, etc. These “intelligent flaws” in human nature can be effectively overcome by machine decision-making. On August 20, 2020, a human pilot who participated in the U.S. Air Force’s “Alpha Air Combat Competition” said, “The AI fighter plane is superior because it is extremely aggressive. It uses attack methods that are not commonly used by human pilots to carry out operations, which makes human pilots very uncomfortable.” “. This is enough to prove that the combat model implanted in the machines on the battlefield under the conditions of “three modernizations” integration is very different from the strategies used by human commanders in the decision-making process. Another feature of the machine combat model is its self-learning ability. The process of accumulating combat experience that may take years for humans to complete can be completed by intelligent machines in only dozens of days or even dozens of hours. When the learning ability of machines surpasses that of humans, algorithmic victory will become another focus in battlefield confrontations. However, wars are always led by humans, and this will not change no matter how advanced the machines evolve. Therefore, designing a combat model under human intervention conditions and formulating reasonable rules to promote the adaptive optimization of machine combat models are the key to the competition of combat effectiveness intelligence index on the future battlefield.
Only by proactively seeking change can we win the times
In the same way that humans produce, they fight in the same way. The military’s combat effectiveness generation model is a product of the times and will inevitably be deeply marked by the times. The form of war has entered the era of informationization and intelligence. The intelligence factor has changed from an addend in the past to an exponential. The status, role and structure have undergone earth-shaking changes. The mechanism for winning wars has been completely refreshed, and “yesterday’s old tickets” can no longer board the “passenger ships” of the future.
Facing the great changes of the times, the military’s transformation of its combat effectiveness generation model is a prerequisite for victory. The first-rate troops took the initiative to turn around, the second-rate troops followed suit, and the third-rate troops were forced to turn around. As a soldier, to win in the future, you must learn to be a “lookout on the mast”, dare to step out of the “comfort zone” and “familiar zone” of thinking, take the initiative to seek change, actively explore, and use the storm of ideas to sweep away the old and rigid thinking. Take control of the lifeblood of victory.
Throughout modern warfare, cognitive games have become the focus of offense and defense. Whether one is proficient in planning operations in the cognitive domain will greatly affect the direction and outcome of the war. A deep understanding of the connotation, extension and category style of cognitive domain operations, and an accurate grasp of its winning mechanism and development trend are the keys to understanding the context of the battlefield and winning modern wars.
Cognitive domain operations are the new focus of war games
Different from traditional operations, cognitive domain operations are no longer limited to land, sea, air, space, electricity, network and other fields. It breaks through the traditional physical domain and information domain. It has unique advantages, presents new characteristics, and expands the modern Battlefield new frontier.
Cognitive domain operations expand the war domain space. First of all, the battlefield space in the cognitive domain is broad, mainly reflected in people’s spirit, psychology, thinking, beliefs and other cognitive activities. Its combat targets are mainly hostile heads of state and political figures, military personnel, social elites and the general public. Secondly, cognitive domain operations take a wide range of forms, including but not limited to political and diplomatic pressure, economic blockade and sanctions, cultural penetration and erosion, etc. Thirdly, the goals of cognitive domain operations are wide-ranging, mainly to shake the enemy’s belief, disintegrate the enemy’s will, influence and change the opponent’s decision-making, thereby causing social chaos, decision-making errors, demoralization of the enemy’s military, and even subverting its national power.
Cognitive domain operations blur the boundaries of the war domain. The main body of cognitive domain operations is people. People are the most active factor in war, especially the cognition of high-level decision-makers, which embodies the overall will of the war, directly affects the overall situation of the war, and determines the outcome of the war. The cognition of state leaders and military generals is the key target of cognitive domain operations. Popular will, social foundation, and international public opinion are usually the basis for cognitive domain operations and are the key forces that promote the process and direction of war. Cognitive domain operations mix conventional and unconventional operations, blurring the boundaries of the war field. It aims to cognitively induce and attack information recipients, bypassing the traditional battlefield and reaching the weakest link – people. Tactical actions can achieve strategic goals, from Fundamentally change the battlefield environment and change the outcome of the war.
