Category Archives: #Chinese Military Joint Oprations

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Chinese Military Joint Oprations, #cross-domain collaborative operations, #Information Support Force, #intelligent warfare, #跨域協同作戰, Cross-domain attacks, Mosaic Warfare, Multi-domain fusion operations, Multi-Domain Operations, 多域融合作戰, 跨域協同作戰

Advantages, Prospects of Multi-domain Integration & Cross-domain Attack and Defense

Leave a comment

多域融合與跨域攻防的優勢與前景

現代英語：

“Multi-domain fusion operations” and “cross-domain collaborative operations” are the latest operational ideas proposed by the US military in recent years, guiding the gradual upgrade and evolution of the US military’s combat concepts to joint concepts, and building a new war style based on this, covering all combat fields such as “land, sea, air, space, and network”, and integrating various capabilities such as space, network, deterrence, transportation, electromagnetic spectrum, and missile defense. Through this new combat idea, we can compete with competitors such as Russia in various fields, develop asymmetric advantages, and ensure the leading position of our country’s military strength. What advantages do multi-domain fusion operations and cross-domain offense and defense have in actual combat, and what are their development prospects?

The evolution of the concept of global warfare

After the mid-1970s, the U.S. Army successively proposed combat concepts such as “central combat”, “expanded battlefield” and “integrated battlefield”, forming the “air-ground integrated combat” combat theory. Air-ground integrated combat requires the coordination and unity of ground forces and the air force, and conducts deep operations on the basis of the air force’s battlefield air interdiction and offensive air support. For the first time, the combat concept of multi-service coordinated operations appeared, and this combat theory was also tested in actual combat in the Gulf War. This is the starting point for the birth of the concept of multi-domain warfare and even global warfare.

On October 3, 2016, at the annual meeting of the Association of the United States Army, General David G. Perkins, then commander of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, delivered a public speech in which he used the word “domain” for the first time to accurately summarize the new form of international warfare, and put forward the view that “all domains of the United States are challenged” and “advantages in a single domain cannot win the war”, and then introduced the concept of “multi-domain combat”. The operational concept of “multi-domain combat” requires close cooperation between the combat forces of various services, abandoning the inertia of the service thinking of pursuing control in a single domain, and providing a “multi-domain solution” for the national command authorities.

In October 2018, the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command issued the 1.5 version of the concept of “U.S. Army Multi-Domain Operations 2028”. As the most mature version of the concept, it replaced the original word “battle” with “operation” and extended the concept of “multi-domain combat”. The concept of “multi-domain combat” is only applicable to the conflict stage, but in the case that the competition between nation states has become a new factor in the world situation, simply winning the actual conflict has very limited significance for the overall combat background, so the concept of “multi-domain” must be extended and deepened. The concept of “multi-domain combat” introduces relevant cross-government and cross-institutional elements into the “competition continuum” of “competition, armed conflict and return to competition”, and puts forward the three core concepts of “calibrating force posture, using multi-domain formations, and achieving multi-domain aggregation” in “multi-domain warfare”, clarifies the specific needs of “multi-domain formations”, and refines the corresponding combat capabilities that troops at different levels need to have in “multi-domain warfare”.

“Cross-domain coordination” refers to the mutual cooperation of various services to make up for the deficiencies of other forces in combat, thereby achieving complementary efficiency in various fields and successfully completing combat missions. Guided by the basic ideas of multi-domain integration and cross-domain coordination, the US military has formed the concept of “full-domain warfare”, that is, to develop the joint combat capabilities of various services throughout the entire process of combat and training, and realize the transformation of the army into a joint combat force.

The advantages of all-domain operations are obvious

Judging from the current international military development situation, countries will face an increasingly complex, deadly, extremely active, and urbanized battlefield. The combat environment is becoming increasingly fragile, and the combat mode of the traditional battlefield is no longer applicable to contemporary warfare. Against this background, the US military has proposed the concept of full-domain warfare in order to cope with the increasingly complex international environment. What are the advantages of multi-domain warfare and cross-domain attack and defense on the modern battlefield?

Multi-domain integration enables the advantages of different arms to overlap and their disadvantages to complement each other. The predecessor of multi-domain warfare, “Air-Land Integrated Warfare”, was a combat style of joint operations between the Air Force and the Army that the U.S. military attempted to establish in the early 1980s in response to the huge threat posed by Soviet tank clusters to NATO on the European plains. This combat mode requires a high degree of coordination between ground forces and air forces. Ground forces conduct offensive mobile defense operations on the front line, while the Air Force blocks the replenishment of front-line forces by striking the enemy’s rear, thereby providing tactical support to the front-line army. This is also the first time in the history of the U.S. military that the Air Force and the Army have conducted in-depth cooperation, which has increased the complexity and flexibility of the U.S. military’s operations, made the U.S. military’s tactical options richer and more dynamic, and posed a greater strategic deterrence to the enemy.

On the other hand, cross-domain attack and defense can expand asymmetric advantages and impose greater restrictions on the enemy’s power. Since the concept of cross-domain attack and defense emphasizes the coordination of offensive and defensive forces in different fields, during the battle, the army can exert greater pressure on the enemy through its own advantageous fields, making it difficult for the enemy’s power to be maximized, thereby expanding the asymmetric advantage, maximizing its own strength and weakening the enemy’s power. In recent years, all countries have attached great importance to the technical development and research in the field of network electromagnetics. To some extent, this is because the field of network electromagnetics is a new product that came with the information age. Emerging powers that try to catch up with old powers can establish their own advantages through the development of this field, while old powers do not want to be overtaken and have fields that can be used as weaknesses by the enemy. Therefore, all countries have unanimously regarded the research and development of the field of network electromagnetics as one of their current key areas of development, which also reflects the great power of cross-domain attack and defense in modern information-based intelligent warfare.

Global war has broad prospects for development

At present, the concept of “global warfare” only has a theoretical basis, and it still takes a lot of effort to convert theory into practice. The vice chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff clearly stated in an interview: “The seamless integration of various fields and effective command and control are still a daunting challenge. We are not sure how to do it, and no one has a ready-made answer.”

