Category Archives: 中國解放軍敘事戰爭

打贏資訊化智慧化戰爭解放軍必須找到科技融合點推進戰術創新

To Win The Information-based Intelligent War China’s People’s Liberation Army Must Find Science and Technology Integration Point To Evolve Innovation of Tactics

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

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

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

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

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

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

Modern English:

Find the integration point of theory and technology for innovative tactics

Tactic, that is, combat methods, refers to the strategies and techniques used in combat. To innovate tactics, we must not only think deeply about “strategies”, but also study “techniques”. If there is “strategy” but no “skill”, the mind will be more than sufficient but the strength is insufficient; if there is “skill” but no “strategy”, no matter how hard you try, you will not be able to achieve the goal. It requires both strategic guidance and technical support to be victorious in every battle. To win information-based and intelligent wars and carry out strategic innovation that puts strategy first and wins by outsmarting, we must implement both “policy” and “technique” to effectively solve problems such as the disconnect between theoretical innovation and technological application, and the derailment of combat operations and technological paths.

“Integration” of thinking and cognition. The rapid development of modern science and technology is promoting the evolution of future combat to high-end warfare. It is necessary to seize the theoretical commanding heights and create new technological advantages. In-depth integration of science and technology and innovative tactics are the keys to victory on the battlefield. As the main body of innovation in tactics, military personnel must have a deep understanding of the winning mechanism of modern warfare, root the concept of integrating science and technology, and expand the thinking of integrating science and technology. At present, two outstanding problems and tendencies are worth noting: First, insufficient scientific and technological literacy, which can easily lead to an in-depth understanding of new forms of warfare. Only relying on past experience and routines to study tactics, and which technologies are effective and which technologies in the combat system. I don’t know much about how effective it is, where to start to form a technological advantage over the enemy, what are the technical differences with powerful enemies, how to avoid being suppressed by the enemy’s technology, etc. We emphasize tactics over technology, emphasis on “wisdom” over “intelligence”, and innovative tactics. It seems to work, but in fact it lacks technical support and is highly risky. The second is that the combat needs are not accurately grasped, and the future battlefield scene is not clearly described. Although the technical principles and winning mechanisms are understood, the application of science and technology in combat operations is not known enough, and the decisive role of human subjective initiative in combat effectiveness is ignored. Function, focusing on technology over tactics, researching technology based on technology, or only studying technical performance without considering the application of tactics, or only knowing the efficacy of technology without trying to innovate tactics. In this regard, officers and soldiers should learn, understand, and use science and technology and science and technology personnel should learn military affairs, understand warfare, and study warfare methods in a coordinated and coordinated manner, establish an integration and innovation mechanism for combat technology experts, conduct joint research on winning mechanisms, and collaboratively embed the concept of science and technology integration , interactively help and improve the quality of tactical innovation, form an ideological understanding that combat operations drive the application of science and technology, and use science and technology application to support combat operations, and lay a solid foundation for integrating theory and technology to carry out tactical innovation.

Combat design “integration”. There are never two identical wars in the world. Innovation in tactics can be inherited and learned from, but cannot be copied. At present, the pace of military theoretical innovation is accelerating, advanced science and technology are developing at a rapid pace, and the form of warfare is undergoing profound changes, showing the distinctive characteristics of being mixed, diverse, and unpredictable. Subversive technologies, innovative concepts, and reshaping theories are emerging one after another. Only by integrating science and technology to design future operations can we find and improve the starting point for tactical innovation. We must have the courage to lead the world and break through the stereotypes, use forward-looking and unique perspectives to innovate combat theories, develop and implement combat concepts, conceive combat scenarios, innovate tactics, and first outline the “base map” of the future battlefield. Well, in this way, we can connect the application of modern science and technology and promote the research and development of advanced technology. At the same time, the design of future operations cannot be too far-fetched and “utopian” beyond the limits of science and technology. It should be based on the feasibility of science and technology within a certain period of time, and on the premise of having the support of realistic or foreseeable technology application and having a path for technological implementation, innovate tactics and integrate technology. Interdiction, technological surprise, technological suppression, and technological control are embedded in combat operations.