Cognitive domain operations reach the ultimate strategic goal. There is a saying in the ancient Chinese art of war: “The way to use troops is to attack the heart first, and to attack the city below; to fight the heart first, and to fight soldiers lower.” Operations in the cognitive domain aim to occupy cognitive dominance and influence the enemy’s decision-making and behavior. Achieve maximum combat effectiveness at minimum cost. As Clausewitz mentioned in “On War”, “War is an act of violence that forces the enemy to obey our will.” Since cognitive domain operations are not hard kills against living forces, but soft kills against invisible targets, they can not only “force the enemy to obey our will”, but also objectively enable the enemy to destroy itself from within, making it unable to resist, disintegrate, and ultimately Achieve the strategic goal of “complete victory” without fighting.
Cognitive domain operations are a new product of military reform
At present, major changes in the world that have not been seen in a century are accelerating. The international situation is becoming increasingly complex, and local wars and regional conflicts continue. As a new combat method, cognitive domain operations are becoming more and more important driven by the new wave of military reforms.
The laws of war are the basic rules for combat in the cognitive domain. Cognitive domain operations still follow the basic laws of war. First, justice must prevail. Just wars promote historical development and ultimately defeat unjust wars, and cognitive domain operations that occupy the moral commanding heights have the conditions to win first. The second is the victory of the strong and the defeat of the weak. The advancement of science and technology has given rise to advanced military theories and promoted the development of high-tech equipment. Seizing control and control can achieve dimensionality reduction strikes and disintegrate enemy forces. Third, subjective guidance is consistent with objective reality. Cognitive domain operations must be based on a certain objective material basis. The battlefield environment must be comprehensively considered, the situations of both parties must be weighed, and favorable decisions must be made. Fourth, key operations affect the overall situation. In network-centered system operations, the cognitive domain often becomes the most critical link, and its success or failure can determine the battle situation.
Theoretical innovation is the basic support for cognitive domain operations. In recent years, the US military has successively proposed new combat theories such as “hybrid warfare”, “mosaic warfare” and “gray zone conflict”. It regards cognitive domain operations as the main combat method and has formed a relatively mature theory. The Russian army has also developed its own set of hybrid warfare methods in long-term military practice, especially in the Syrian battlefield, where it skillfully used “Gerasimov” tactics to deal with “hybrid warfare.” Japan has also vigorously developed its military power in recent years. In its new version of the “Defense White Paper”, it first mentioned the concept of “domain transversal” operations, aiming to break through traditional fields and regard new fields such as the cognitive domain as the key direction of its military power development, making it more proactive. and extraversion.
Military practice is an important basis for cognitive domain operations. Judging from the recent local wars, cognitive domain warfare has become the main combat method of modern warfare and has achieved high combat effectiveness. The confrontation between cognitive warfare and counter-cognitive warfare is quite fierce. In 2010, the United States and other Western countries launched a cognitive war, hyped up the Tunisian democratic movement and created the “Arab Spring”, which plunged the Middle East into chaos and allowed terrorist organizations to take advantage of the opportunity to wreak havoc. The United States attempted to consolidate its hegemony by overthrowing the Egyptian government, launching a war in Libya, and intervening in the Syrian war. In 2014, the Russian army took control of Crimea through a combination of strategies, multi-dimensional breakthroughs, and public opinion building. Its cognitive domain operations also have very distinctive characteristics.
Cognitive domain operations are a new direction in war planning
With the continuous development of high and new technologies and their widespread application in the military field, the shape of future wars will evolve at an accelerated pace, and the complexity and unknown nature of wars will increase dramatically. To this end, we should plan in advance, coordinate scientifically, strengthen the construction of combat capabilities in the cognitive domain, deeply integrate into the future battlefield, and effectively control the initiative in future wars.
Promote research on the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations. As an important combat method in future wars, the status and role of cognitive domain operations will be more prominent, and the development prospects will be broader. Controlling cognitive power has become an important part of seizing war control. To win future wars, we must keep up with the trends in the development of war forms, vigorously study the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations, use theoretical innovation to drive innovation in tactics, and seek advantages and opportunities.
Strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive capabilities in cognitive domain operations. From individuals to organizations to countries, the impact of cognitive domain operations spans all time and space and all elements, spans different combat fields, and affects the entire combat process. In future wars, commanders and combatants will face huge cognitive offensive and defensive challenges. Seizing control of cognitive power, and then seizing comprehensive battlefield control, will become the key point of control in future wars. We should adhere to demand-driven efforts, strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive forces in cognitive domain operations, build a cognitive domain combat system that integrates offense and defense, peacetime and war, and multi-dimensional integration, establish and improve drill and evaluation mechanisms, and continuously improve capabilities through long-term military practice.
Accelerate the research and development of high-tech cognitive domain operations. Currently, with the rapid development of high-tech technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, and cloud computing, the acquisition of open source information has become more convenient and efficient. Cognitive domain operations are increasingly characterized by fast start-up, low cost, and high efficiency. In addition, with the quiet development of emerging technologies such as neuroscience and brain science, it can be inferred that cognitive warfare weapons will become increasingly abundant and widely used in future wars. We should keep up with the development of the times, plan and design in advance, vigorously develop cutting-edge technologies oriented to seizing cognitive advantages, and promote the update of cognitive domain combat concepts and methods, so as to seize the initiative in future wars.
The Chinese Military Cognitive Warfare Operational Battle Rhythm with an Analysis of the Characteristics and Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations
Cognitive domain operations take people’s will, beliefs, thinking, psychology, etc. as direct combat objects, and then affect their decisions 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 game, with all parties striving 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. Analyze the characteristics and development trends of cognitive domain operations, which are reflected in at least the following eight aspects.
The cognitive domain is the key domain for transforming military advantage into political victory.
On the surface, military confrontation is a confrontation between the hard power of both sides.
On a deeper level, no matter what the nature of the war is and for what purpose, 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 the key domain for transforming military advantage into political victory. As war accelerates its evolution toward intelligence, cognitive quality advantages bring decision-making and action advantages, which can not only occupy the moral and legal high ground and create a favorable situation of justice and legality, but also realize small wars through hybrid warfare and comprehensive game means. Even the purpose of winning without fighting. Especially in the context of great power competition, the cost of war is high. All parties hope to intensify the 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”, and then achieve 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. Active shaping of political power can also 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 intelligent generation software, a large amount of cognitive “munitions” can be produced 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 informationized and intelligent 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 various combat domains, 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. They blur the boundaries between wartime and peacetime, front and rear, cross battlefields and national boundaries, go beyond the pure military field, and widely penetrate 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 localities, and levels to achieve the best communication effect.
The key is to seize control over the right to define the nature of an action or activity, the right to dominate the process, and the right to judge the outcome.
The cognitive game struggle involves multiple opposing parties and seems complicated. The key is to compete for 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, pre-emptive definitions, group alliances and forced definitions, information suppression and unilateral definitions, setting issues and applying definitions are usually adopted 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 are trying 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 harm 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, whether 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 possible to package themselves 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 “righteousness” defeats “unrighteousness”. 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 network information age, the way humans communicate continues to undergo complex and profound changes. On-site interactive interactions have gradually given way to online connections. Some large-scale social platforms have become the main battleground for cognitive games and the main channels for influencing public cognition. Using information as ammunition to fight for the right to block international networks and control discourse has become today’s norm. One of the main actions of 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 cannonballs. 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 less” “A situation where “I’m right and you’re wrong” and “I can only say it and you’re not allowed to say it”. As users of large-scale social platforms, the public is influenced by and affects others in the process of “listening”, “speaking” and even “doing”, 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 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. In 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 messages. The side with superior quantity and quality of these two types of personnel will often have a higher probability of winning.
Cognitive countermeasures technology is increasingly used directly in warfare. In past wars, the influence and effect on the cognitive domain were 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 of information communications, artificial intelligence, biocrossing, brain science and other technologies, new cognitive warfare tools and technologies are directly targeting military personnel. Cognitive countermeasures use not only traditional information warfare weapons, but also an arsenal of neural weapons that target 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 building a modern network architecture and developing a data visualization platform to quickly understand the information environment and effectively influence target groups.
中國軍事參考：http://www.81.cn/ll_208543/10178888.html
中國網絡衝突討論，信息與研究 // Chinese Cyber Conflict Discussions, Information & Research