In the process of achieving true joint operations, there are obstacles in various aspects, including culture, economy, and politics. These problems will affect the establishment of truly joint combat forces and joint combat modes. First, each service has formed its own unique combat style and combat culture in the long-term development process. The differences in the culture of different services may lead to different concepts of combat focus on the construction of joint combat forces, which in turn leads to unclear directions and goals for force construction. Secondly, the budget for military construction is limited, and each service will try its best to use it for the update and research and development of its own weapons and equipment, resulting in the budget giving priority to meeting the needs of each service rather than joint combat needs. Finally, it is difficult for the Ministry of National Defense to obtain the power of integrated government and allies. “Cross-domain coordination” is a game of national comprehensive power, which includes politics, economy, diplomacy, intelligence and other aspects. It requires the coordination and coordination of government agencies in various fields of the country, and relying solely on the Ministry of National Defense does not have enough power to achieve the integration of various forces.

These issues all affect the development of “all-domain warfare”, but in any case, as a new combat concept, “all-domain warfare” will surely become an important mode of future combat. The United States released the “Joint All-Domain Combat Software” in April this year, aiming to develop theater-level joint all-domain combat software to allocate combat resources and achieve coordinated killing in the fields of land, sea, air, space, and electromagnetic fields. This action also shows the United States’ determination to achieve “all-domain warfare.” (Zhang Haoyue, Shen Qiyou, Ma Jianguang)

(Editors: Huang Zijuan, Chen Yu)

現代國語：

“多域融合作戰”與“跨域協同作戰”是美軍近年來最新提出的作戰思想，指導著美國軍種作戰概念逐步向聯合概念升級演進，並以此為基礎打造全新戰爭樣式，建設涵蓋“陸、海、空、天、網”等全部作戰領域，融合太空、網絡、威懾、運輸、電磁頻譜、導彈防禦等各種能力的聯合作戰部隊。透過這種全新的作戰思想與俄羅斯等競爭對手在各領域內角力較量，發展不對稱優勢，確保本國軍事實力的領先地位。多域融合作戰與跨域攻防在實戰中有著怎樣的優勢，發展前景又如何呢？

全局戰概念演變過程

1970年代中期後，美國陸軍先後提出了「中心戰」、「擴大的戰場」和「一體化戰場」等作戰思想，形成了「空地一體戰」作戰理論。空地一體作戰要求地面部隊與空軍協調統一，在空軍實施戰場空中遮斷和進攻性空中支援的基礎上進行縱深作戰，首次出現了多兵種協同作戰的作戰思想，這一作戰理論也在海灣戰爭中得到了實戰檢驗。這就是多域戰乃至全局戰思想誕生的起點。

2016年10月3日，美陸軍協會年會上，時任美國陸軍訓練與條令司令部司令的大衛·G·珀金斯將軍發表公開演講，首次使用“域”一詞精確概括出了國際戰爭的新形式，提出美國“所有領域均受到挑戰”、“單一領域的優勢 無法贏得戰爭”等觀點，進而推出了“多域戰鬥”的概念。 「多域戰鬥」的作戰思想要求各軍種作戰力量之間密切合作，摒棄追求各自單一領域制權的軍種思維慣性，為國家指揮當局提供一種「多域方案」。

2018年10月，美國陸軍訓練與條令司令部頒布了《美國陸軍多域作戰2028》概念1.5版本，作為目前最為成熟的一版概念，它以“作戰”一詞替換了原有的“戰鬥”，對“多域戰鬥”概念進行了延伸拓展。 「多域戰鬥」的概念僅適用於衝突階段，但在民族國家競爭成為世界局勢新要素的情況下，僅僅贏得實戰衝突的勝利對於作戰大背景的意義是非常有限的，因此必須將「多域」概念延拓深化。 「多域作戰」這個概念就是在「競爭、武裝衝突和重回競爭」這個「競爭連續體」中引入了跨政府、跨機構的相關要素，提出「多域戰」中的「校準力量態勢、運用多域編隊、達成多域聚合」三項核心理念，明確了「多域編隊」的具體需求，細化了不同層級部隊在「多域作戰」中具備的具體領域作戰能力」。

「跨域協同」指的是各軍種透過相互合作彌補其他部隊在戰鬥中存在的不足進而實現各領域的互補增效，最終成功完成戰鬥任務。在多域融合與跨域協同的基本思想指引下，美軍形成了「全域戰」的概念，即在戰訓的全過程中發展各兵種聯合作戰的能力，實現軍隊向聯合作戰部隊轉型。

全局作戰優勢顯著

就目前國際軍事發展情勢來看，各國面對的將是一個日益複雜、致命、極度活躍、都市化的戰場，作戰環境越來越脆弱，傳統戰場的作戰模式已經不再適用於當代戰爭。在這種背景下，美軍提出了全域戰的理念，以期應對日益複雜的國際環境。多域作戰與跨域攻防在現代化戰場上究竟有何優勢呢？

多域融合能使不同兵種力量優勢疊加，劣勢互補。多域戰的前身「空地一體戰」就是20世紀80年代初，美軍為應對蘇聯坦克集群在歐洲平原對北約造成的巨大威脅而試圖建立的空軍與陸軍協同作戰的作戰樣式。這種作戰模式要求地面部隊與空中力量高度協同，地面部隊進行前線進攻性機動防禦作戰，空軍則透過打擊敵軍後方阻滯其對前線兵力的充實，進而為前線陸軍提供戰術支援。這也是美軍歷史上 首次進行空軍與陸軍的深度協作，提高了美軍軍隊作戰的複雜度與靈活性，使美軍戰術選擇更加豐富且具有活力，對敵人造成更大了戰略威懾。

另一方面，跨域攻防能擴大不對稱優勢，對敵軍力量發揮產生更大限制。由於跨域攻防的概念強調不同領域攻防力量相互配合，因此，在戰鬥過程中，軍隊可以透過自己的優勢領域向敵軍施加更大壓力，使敵人的力量難以得到最大程度的發揮，進而擴大不對稱優勢，最大程度展現自身實力而削弱敵軍力量。各國近年都來非常重視網路電磁領域的技術開發研究，某種程度上就是因為網路電磁領域是隨著資訊時代而來的新產物，試圖趕超老牌強國的新興大國能夠透過這個領域的發展建立自身優勢，而老牌強國不希望被追趕，出現能夠被敵軍當作弱點打擊的領域。因此各國都不約而同地將網路電磁領域的研究發展作為了自己目前發展的重點領域之一，這也體現了跨域攻防在現代資訊化智慧戰爭中的巨大力量。