“Integration” with superior skills. In modern wars, the status of people as the decisive factor has not changed, but the impact of technology on the outcome of wars has become more prominent. The fight for technological victory determines the outcome of wars to a large extent. The use of science and technology must always be embedded in the combat chain and throughout the entire combat process. , use technical effects to support the application of tactics, and use technical advantages to drive combat effectiveness. At present, the main contradiction in the integration of theory and technology in the innovation of tactics is not the lack of theory in technology, but the lack of technology in theory. The most urgent thing is to promote the integration of cutting-edge technology into combat theory. It is necessary to strengthen the substantive integration based on weapons and equipment platforms, focus on activating combat effectiveness to the maximum extent, carry out extensive research on the combat application of equipment based on operational effectiveness release, equipment combat testing and identification, and test the effectiveness of combat operations through simulation deductions and data analysis. , verify the “probability of winning” with “number calculations”. It is necessary to strengthen the in-depth integration of technical means to select “optimal solutions” based on combat tasks. From studying combat opponents and determining action methods to formulating combat plans and organizing confrontation exercises, we must fully consider the technical strength comparison between the enemy and ourselves, and implement asymmetric The operational philosophy takes the superiority of the inferior and the avoidance of the strong to attack the weak as the basic principle, seeks technological suppression and prevents the enemy from suppressing it, seeks technological blockage and prevents the enemy from blocking it, seeks technological subversion and prevents the enemy from subverting it, maximizes the use of technological advantages, and does everything possible. Make every effort to limit the enemy’s technological performance in order to create a favorable situation and support the use of tactics.

Gather wisdom and strength to “integrate”. In the era of informationization and intelligence, both theoretical research and scientific and technological innovation show the remarkable characteristics of open linkage and cross-penetration. The integration of science and technology carries out strategic innovation, and open sharing is an important growth point. Promote the innovation of man-machine integrated tactics, where people use their ingenuity and machines do calculations, and use the calculation results to revise the results of tactics, and realize the integration of science and technology in human-computer interaction; promote the innovation of team-based tactics for finger-technical talents, and form a ” A mixed group of “scientists + commanders” and “combatants + technicians” implements joint debugging and testing, joint exercises and training, and joint calculations and calculations, and seeks joint victory with the scientific nature of tactics and advanced technology; promotes open source and mass Tactics innovation, integration within and outside the military, online and offline interaction, with a broader vision and more flexible form, pool the wisdom of officers and soldiers and various professional talents to carry out “makers” in the field of tactics innovation “Activities, develop and gather new tactics “resource pools” and “results libraries” to achieve maximum benefits from the integration of science and technology.

Practice iterative “integration”. Theoretical achievements have been tested and sublimated in practical applications, and scientific and technological means have demonstrated their functions and benefits in combat operations. Innovation in tactics is not something that can be accomplished in a day, and the integration of science and technology should also be iteratively progressed and developed on a rolling basis. It is necessary to focus on the integrated application of information technology and intelligent technology, to virtually construct future combat scenarios, and to innovate tactics while feeling and experiencing the intelligent combat environment; it is necessary to carry out in-depth virtual simulation demonstrations of the innovative results of tactics, and fully verify them through virtual experiments and simulation tests. The feasibility of tactical design and the effectiveness of combat operations; technical performance testing must be carried out in conjunction with drills and training activities, and the efficacy and flaws of technical applications must be fully tested by analyzing the actual energy collection and release of weapons, equipment and information systems. Therefore, problems can be discovered and solved dynamically during review discussions, repeated demonstrations, and data testing, and we can modify theories where the theory is not applicable and upgrade technologies where technology is not feasible, so that tactics can introduce new field technologies, and technology can subvert traditional tactics and achieve success. The organic combination of technology and combat continues to promote the spiral and rolling development of tactical innovation.