全局戰發展前景廣闊

目前，「全局戰」這一理念只是擁有了理論基礎，要將理論轉換為實踐仍需許多努力，美軍參聯會副主席在接受采訪時明確表示：“各領域的無縫融合和有效 指揮控制仍是一項艱鉅的挑戰，我們還不清楚究竟要如何做到，沒人有現成的答案。”

在實現真正的聯合作戰過程中，存在著包括文化、經濟、政治等各方面的阻礙，這些問題都會影響真正意義上的聯合作戰部隊、聯合作戰模式的建立。首先，各軍種在長期發展過程中都形成了本軍種特有的作戰樣式與戰鬥文化，不同軍種文化的分歧可能導致對聯合作戰部隊建設的作戰重點觀念不同，進而造成部隊建設的方向模糊，目標不明確。其次，軍隊建設預算有限，各軍種都會盡力爭取用於自身武器裝備更新研發，導致預算優先滿足各軍種需求而非聯合作戰需求。最後，國防部難以獲取整合政府與盟國力量，「跨域協同」是國家綜合力量的博弈，包含了政治、經濟、外交、情報等各個方面，需要國家各領域政府機構力量的配合協同，而僅依靠國防部是沒有足夠的權力實現各力量的整合。

這些問題都影響著“全局戰”的發展進程，但無論如何，作為新型作戰理念的“全局戰”都必將成為未來作戰的重要模式，美國更是在今年4月發布了“聯合全局作戰軟體”，旨在開發戰區級聯合全局作戰軟體，以編配作戰資源，實現陸、海、空、天、電磁等領域的協同殺傷。這項行動也昭示了美國實現「全域戰」的決心。 （張顴月、申起有、馬建光）

(編按：黃子娟、陳羽)

中國原創軍事資源：https://military.people.com.cn/n1/2020/0817/c1011-31824792888.html

#Chinese Military Joint Oprations, #Information Support Force, #intelligent warfare, #Self Coupled Operations

Chinese Military Self-coupled Operations: China’s New Trend in Future Joint Operations

Leave a comment

中國軍隊自主耦合作戰：中國未來聯合作戰新趨勢

現代英語：

Faced with changes in technology, warfare, and opponents, the combat mode of fixed formation, task balance, and tree-shaped command formed in traditional warfare will be difficult to adapt to battlefield needs. It is urgent to change the concept and innovate the implementation of self-coupling operations. The so-called self-coupling operations refer to the support of big data, cloud computing, and intelligent network information systems. The participating forces focus on the commander’s intentions, based on mission objectives and combat needs, breaking through regional, organizational, and field restrictions, and instantly perceive the situation, quickly and dynamically form groups, and autonomously match tasks, aggregate system advantages, and maximize the release of system combat capabilities.

Using the most appropriate forces to carry out the most appropriate tasks and achieve the best release of combat effectiveness has always been the highest level of war guidance.

Turning over the pages of human war history, coupling energy release is closely related to the development of war and command coordination. What has changed is the coupling organizational form – evolving from “other coupling” to “self coupling”; what remains unchanged is the pursuit of coupling value – the pursuit of the best release of combat effectiveness and the pursuit of the best combat benefits.

In the cold weapon era, the two sides formed simple formations and fought face to face. The war leaders often relied on their own exemplary role or simple organization to achieve effective coordination of different combat forces and combat actions, thereby maximizing the release of combat energy. In this sense, in the cold weapon era, combat was mainly organized by the commander’s orders, that is, “hetero-coupling”.

In the era of hot weapons, with the increase of the strike distance, weapons and equipment such as artillery, aircraft, tanks, and ships have appeared one after another. Combat operations have become more complicated and mutual coordination has become more important. Commanders and their command agencies must make careful pre-war planning and rely on wired/wireless communications to implement wartime control. The release of combat effectiveness is mainly achieved by the force organization, task allocation, action sequence, and support guarantee determined by the commander, that is, it has not yet gotten rid of the constraints of “other coupling”. However, due to the rapid changes in the battlefield situation, pre-war planning and organization have been difficult to adapt to actual combat needs. In response to battlefield uncertainty, with a focus on giving full play to the subjective initiative of the task force, command methods such as decentralized command, delegated command, and task-based command have emerged one after another. From the perspective of energy release, these command methods can be used as self-coupling operations based on command authorization.

In modern joint operations, unmanned forces have emerged, long-range precision strikes have become the new cutting-edge, stealth and high speed have gradually become the main force, multi-dimensional battlefields are deployed in full depth, multiple forces are mixed, and multi-domain operations are coordinated and efficient. Although the release of combat effectiveness still relies on “other coupling”, more emphasis is placed on “self-coupling”. The concept of “mosaic warfare” proposed by foreign militaries in recent years aims to emphasize the use of technical architecture to enable existing systems to be flexibly networked and quickly configured, and to provide the desired combat capabilities at the time and place specified by the commander. In recent years, in local wars and armed conflicts, the military of some countries has reconstructed the killing link based on the network information system, issued tasks based on the network, and the combat units implemented “order-based” strikes, which has begun to show signs of self-coupling operations.

Information and intelligent technology provides a means to support the best release of combat effectiveness, and it is mandatory to migrate to self-coupling combat.

With the widespread use of new technologies such as big data, cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and quantum communications, it has become possible to distribute combat forces in all dimensions and to make heterogeneous isomorphism, to make extreme use of combat resources and to release them on demand, thus forcing the transformation of combat methods to self-coupled combat.

Real-time battlefield situation perception provides a “smart eye” for self-coupled operations. Supported by information network technology, multi-domain, multi-dimensional and multi-dimensional early warning and reconnaissance means such as space-based monitoring, air early warning, maritime detection, underwater surveillance, and ground perception can obtain battlefield intelligence information in real time and efficiently process and integrate various types of information, so that combat units distributed in various fields and full depth can obtain complete, accurate, and real-time battlefield situations, so that the entire combat system can clearly perceive potential threats and accurately judge the targets of attack, providing a “clairvoyance” for its autonomous implementation of combat operations.

Cross-domain operations and real-time strikes provide an “arm” for self-coupling operations. The concept of “multi-domain warfare” proposed by foreign militaries is actually a combination of the strengths of multiple domains to overcome the weaknesses of other domains. In recent local wars, foreign militaries have practiced cross-generational integration, system-based counterattacks, division-based counterattacks, and unmanned clusters to attack high-value targets with humans, which mostly reflect this asymmetric balance concept of multi-domain operations. The development of intelligent technology will further change this way of fighting. The “perception-decision-strike-assessment” link of various combat units will achieve instantaneous transmission from “sensor to shooter”, and strike preparations will achieve “zero warm-up”, and “discovery is destruction” can be truly realized. This “zero reaction” of cross-domain operations provides a “fist” for the implementation of self-coupling operations.

Highly intelligent decision-making systems provide the “brain” for self-coupled operations. With the evolution of artificial intelligence, the “external brain” functions of staff officers, such as auxiliary decision-making, command and control, and evaluation and deduction, will be increasingly replaced by artificial intelligence “smart brains”, and ubiquitous “intelligent staff officers” will replace the large group of staff officers. With the support of intelligence, force allocation will shift to real-time task-based combination, force selection will shift to domain aggregation, system selection, and on-demand selection, combat operations will shift to immediate response, synchronous collaboration, and precise energy release, the command system will be reshaped into a command structure with star-point distribution and different authority, and the command method will shift to task issuance and node control. Strike power, information power, and protection power will be released on the most appropriate target at the most needed time and in the most appropriate way to achieve the maximum transformation of combat potential.

The network information system provides the “meridians” for self-coupling operations. With the development of information technology, the network aggregation function of the network information system is more powerful than ever before. The dispersed combat forces, combat units, and weapons and equipment become equal network information nodes based on various information links, and can obtain and use information without distinction. Just like the meridians of the human body, this characteristic of the network information system not only facilitates the command organization to issue instructions and control actions, but also transports blood and provides nutrients for combat units. Based on the network information system, the joint combat command organization can not only issue tasks in the cloud to truly achieve “decentralization”, but also monitor the battlefield situation, perceive the effects of operations, and deploy force resources; combat units can carry out “order-based” task selection, and carry out autonomous actions based on network intelligence brains to minimize internal consumption of forces and form local optimal combat capabilities.

Strive to explore the way of combat operations dominated by “other coupling” in strategic campaigns and “self coupling” in tactics

Victory always smiles upon those who can foresee the changes in the nature of war. In response to changes in technology, warfare, and opponents, we must base ourselves on the current reality of the troops, look forward to future combat developments, and step up efforts to promote concept renewal, training transformation, and condition building, so as to get closer and closer to actual combat.

Actively promote the renewal of combat concepts. At present, intelligent unmanned combat forces have been widely used in modern battlefields, and joint operations are rapidly developing towards cohesive integration. We should break through the constraints of the concept of controlling platform weapons and transform to system optimization, highlight the rapid combination of forces and planning actions in battle, and build a modular and resilient combat system; we should break through the constraints of the traditional concept of the number of combat resources and transform to micro-group multi-function, build a highly intelligent combat group, and promote the transformation of the combat system to adaptive and system-emergent functions; we should break through the constraints of the traditional concept of overall control and transform to task command, set tasks, goals, and forces based on the situation, and promote the action mode of superior card point command and multi-level parallel implementation; we should break through the constraints of the traditional concept of coordination and transform to autonomous combat, based on task allocation, rule coordination, and situation collaboration, to promote the optimal release of combat energy.

Speed up the improvement of the combat rules system. The promotion of self-coupling combat is inseparable from the rules and constraints of unified action, mutual integration, and coordination of various combat forces within the system. These rules are not only the necessary prerequisites for intelligent decision-making support systems, but also the key to avoiding arbitrary actions and coordination disorders. An efficiency priority rule should be established, that is, according to the combat capabilities and strike effects of multi-domain combat units, the effectiveness of paralysis and disability should be used as the force selection standard to provide a basis for the integration of combat forces in different domains and of different qualities; a force-dominant rule should be established, that is, the coordination relationship between different forces should be clarified, and force-dominant rules should be established according to tasks, sub-targets, and fields, to provide a basis for the timing and coordination of combined domain actions; an authorization rule should be established, that is, combat units perform the command and responsibility of a certain field, a certain direction, or a certain action according to the authorization of the commander, to provide a basis for responding to the battlefield and commanding the lower level; a control rule should be established to clarify the timing, method, and authority of the commander’s control to ensure that the operation is always carried out according to the commander’s intention.

Focus on building a strong information support network. The joint combat system supported by cloud connection is the prerequisite for achieving system confrontation and system optimization. We should focus on the high-speed flow of information, build a cloud battlefield network chain that penetrates the barriers of military services, shares intelligence information, and connects combat units, to provide support for the dispersed deployment, network-based reorganization, and cross-domain integration of combat forces; we should aim at intelligent decision-making, accelerate the development of intelligent auxiliary models for rapid information processing and rapid solution generation, and provide support for cloud-based task release and intelligent order matching; we should improve the data resource pool, distinguish between enemy and friendly combat targets, platform equipment, combat units, and combat groups, and build a resource pool with fresh and authentic data and dynamic updates to provide objective support for mission operations.