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

中國軍隊做好戰爭準備,科學研究旨在實現戰場統治

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

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

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

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

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

Modern English:

In late April, the Institute of War Research of the Academy of Military Sciences successfully completed the submission of project demonstration proposals for two major combat issue research projects. This is a concrete practice of the institute focusing on fulfilling its core functions and always aiming at scientific research and preparation for war.

The War Research Institute is a scientific research institution specializing in the study and design of war in the entire military. As a newly established unit, the main characteristics of their scientific research work are many major tasks, many temporary tasks, and many demonstration and application tasks. At the beginning of the year, in response to the actual situation where there were few people and urgent tasks and scientific research tasks were being pushed forward, the party committee of the institute put the scientific research work aimed at strengthening the army and winning the war in an important position in accordance with the combat effectiveness standards. Based on the criteria of urgent need for war preparation, urgent need for war, and urgent need of troops, they adjusted and established key scientific research tasks in the research of war and combat issues, and the compilation of doctrines and regulations, etc., and reduced more than 10 topics that deviated from their main responsibilities and main business, and added new A batch of research on war forms, combat styles and other topics focusing on war preparation and combat were carried out. According to the leader of the institute, the party committee of the institute requires team members to both take command and go out on major scientific research tasks, so that the main energy should be devoted to key tasks, and force allocation and financial support should be tilted towards combat research.

At the same time, the institute continues to deepen the collaborative research of “small core and large periphery” and continuously innovates the scientific research organization model. They carry out “bundled” research by military theoretical personnel and military scientific and technological personnel within the institute to break down barriers to scientific research; they exchange experts with sister units such as the Military Medical Research Institute and the National Defense Engineering Research Institute to participate in major project research to achieve complementary advantages; organize scientific research Personnel participate in various major exercises and training activities to identify scientific research needs; multilateral military exchange activities are held to keep scientific researchers informed of the latest military science and technology trends. In addition, they also actively cooperate with local scientific research institutes to use local high-quality scientific research resources for their own use, forming a closed loop of researching war, designing war, operating war, and verifying war.

Since last year, the institute has completed more than 100 scientific research projects, made important breakthroughs in the development of core operational concepts and joint operational experiments, submitted more than 60 national high-end think tank research reports and important issue assessment reports, and launched a number of strategies. Innovative results that are highly innovative, original and forward-looking.

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

中國軍事上對敘事戰爭的運用

Chinese Military Use of Narrative Warfare

中國解放軍敘事戰爭

Traditional Mandarin Chinese:

語言也是武器。 軍事鬥爭除了可以動用飛機、坦克等硬手段外,也可以將語言修辭作為實現軍事目標的手段。 不同於話語,敘事更為宏廣。 認清軍事敘事的內涵與特點,對於建構未來軍事理論具有重要意義。

語言是上膛的「手槍」。 「敘事戰」指以語言為武器,以佔據世界軍事論述主導權為目標而展開的軍事理論創新與競爭。 從目標上可分為進攻性敘事、防禦性敘事和威懾性敘事等,依手段可分為作戰概念敘事、軍事理論敘事、軍事話語敘事、軍事話語敘事等。 內容既涉及國防和軍事建設、軍事戰略層面的敘事,也包括戰略、戰役、戰術層面作戰概念的敘事,還包括作戰標準、作戰規則的權威制定和議程設定。 把握敘事主導權,是贏得認知戰的前提與基礎。 把握了敘事主導權,也就掌握了國際意識形態鬥爭的主動權、領導權,進而獲得軍事論述主導權。

成功的敘事需要吸引力。 與嚴密的邏輯論證不同,敘事透過引人入勝的故事吸引觀眾,二戰時期德國「閃擊戰」神話就是如此。 這個橫空出世的戰術其實是一戰後期「胡蒂爾戰術」或「滲透戰術」的翻版,但在軍事界和各類媒體的華麗包裝下,迅速成為德國能夠橫掃歐洲的「魔法」。 目前,美軍各軍種都在推出令人眼花繚亂的作戰概念,儘管不少是對以往作戰思想的翻新和包裝,然而這種頗具「概念股」意味的營銷方式成功吸引了世界軍事界的注意和追捧 ,甚至影響了其他國家軍事變革的方向和軍事理論的製定。

敘事是軍事發展的“設計”

中國解放軍敘事戰爭

敘事既是理論研究者腦中的思考脈絡,也是媒體口中的報道風格,它對內構成了理論研究的習慣,對外則成為描述對手的行文規範,涉及理論、概念、宣傳、話術手段等諸多內容 。 因此,可以從四個方面來認識敘事在軍事上發揮作用的方式。

作戰概念敘事影響未來軍事建設與發展。 作戰概念既是一種作戰理念,本身也是一種武器和作戰手段。 作戰概念的敘事競爭讓作戰雙方極力追求軍事技術運用和作戰方法手段的共同演化,力爭使雙方作戰理念和方法手段處於相近的水平。 當國家軍事實力差距龐大時,強大的國家力求主導設計戰場,實現對作戰對手的降維打擊。 當國家軍事實力差距不明顯時,雙方作戰概念的賽局結果可能是混沌未知的。 各方窮盡所有,在時代框架所能允許的範圍內,盡量全景描述可能的作戰方式和手段。 在你來我往的作戰概念「敘事戰」之中,新型戰爭方式最終會在雙方軍事理論家的「腦力激盪」中誕生,在演訓實踐中定型,最終在戰場對決中進行檢驗。

軍事理論敘事能左右軍事戰略的發展。 軍事理論敘事有助於確定國家安全利益、識別現實和潛在威脅,也有助於針對性規劃國防與軍隊發展戰略。 例如,馬漢「海權論」的提出,既有力滿足了本國海軍發展需求,同時也成為二戰後各國爭奪海洋利益、發展海上力量的重要思想源頭。 美軍1990年代以來對高新技術戰爭的敘事,引導了世界新軍事革命浪潮,帶來了武器裝備和部隊編制體制的重大變革。 近年來,美軍相繼提出「多域戰」「分散式海上作戰」等新作戰概念,反映出其希望藉助先進作戰概念繼續佔據世界軍事發展前沿、引領軍事變革方向的意圖。

軍事話語敘事可塑造軍事認知環境。 軍事論述透過構設術語,對軍事理論內容進行議程設置,塑造軍事語境,內化對手思考方向,讓其在既設的軍事框架內認知作戰環境、作戰手段,進而創設自己熟悉的作戰“ 劇本”,讓對手陷入其中卻渾然不知。 譬如美軍名義繁多的作戰概念,既有服務本軍種利益競爭的需要,也有試錯性的作戰概念推演,同時還有意無意地給對手製造「概念圈套」。

軍事話術敘事可主導話語權顛倒黑白。 透過名詞構造等話術,強勢敘事者可對既有概念做出新表述,模糊人們對原有概念的理解,形成強勢話語對弱勢話語的壓制。 透過高調宣傳、片面解讀、美化包裝和選擇性運用政策法規等手段,既妖魔化對手,又彰顯強勢敘事者自身行動的「正義性」和「合法化」。 近年來,西方國家把意識形態領域的政治語言敘事模式轉變成軍事話語權進行輸出,隱密地將價值評價植入軍事層面的敘事之中。 例如,描述同樣性質的作戰行動,西方國家自己會用「低強度戰爭」「航行自由行動」等帶有中性和正義色彩的詞彙,卻貶損別國為「灰色地帶行動」。

善於爭奪「麥克風」主導權

從內容來看,敘事屬於語言藝術範疇,並不神祕。 在認清其特徵及作用方式的基礎上,如何在軍事敘事的鬥爭維度上贏得勝利,是擺在我們面前的重要理論和現實問題。 筆者認為,爭奪「敘事戰」主導權,應該注意把握四點原則。