現代國語：

來源：中國軍網-解放軍報 作者：彭海 劉孝良 張付林 責任編輯：黃敏

2023-03-30 06:52:00

面對科技之變、戰爭之變、對手之變，傳統戰爭中形成的固定編組、任務衡定、樹形指揮的作戰模式將難以適應戰場需要，亟需轉變觀念，創新實施自耦合作戰。所謂自耦合作戰，是指依託大數據、雲計算、智能化的網絡資訊體系支撐，參戰力量圍繞指揮員意圖，基於任務目標與作戰需求，打破地域、建制和領域限制，即時感知態勢、快速動態組群、自主匹配任務，聚合體系優勢，最大限度地釋放體係作戰能力。

用最合適力量遂行最恰當任務，達到作戰效能最佳釋放，歷來是戰爭指導的最高境界

翻開人類戰爭史的畫卷，耦合釋能與戰爭發展相生相伴、與指揮協同緊密關聯。變化的是耦合組織形式——從「他耦合」到「自耦合」演進；不變的是耦合價值追求——追求作戰效能最佳釋放，尋求最佳作戰效益。

冷兵器時代作戰，雙方擺成簡單隊形，展開面對面廝殺，戰爭指導者往往依靠自身的表率作用或簡單的組織，來實現不同的作戰力量、作戰行動的有效配合，從而最大限度地釋放作戰能量。從這種意義上看，冷兵器時代作戰，主要是透過將帥的發號施令，即「他耦合」來組織能量釋放。

熱兵器時代，隨著打擊距離的增大，火砲、飛機、坦克、艦艇等武器裝備相繼出現，作戰行動更加復雜，相互配合更加重要，必須由指揮員及其指揮機關進行周密戰前籌劃，依靠有線/無線通信實施戰中調控。作戰效能釋放，主要依靠指揮者所確定的力量編組、任務分配、行動時序、支援保障來實現，即仍沒有擺脫「他耦合」束縛。但由於戰場態勢的快速變化，戰前規劃組織已經難以適應實戰需求。應對戰場不確定性，著重發揮任務部隊主觀能動性，分散指揮、委託式指揮、任務式指揮等指揮方式相繼出現。從能量釋放角度來看，這些指揮方式可以作為基於指揮授權實施的自耦合作戰。

現代聯合作戰，無人力量嶄露頭角，遠程精打成為新銳，隱身高速漸成主力，多維戰場全縱深布勢，多元力量混合發力，多域行動協同增效，雖然作戰效能釋放還依靠“他耦合”，但更加註重“自耦合”。近年外軍提出的「馬賽克戰」概念，旨在強調透過技術架構使已有系統靈活組網並快速配置，在指揮官指定時間與地點提供期望的作戰能力。近年來，局部戰爭和武裝沖突中，有的國家軍隊基於網絡資訊體系，重構殺傷鏈路，依網發布任務，作戰單元實施「接單式」打擊，已經初現自耦合作戰端倪。

資訊化智慧化技術為作戰效能最佳釋放提供了手段支撐，強制要求向自耦合作戰遷移

隨著大數據、雲計算、人工智慧、量子通訊等新技術的廣泛運用，使作戰力量全維分佈、異質同構，作戰資源極限運用、按需釋放成為可能，強制推動作戰方式向自耦合作戰轉變。

戰場態勢即時感知為自耦合作戰提供了「慧眼」。在資訊網絡技術支撐下，天基監控、空中預警、海上探測、水下偵監、地面感知等多域多維多元預警偵察手段，實時獲取戰場情報信息，高效處理融合各類信息，使得分佈於各領域、全縱深的作戰單元，可以獲得完整、精準、實時的戰場態，使整個作戰體係可以清晰感知潛在威脅、準確性打擊目標

跨域行動即時打擊為自耦合作戰提供了「臂膀」。外軍提出的「多域戰」概念，其實質是集多域之所長克他域之所短。在近幾場局部戰爭中，外軍實踐的跨代融合、體系抗擊、以分抗散，以無人集群打有人高價值目標等大都體現了多域作戰的這一非對稱制衡理念。智慧技術發展將進一步改變這種作戰方式，各類作戰單元“感知—決策—打擊—評估”鏈路將實現從“傳感器到射手”的瞬間傳遞，打擊準備實現“零預熱”，“發現即摧毀”得以真正實現。這種跨域行動“零反應”，為實施自耦合作戰提供了“拳頭”。

高度智慧決策系統為自耦合作戰提供了「大腦」。隨著人工智慧的演進，參謀人員的輔助決策、指揮控制和評估推演等「外腦」功能，將更多地被人工智慧「智腦」所取代，泛在的「智慧參謀」將取代龐大的參謀人員群體。在智能化加持下，力量編配將向基於任務的實時組合轉變，力量選用將向並域聚優、體系選優、按需擇優轉變，作戰行動將向即時反應、同步協作、精準釋能轉變，指揮體係將重塑為星點分佈、權限不同的指揮架構，指揮方式向任務下達、節點把控轉變，打擊力、信息力、最成功

網絡資訊體係為自耦合作戰提供了「經絡」。隨著資訊科技的發展，網絡資訊體系的網聚功能較之以往任何時代都更加強大，分散配置的作戰力量、作戰單元、武器裝備基於各種資訊連結成為地位平等網絡資訊節點，可無差別獲取與使用資訊。正如人體的經絡一樣，網絡資訊體系這一特性，不僅為指揮機構下達指令、調控行動提供便利，也為作戰單元輸送血液、提供養分。基於網絡資訊體系，聯合作戰指揮機構不僅可以雲發布任務，真正實現“去中心化”，也可監控戰場態勢、感知行動效果、調配力量資源；作戰單元可以進行“接單式”任務選擇，基於網絡智腦進行自主式行動，最大限度地降低力量內耗，形成局部最優作戰能力。

努力探索戰略戰役上「他耦合」為主導、戰術上「自耦合」為主體的作戰行動之道

勝利總是向那些能預見戰爭特性變化的人微笑。應對科技之變、戰爭之變、對手之變，必須立足當前部隊實際、前瞻未來作戰發展，加緊推動觀念更新、訓練轉型、條件建設，向著實戰貼近再貼近。

積極推動作戰理念更新。當前，智慧無人作戰力量已大量運用於現代戰場，聯合作戰正向內聚式融合快速發展。應突破掌控平台利器觀念束縛向體系聚優轉變，突出戰中快速組合力量、規劃行動，打造模塊化韌性強的作戰體系；應突破傳統作戰資源多少觀念束縛向微群多能轉變，打造高度智能化作戰群，推動作戰體係向自適應、系統湧現功能轉變；應突破傳統統攬統管觀念束縛向任務指揮轉變，基於態勢定任務、定目標、定力量，推動上級卡點指揮、多級並行實施的行動方式；應突破傳統協同觀念束縛向自主作戰轉變，基於任務編配，基於規則配合，基於態勢協作，推動作戰能量最佳釋放。

加緊完善作戰規則體系。推動實現自耦合作戰，離不開對體系內部各作戰力量統一行動、互相融合、協調配合的規則約束。這些規則，既是智慧化輔助決策系統必備的前提，也是避免行動隨意、協同失調的關鍵。應建立效能優先規則，即根據多域作戰單元作戰能力、打擊效果，以癱體失能成效為力量選用標準，為不同域、不同質作戰力量融合提供依據；應建立力量主導規則，即明確不同力量間協同關系，按任務、分目標、逐領域建立力量主導規則，為並域行動時序、配合提供依據；應建立授權性規則，即作戰單元根據指揮員授權履行某一領域、某一方向或某一行動指揮權責，為響應戰場、指揮下沉提供依據；應建立調控性規則，明確指揮員調控時機、調控方式、調控權限，確保作戰始終按指揮員意圖實施。

著力建強資訊支撐網系。雲聯支撐的聯合作戰體系，是實現體系對抗、體系聚優的前提基礎。應著眼資訊高速流轉，打造貫通軍種壁壘、共享情報資訊、銜接作戰單元的雲態戰場網鏈，為作戰力量分散部署、依網重組、跨域融合提供支撐；應瞄準智能決策，加速研發信息快速處理、方案快速生成的智能輔助模型，為任務雲發布、依網重組、跨域融合提供支撐；應瞄準智能決策，加速研發信息快速處理、方案快速生成的智能輔助模型，為任務雲發布、接單智能匹配.

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/ll_208543/16213160888.html

#Chinese Military Joint Oprations, #Information Support Force, #intelligent warfare

Chinese Military Cross-domain Joint Operations: New Trend in Future PLA Joint Operations

Leave a comment

中國軍隊跨域聯合作戰：未來解放軍聯合作戰新趨勢

中國軍網 國防部網
2020年9月8日 星期二

現代英語：

With the continuous improvement of information technology and the expansion of combat space, the combat capabilities of various services in modern warfare have been qualitatively improved. The joint combat concept that used to focus on the “service attributes” of combat forces is shifting to the “combat domain” affiliation of combat forces. On the basis of achieving “divided domain jointness” in a single combat domain, it seeks “cross-domain jointness” between various combat domains, thereby maximizing the combat capability of one’s own system.

Cross-domain joint operations are an advanced form of joint operations development

Since the transition from mechanization to informatization of warfare, the concept of joint operations that comprehensively utilizes the combat capabilities of various services has been gradually established, and has demonstrated a strong system combat power in recent local wars. At present, with the continuous development of information technology, supported by information and communication technology, the combat capabilities of various services are constantly enhanced, and the tentacles of action are constantly extending to multiple spaces, with overlapping situations in various dimensions. The traditional integration and integration of joint combat capabilities based on “services and arms” seems to be somewhat inadequate and difficult to meet the development requirements of information-based joint operations. It needs to be coordinated with a new concept of joint operations.

The combat domain has become the glue point for the integration of joint combat capabilities. There is no clear definition of the combat domain at present. Combined with the definition of domain in the modern Chinese dictionary, it can be understood as the scope involved in combat operations. There are many ways to divide this scope in the field of military operations. The most common one is according to the spatial scope involved in military operations, namely, land, sea, air, space, network, electromagnetic and other combat spaces. These combat spaces all have professional combat forces relying on this space. Around the competition for control of this space, an independent combat space domain, namely, the combat domain, has gradually formed. At present, the combat forces and combat operations of each service have more or less extended their tentacles to the traditional scope of other services. In joint operations, if the service continues to integrate joint capabilities, the operations in a certain combat space will appear in a situation of multiple command and control, with low command efficiency and large internal losses. Therefore, it is necessary to find another way to seek a new glue point for the integration of joint combat capabilities of various services. At present, integrating joint combat capabilities based on combat domains has become a new development direction. For example, during the Iraq War, the U.S. Army’s Joint Ground Component Command unified the command of the combat operations of the Army’s 5th Army and the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force’s ground forces, and the Joint Air Component Command unified the command of the combat operations of the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps flight forces.

Cross-domain joint operations are the combination of combat domains and military services. Cross-domain operations involve at least two combat domains in terms of the scope of combat space. For example, operations conducted by naval ships, naval aviation, and the Marine Corps involve three combat domains: land, sea, and air, and may even involve cyber and electromagnetic space. However, this may only be naval operations, and is not considered a joint operation. Joint operations involve at least two military services in terms of the military service attributes of combat forces. For example, operations jointly conducted by the Marine Corps, the Air Force Airborne Force, and the Army’s ground combat forces can be called land joint operations. However, this type of joint operation is mainly carried out on land, and cross-domain operations are not fully reflected. Cross-domain joint operations are a combination of the concepts of cross-domain operations and joint operations, that is, combat operations must involve at least two combat domains, and at least two military services must participate in combat operations.

Cross-domain joint operations are the main mode of future joint operations

With the support of the network information system, the barriers that previously affected the “coordination” of combat operations between the various services and arms and the “integration” of combat capabilities between various combat domains have been gradually broken down, and the conditions for implementing high-level and high-efficiency joint operations have basically been met. In future joint operations, the combat operations of various participating forces will be linked by the network information system and will work together around the overall combat intent. The combat concept of multi-domain coordination and cross-domain integration has become a general trend.

Future joint operations require multi-domain coordination. At present, from the perspective of the combat space of each service, each service has a certain cross-domain combat capability. The Army has the Army Aviation, the Air Force has the Airborne Force, and the Navy has the Naval Aviation and Marine Corps. At the service level, multiple combat domains have the ability to coordinate and engage in combat. This multi-domain coordination can be called “small coordination”. In future joint operations based on network information systems, these multi-domain coordination at the service level must develop to a higher level, toward the direction of integrating the capabilities of different services in the same combat space, that is, the direction of “big coordination”, that is, to achieve domain-specific joint operations between different services. In addition, combat domains such as space, network, and electromagnetic space are indispensable and important components of joint operations. Even if a certain service implements relatively independent combat operations in a specific range and a certain joint combat stage, it will also need the support of space, network, and electromagnetic space combat operations. Therefore, future joint operations will inevitably be coordinated engagements in multiple combat space domains.