注重量體裁衣服務國家策略。 軍事服從政治。 軍事敘事不能天馬行空,應該與國家戰略敘事一致,否則二者的分裂將嚴重損害國家安全利益。 二戰前夕,法國奉行的以「馬奇諾防線」為代表的防禦性軍事敘事,無法支撐其政治上與東歐國家的同盟戰略體系,令法國失去了應對德國威脅的可信能力。 因此,軍事上的敘事貴在圍繞著國家戰略目標「就地取材」「你打你的,我打我的」。 我軍歷史上的「麻雀戰」「零敲牛皮糖」「小群多路戰」等作戰概念,有力支撐了我軍作戰實踐。 現今俄軍結合自身實際,創造性地發展了「混合戰爭」理論,為自身尋求到迥異於美軍卻適合俄羅斯特色的作戰方式,並在俄格衝突等行動中有效維護了其國家戰略利益。

靈巧拆解詞語進行反向敘事。 詞語建構是對已有概念作出新表述,模糊對原有概念的理解,從而達到引導輿論的目的,是建構話語體系常用的手段之一。 美軍當今大量所謂的新式作戰概念往往是新瓶裝舊酒。 例如“分散式海上作戰”,其實是“分散兵力”或“狼群戰術”借用網路領域概念的語言升級,“海上遠徵基地作戰”炒的則是“跳島戰術”的冷飯。 對待這些作戰概念,千萬不能人雲亦雲。 應運用批判性思維,透過反向敘事的方式擠出作戰概念敘事中的水分,撥開雲霧見真容。

積極奪取認知空間,對抗敘事霸權。 「敘事戰」的終極目標是奪取認知領域的話語權、制腦權。 如今網路是敘事的主戰場,自媒體、社群網路、直播影片等是認知對抗、「敘事戰」的重要平台。 西方軍事強國憑藉佔據全球輿論高點的優勢,用一套霸權性質的話術,構設了一套服務資本利益、維護霸權地位的價值和標準體系,形成了偏向於網絡霸權國家的選擇性敘事取向。 處在這種不利的敘事環境下,應著重探索弱勢敘事空間的話術手段,在媒體、智庫等敘事平台構造話語連動機制,逐步拓展敘事空間,贏得更多的社會認同、更多的公眾青睞和 影響力。

防止落入作戰概念的敘事陷阱。 作戰概念超前並不代表軍事實力領先。 戰爭對決,作戰概念從來不是製勝武器,更無法左右戰爭的結局。 冷戰後美國發起的幾場戰爭,均憑藉絕對的非對稱優勢以強對弱、以優勝劣,其背後密碼為:實力+新作戰概念,其中何者為決定因素還有待商榷。 因此,應避免落入對手作戰概念的敘事陷阱,防止被對手牽引追逐作戰概念創新以致被帶偏節奏。 要堅持「你打你的,我打我的」的原則,用清醒的頭腦、理智的思維謀求有中國特色的軍事理論敘事,練就制勝強敵的過硬「內功」。

Modern English Version:

With the development of psychological warfare, cyber warfare, social media warfare, cognitive warfare and other theories and their application in combat practice, the competition for military discourse power has become increasingly fierce. Using language as a weapon, a strong narrative can not only suppress the opponent to form discourse dominance, but also subtly shape the opponent’s thinking habits, guide the opponent to follow suit, and form an asymmetric advantage in discourse, thereby achieving “conceptual attack.”

Narrative can strangle the “throat” of military theory

Language is also a weapon. In addition to using hard means such as aircraft and tanks, military struggles can also use language and rhetoric as a means to achieve military goals. Unlike discourse, narrative is broader. Recognizing the connotation and characteristics of military narratives is of great significance to constructing future military theories.

Language is a loaded pistol. “Narrative warfare” refers to military theoretical innovation and competition that uses language as a weapon and aims to dominate the world’s military discourse. According to the goal, it can be divided into offensive narrative, defensive narrative and deterrent narrative. According to the means, it can be divided into operational concept narrative, military theory narrative, military discourse narrative, military rhetoric narrative, etc. The content involves not only the narrative of national defense and army construction and military strategy, but also the narrative of operational concepts at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels. It also includes the authoritative formulation and agenda setting of operational standards and operational rules. Grasping narrative dominance is the prerequisite and foundation for winning the cognitive war. By grasping the dominance of narrative, we also grasp the initiative and leadership of the international ideological struggle, and then gain the dominance of military discourse.

Successful narratives require appeal. Rather than strictly logical arguments, narrative engages the audience through a compelling story, as was the case with the German “Blitzkrieg” myth of World War II. This unexpected tactic was actually a replica of the “Hutier tactics” or “infiltration tactics” in the late World War I. However, under the gorgeous packaging of the military circles and various media, it quickly became the “magic” that allowed Germany to sweep across Europe. Currently, all branches of the U.S. military are launching dazzling combat concepts. Although many of them are refurbishments and packaging of previous combat ideas, this marketing method with a “concept stock” meaning has successfully attracted the attention and pursuit of the world’s military circles. , and even influenced the direction of military reforms and the formulation of military doctrines in other countries.

Narrative is the “designer” of military development

Narrative is not only the thinking thread in the minds of theoretical researchers, but also the reporting style in the media. It constitutes the habit of theoretical research internally, and it becomes the writing standard for describing opponents externally, involving theories, concepts, propaganda, rhetorical techniques and many other contents. . The way narrative works in the military can therefore be understood in four ways.

The operational concept narrative affects future military construction and development. The combat concept is not only a combat concept, but also a weapon and combat method. The narrative competition of operational concepts has led both combatants to pursue the co-evolution of the application of military technology and operational methods, striving to bring the operational concepts, methods and means of both sides to a similar level. When there is a huge gap in national military strength, the more powerful country strives to dominate the design of the battlefield and achieve dimensionality reduction against combat opponents. When the gap in national military strength is not obvious, the outcome of the game of combat concepts between the two sides may be chaotic and unknown. All parties tried their best to fully describe possible combat methods and means within the framework of the times. In the “narrative war” where operational concepts come and go, new methods of warfare will eventually be born in the “brainstorming” of military theorists on both sides, finalized in training practices, and finally tested in battlefield duels.

Military theoretical narratives can influence the formulation of military strategies. Military theoretical narrative helps to determine national security interests, identify actual and potential threats, and also helps to plan national defense and military development strategies in a targeted manner. For example, the proposal of Mahan’s “Sea Power Theory” not only effectively met the country’s naval development needs, but also became an important ideological source for countries to compete for maritime interests and develop maritime power after World War II. The U.S. military’s narrative of high-tech warfare since the 1990s has led the world’s new wave of military revolution and brought about major changes in weapons, equipment, and troop establishment systems. In recent years, the US military has successively proposed new operational concepts such as “multi-domain warfare” and “distributed maritime operations”, reflecting its intention to continue to occupy the forefront of world military development and lead the direction of military transformation with the help of advanced operational concepts.

Military discourse narratives can shape the military cognitive environment. By constructing terminology, military discourse sets the agenda for military theoretical content, shapes the military context, internalizes the opponent’s thinking direction, allows them to recognize the combat environment and combat methods within the established military framework, and then creates a familiar combat ” Script”, allowing the opponent to fall into it without knowing it. For example, the U.S. military’s numerous operational concepts not only serve the needs of competing interests of the service, but also involve trial-and-error operational concept deductions. They also intentionally or unintentionally create “conceptual traps” for opponents.

Military narrative can dominate the discourse and confuse right and wrong. Through discourse techniques such as noun construction, strong narrators can make new expressions of existing concepts, blurring people’s understanding of the original concepts, and forming a strong discourse that suppresses weak discourse. Through high-profile propaganda, one-sided interpretation, beautifying packaging, and selective use of policies and regulations, it not only demonizes opponents, but also demonstrates the “justice” and “legitimation” of the powerful narrator’s own actions. In recent years, Western countries have transformed the political language narrative model in the ideological field into military discourse power for export, and covertly embedded value evaluations into military-level narratives. For example, when describing combat operations of the same nature, Western countries themselves will use neutral and just terms such as “low-intensity war” and “freedom of navigation operations”, but disparage other countries’ operations as “gray zone operations.”