Future multi-domain operations require cross-domain joint operations. From the overall perspective of operations, the future will involve joint operations involving multiple services and multiple combat domains, and the operations of various services in various combat domains are interconnected and mutually supportive. On the surface, although some operations are carried out in a certain combat domain, the effects or targets they produce are in other combat domains. For example, the army destroys or occupies the enemy’s airport in ground combat, which has a significant impact on the air force’s seizure of air superiority; for example, electronic countermeasures forces implement electronic interference on space targets, causing the enemy’s reconnaissance and communication satellites to be paralyzed, which will have a huge impact on combat operations in land, sea, air and network combat domains. Therefore, future joint operations must be multi-domain operations, and multi-domain operations must achieve cross-domain joint operations, and better promote the achievement of combat objectives through the connection of actions and effects.

Cross-domain collaboration is an important way to achieve cross-domain efficiency

As the development direction of future joint operations, cross-domain joint operations seek to integrate the combat capabilities of different combat domains and complement each other’s advantages, so as to achieve the best combat effect in each combat domain. By superimposing the effects of each combat domain, the battle situation will develop in a direction that is beneficial to oneself, thereby achieving the overall or local goals of the war. Cross-domain joint operations based on network information systems can achieve cross-domain effects and cross-domain efficiency.

Transformation from cross-domain action to cross-domain effect. There are two ways to understand cross-domain: the traditional understanding is the cross-domain of combat entities in geographic space, which is mainly reflected in the potential relationship in the combat space field, that is, the attack platform and the target platform are divided into different geographic spaces. For example, using land-based anti-satellite weapons to attack the opponent’s satellite is cross-domain; while using space-based anti-satellite weapons to attack the opponent’s satellite does not fall into the cross-domain category. Another understanding is cross-domain combat effectiveness, that is, combat operations in the same geographic space can also produce cross-domain effects. For example, the action of land combat forces to destroy the opponent’s airport and thus reduce the opponent’s air combat capability can also be considered as a cross-domain category.

The first understanding has already existed in the mechanized warfare period. The corresponding effect is mainly achieved through the coordinated actions of various military services, that is, the “action domain” and the “target domain” belong to different spaces, and the combat effectiveness is directly reflected in the “target domain”, focusing on the spatial attributes of the equipment means. In the current and even future information-based joint operations, cross-domain operations will be more inclined to the second understanding, that is, the “action domain” and the “target domain” can be both “same domain” and “different domains”, but the combat effectiveness can be reflected in the “different domain”, which is not limited by the spatial attributes of the equipment means themselves, but is related to the space and scope of the impact of the combat effect, and therefore has a wider range of applicability.

Transformation from joint efficiency enhancement to cross-domain efficiency enhancement. With the continuous expansion of the combat space and the improvement of the performance of weapons and equipment, a relationship of mutual checks and balances has been formed between the various combat space fields. For example, the so-called “controlling the land with the air” and “controlling the land with the sea” are the embodiment of this kind of checks and balances. The reason why each service develops its own cross-domain combat capabilities is also to focus on this kind of checks and balances in the combat space field. However, each service has its own key areas of construction, and it is impossible to develop the combat capabilities of each combat space field in a balanced manner. This requires the use of the combat effects of other services to promote the improvement of the combat effectiveness of this service.

In the era of mechanized warfare and the early stage of information warfare, each service fully exerted the combat effectiveness of its own service forces in combat according to the plan, and created conditions for the combat of other services on the basis of completing its own combat tasks. Compared with the army without joint combat capability, its combat effectiveness is significantly higher by several orders of magnitude. However, due to the imperfect construction of command information system and network, and the long-term fragmentation of various services, information transmission and sharing are restricted, the coordination between the forces of various services is relatively mechanical, and the complementarity, integration and utilization rate of combat effects cannot reach the ideal state. With the advancement of information technology, the participating forces in joint operations based on the network information system can smoothly realize the joint operation of different domains, and on this basis, conduct cross-domain joint operations with other combat domains. Through the efficient flow of information, the combat operations of each domain can achieve self-synchronous coordination around the combat mission, and the combat effect of a certain domain will be quickly utilized by other domains, and a cascade amplification effect will be generated, spreading to each domain, thereby achieving cross-domain efficiency.

現代國語：

逯 杰

随着信息化水平的不断提升和作战空间的拓展，现代战争中各军种作战能力有了质的提升。以往以作战力量“军种属性”为着眼点的联合作战理念，正在向作战力量的“作战域”归属为着眼点转变，在实现单一作战域“分域联合”的基础上，谋求各作战域之间的“跨域联合”，从而最大限度地释放己方体系作战能力。

跨域联合是联合作战发展的进阶形式

战争由机械化向信息化过渡发展以来，综合运用各军种作战能力的联合作战理念逐步得以确立，并在近几场局部战争中展现了强大的体系作战威力。当前，随着信息化技术的不断发展，以信息通信技术为支撑，各军种作战能力不断增强，行动触角不断向多个空间延伸，在各维空间出现相互交叠的情况，传统以“军兵种”为基础的联合作战能力整合与集成显得有些力不从心，难以满足信息化联合作战的发展要求，需要以新的联合作战理念加以统筹。

作战域已经成为联合作战能力集成的黏合点。作战域目前没有明确的定义，结合现代汉语词典中对域的释义，可以将其理解为作战行动所涉及的范围。这种范围在军事行动领域有多种划分方法，最为普遍的是按照军事行动所涉及的空间范围，即陆、海、空、天、网络、电磁等作战空间。这些作战空间都存在依托此空间的专业作战力量，围绕该空间控制权的争夺，逐步形成独立的作战空间领域，即作战域。当前，各军兵种作战力量和作战行动都多多少少地将触角延伸至其他军种的传统范围。在联合作战中，如果继续以军种进行联合能力集成，在某一作战空间的行动将会出现多头指挥控制的局面，指挥效率低，内部损耗大。因此，需要另辟蹊径，寻求各军种联合作战能力集成的新黏合点。当前，以作战域为依托进行联合作战能力集成已经成为新的发展方向。例如，伊拉克战争中，美军联合地面组成部队司令部统一指挥陆军第5军和海军陆战第1远征军地面部队的作战行动，联合空中组成司令部统一指挥空军、海军和海军陆战队飞行部队的作战行动。

跨域联合是作战域与军兵种的结合。跨域，是在作战空间范围上，作战行动至少涉及两个作战域。如海军舰艇、海军航空兵和海军陆战队所实施的作战，涉及陆、海、空三个作战域，甚至还可能有网络和电磁空间，但这种情况可能只是海军军种作战，并不算联合作战。联合，是在作战力量的军兵种属性上，作战行动至少涉及两个军兵种参战力量。如海军陆战队、空军空降兵和陆军地面作战力量共同实施的作战，就可以被称为陆上联合作战。但这种联合作战主要在陆域展开，跨域作战体现的并不充分。跨域联合是跨域作战与联合作战概念的结合体，即作战行动既要涉及至少两个作战域，还须至少有两个军兵种作战力量参与作战行动。

跨域联合是未来联合作战的主要模式

在网络信息体系的支撑下，以往影响各军兵种之间作战行动“配合”、各作战域之间作战能力“整合”的壁垒已经逐步被打破，实施高层次、高效率联合作战的条件已经基本具备。在未来联合作战中，各参战力量的作战行动将以网络信息体系为纽带，围绕整体作战企图联合发力，多域协同、跨域融合的作战理念已经成为大势所趋。

未来联合作战需要多域协同。当前，从各军兵种的作战空间领域来看，各军种都具有一定的跨域作战能力，陆军有陆军航空兵，空军有空降兵，海军有海军航空兵和海军陆战队等。在军种层面，多个作战域之间已经具备了协同交战的能力，这种多域协同可以被称为“小协同”。在未来基于网络信息体系的联合作战中，这些军种层面的多域协同要向更高层次发展，向不同军种同一作战空间领域能力整合的方向发展，即“大协同”的方向发展，即实现不同军种之间的分域联合。此外，太空、网络、电磁空间等作战域是联合作战不可或缺的重要组成部分，即便是某个军种在特定范围和某个联合作战阶段中实施相对独立的作战行动，也将需要太空、网络和电磁空间作战行动的支持。因此，未来的联合作战必将是多个作战空间领域的协同交战。

未来多域作战要求跨域联合。从作战的全局看，未来涉及多个军兵种和多个作战域的联合作战行动，各军兵种在各个作战域的行动相互联系和相互支撑。从表面上看，虽然有些行动是在某个作战域展开的，但是其产生的作用或者打击的目标是在其他作战域之中。如陆军在地面作战中摧毁或占领敌方的机场，这对空军夺取制空权具有重大影响；又如，电子对抗力量对太空目标实施电子干扰，导致敌方的侦察、通信卫星瘫痪，将对陆、海、空和网络等作战域的作战行动产生巨大影响。因此，未来联合作战必然是多域作战，而多域作战必须实现跨域联合，通过行动和效果的衔接来更好地促进作战目的的达成。

跨域联合是实现跨域增效的重要方式

跨域联合作战作为未来联合作战的发展方向，其谋求的是不同作战域作战能力集成、域间优势互补，从而在各个作战域达成最佳作战效果。通过各作战域效果的叠加，使战役态势向有利于己方的方向发展，进而达成战争全局或局部目的。基于网络信息体系的跨域联合可以实现效果跨域和跨域增效。

由行动跨域向效果跨域转变。对于跨域可以有两种理解：传统的理解是作战实体在地理空间的跨域，主要体现在作战空间领域的位势关系，即以攻击平台和目标平台分处不同地理空间来划分。例如，使用陆基反卫星武器攻击对方卫星，属于跨域；而使用天基反卫星武器攻击对方卫星则不属于跨域范畴。另一种理解则是作战效能的跨域，即处于同一地理空间中的作战行动也能产生跨域效果。例如，陆上作战力量通过摧毁对方机场，从而达到降低对方空中作战能力的行动，也可以认为是跨域的范畴。

第一种理解，在机械化战争时期就已经存在。主要通过各军兵种的协同行动达成相应效果，即“行动所在域”和“目标所在域”分属不同空间，作战成效直接反映在“目标所在域”，着眼于装备手段的自身空间属性。在当前乃至未来信息化联合作战中，跨域作战将更倾向于第二种理解，即“行动所在域”和“目标所在域”既可以“同域”也可以“异域”，作战成效却能够反映在“异域”，不受装备手段自身空间属性限制，而是与作战效果的影响空间和范围有关，因而具备更加广泛的应用性。

由联合增效向跨域增效转变。随着作战空间领域的不断扩展和武器装备性能的提升，各作战空间领域之间形成了相互制衡的关系，比如我们常说的“以空制地”“以海制陆”等等，就是这种制衡关系的体现。各军种之所以发展自身的跨域作战能力，也是着眼这种作战空间领域的制衡关系。但是，每个军种都有自身重点建设的领域，不可能均衡地发展各个作战空间领域的作战能力，这就需要借助其他军兵种的作战效果来促进本军种作战效能的提升。

机械化战争时代及信息化战争初期，各军种按照计划在作战中充分发挥本军种参战力量的作战效能，在完成本军种作战任务的基础上，为其他军种的作战创造条件。相较于没有联合作战能力的军队，其作战效能明显高出几个数量级。但是，由于指挥信息系统和网络建设不完善，加之各军兵种长期的条块分割，信息传递与共享受到限制，各军种力量之间的协同较为机械，作战效果的互补性、融合度和利用率还不能达到理想状态。随着信息技术的突进，基于网络信息体系联合作战的参战力量能够顺利实现分域联合，在此基础上与其他作战域进行跨域联合。通过信息的高效流转，各分域的作战行动能够围绕作战任务实现自同步协同，某个分域的作战效果将会迅速被其他分域所利用，并产生级联放大效应，扩散至各个分域，从而实现跨域增效。

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2020-09/08/content_270364888.htm