Good at competing for “microphone” dominance

From the content point of view, narrative belongs to the category of language art and is not mysterious. On the basis of understanding its characteristics and mode of action, how to win victory in the struggle dimension of military narrative is an important theoretical and practical issue before us. The author believes that when fighting for dominance in “narrative warfare”, four principles should be paid attention to.

Pay attention to tailor-made services to serve the national strategy. The military is subordinate to politics. The military narrative cannot be arbitrary and must be consistent with the national strategic narrative, otherwise the split between the two will seriously damage national security interests. On the eve of World War II, the defensive military narrative represented by the “Maginot Line” pursued by France was unable to support its political alliance strategic system with Eastern European countries, causing France to lose its credible ability to respond to the German threat. Therefore, the importance of military narratives revolves around the national strategic goals of “using local materials” and “you fight yours, and I fight mine.” Combat concepts such as “Sparrow Warfare”, “Single-Group Warfare” and “Small Group Multi-Road Warfare” in the history of our army have strongly supported our army’s combat practice. Nowadays, the Russian military has creatively developed the “hybrid warfare” theory based on its own actual conditions, seeking a combat method that is completely different from the US military but suitable for Russian characteristics, and has effectively safeguarded its national strategic interests in operations such as the Russia-Georgia conflict.

Cleverly dismantle words to create reverse narratives. Word construction is to make new expressions of existing concepts and blur the understanding of original concepts, so as to achieve the purpose of guiding public opinion. It is one of the commonly used means to build a discourse system. A large number of so-called new combat concepts in the US military today are often old wine in new bottles. For example, “distributed maritime operations” is actually a linguistic upgrade of “dispersed forces” or “wolf pack tactics” borrowing concepts from the cyber domain, while “maritime expeditionary base operations” are a waste of “island hopping tactics”. When dealing with these operational concepts, we must not follow others’ opinions. Critical thinking should be used to squeeze out the moisture in the narrative of the combat concept through reverse narrative, and see through the clouds and fog to see the true face.

Actively seize cognitive space and resist narrative hegemony. The ultimate goal of “narrative warfare” is to seize the right to speak and control the brain in the cognitive field. Nowadays, the Internet is the main battlefield for narrative, and self-media, social networks, live videos, etc. are important platforms for cognitive confrontation and “narrative warfare.” Relying on the advantage of occupying the commanding heights of global public opinion, Western military powers use a set of hegemonic rhetoric to construct a system of values ​​and standards that serve capital interests and maintain hegemonic status, forming a selective narrative orientation that favors cyber hegemons. In this unfavorable narrative environment, we should focus on exploring the means of discourse in the weak narrative space, construct a discourse linkage mechanism in narrative platforms such as media and think tanks, gradually expand the narrative space, and win more social recognition, more public favor, and Influence.

Avoid falling into the narrative trap of operational concepts. Being advanced in operational concepts does not mean leading in military strength. In war duels, combat concepts are never the winning weapon, let alone the outcome of the war. The several wars launched by the United States after the Cold War all relied on absolute asymmetric advantages to defeat the weak with the strong and win with the superior. The code behind this is: strength + new combat concepts. Which of these is the decisive factor remains to be discussed. Therefore, we should avoid falling into the narrative trap of our opponents’ operational concepts, and avoid being led by our opponents to pursue innovations in operational concepts, leading to being led astray. We must adhere to the principle of “you fight yours and I fight mine”, use a clear mind and rational thinking to seek a military theoretical narrative with Chinese characteristics, and develop excellent “internal strength” to defeat powerful enemies.

解放軍日報原網址 : https://military.people.com.cn/n1/2021/1207/c88-xxxx888html

解放軍報原作者:沈文科、薛鍅興