發展中國軍事作戰理念，規劃中國未來戰爭勝利

中國軍網 國防部網
2022年6月22日 星期三

現代英語：

Since the 21st century, with the deepening of the world’s new military revolution, the world’s military powers have put forward a series of new operational concepts and continuously improved them in war practice, thus driving the accelerated evolution of war. With the rapid development of information technologies such as cloud computing, blockchain, artificial intelligence, and big data, and their widespread application in the military field, people’s understanding of war has gradually changed from summarizing actual combat experience to studying and judging future wars. At present, as the source of military capability building, the strength of operational concept development capabilities will directly affect the seizure of victory opportunities. In particular, the vigorous development of the world’s new military revolution is calling for innovation in operational theory all the time. Only by developing new operational concepts and designing future wars with a forward-looking vision can we gain the initiative in military struggle preparation.

The concept of combat fundamentally solves the problem of how to fight a war.

First-rate armies design wars, second-rate armies respond to wars, and third-rate armies follow wars. The so-called “real wars happen before wars” means that before a war starts, the theory, style, and method of fighting have already been designed. How can we not win if we fight according to the designed war? The key to designing a war is to design and develop new combat concepts based on understanding the characteristics and laws of war, promote innovation in combat styles and tactics, and fundamentally solve the problem of “how to fight a war.”

In designing wars, theories come first. In recent years, the U.S. military has proposed new concepts such as “network-centric warfare”, “air-sea integrated warfare” and “hybrid warfare”, and the Russian military has proposed theories such as “non-nuclear containment strategy”, “strategic air-space campaign” and “national information security doctrine”, reflecting that the world’s military powers are vigorously studying operational theories and seizing military commanding heights. To a certain extent, operational concepts are the “organizational cells” for the formation of operational theories. Without a perfect concept generation capability, it is difficult to give birth to advanced theories. When an operational theory is proposed, it is necessary to develop relevant operational concepts so that the operational theory can be “sunk” and visualized, and better improved and transformed into military practice. When there is no operational theory concept, operational concept innovation can provide “raw materials” for the study of operational theories. The military field is the most uncertain field, and people’s understanding of war is constantly evolving. However, operational theory innovation cannot wait for the understanding to mature before starting, but needs to be based on the existing understanding, through active development and innovation of operational concepts, constructing future operational scenarios, exploring future winning mechanisms, and guiding and guiding military practice, in order to seize the initiative in war. Therefore, operational concept innovation is becoming a strategic fulcrum and lever for military construction and development.

The development of operational concepts focuses on designing core operational concepts. The core operational concept is the nucleus and embryo of the operational concept, which reflects the essential requirements of operations and contains the “genetic genes” for the growth of operational concepts. The entire concept system is derived and developed from this. At present, the understanding of the winning mechanism of informationized and intelligent warfare is becoming clearer, and it is time to focus the design of war on the development of major operational theories and key operational concepts.

Operational concept is an abstract expression of operational thinking.

The term “operational concept” originated from the US military. It is a description of how to fight in the future and is increasingly becoming an important tool for promoting the development of the military. The US Army Training and Doctrine Command Concept Development Guide points out that the operational concept is a concept, idea, and overall understanding. It is based on the inference of specific events in the combat environment. In the broadest sense, it outlines what will be done and describes how to fight in more specific measures. The US Marine Corps Combat Development Command Operations Development and Integration Directive points out that the operational concept is an expression of how to fight, used to describe future combat scenarios and how to use military art and scientific capabilities to meet future challenges. The US Air Force Operational Concept Development Directive points out that the operational concept is a conceptual description at the level of war theory, which realizes the established operational concept and intention through the orderly organization of combat capabilities and combat tasks.

In summary, the operational concept can be understood as an abstract cognition of operational ideas and action plans that is refined for specific operational problems at present or in the future. Generally speaking, the operational concept includes three parts: the first is the description of the operational problem, that is, the background of the operational concept, the operational environment, the operational opponent, etc.; the second is the description of the solution, that is, the concept connotation, application scenario, action style, winning mechanism, capability characteristics and advantages, etc.; the third is the description of capability requirements, that is, the equipment technology, basic conditions, and implementation means required to implement the operational concept. It can be seen that the operational concept should have the characteristics of pertinence, scientificity, adaptability and feasibility, and its connotation and extension will be constantly adjusted with the changes in factors such as strategic background, military policy, threat opponent, time and space environment, and capability conditions.

In a sense, operational concepts are actually transitional forms of operational theories, and their ultimate value is to guide military practice. The purpose and destination of developing new operational concepts is to tap into and enhance the combat effectiveness of the military. Only by transforming operational concepts into operational regulations and operational plans can their value be fully realized.

Innovation in combat concepts drives changes in combat styles

Since the beginning of the 21st century, the world’s military powers have, in accordance with national strategic requirements and in response to new threats and challenges, developed new operational concepts as a key means of transforming military capabilities, promoting changes in operational styles, and seeking to gain the upper hand in future battlefields. In order to further strengthen their military advantages, the world’s military powers are accelerating the introduction of a series of new operational concepts.

The US military has actively seized the opportunities brought about by scientific and technological progress, comprehensively used cutting-edge technologies such as new-generation information technology, artificial intelligence technology, unmanned autonomous technology, and proposed a series of new combat concepts such as mosaic warfare, multi-domain warfare, distributed lethality, decision-center warfare, and joint global command and control, promoting fundamental changes in combat thinking, combat style, combat space, and combat systems.

Unlike the U.S. military, the Russian military has achieved iterative innovation in operational concepts in military practice. Recently, the Russian military has been committed to promoting the construction of joint combat capabilities, accelerating the development and deployment of new unmanned equipment, focusing on building advantages in the network information battlefield, and constantly enriching the connotation of its traditional operational concepts, integrating them with new operational concepts such as hybrid warfare and mental warfare to guide war practice.

In general, in recent years, the new operational concepts proposed by the world’s military powers are driving profound changes in combat styles. Their capabilities, characteristics and advantages are mainly reflected in the following five aspects: First, the unmanned combat equipment. The proportion of unmanned equipment systems based on the new operational concept has increased significantly, and manned-unmanned collaborative combat has become one of the main combat styles, forming an advantage of unmanned over manned; second, the deployment method is decentralized. The force deployment based on the new operational concept is distributed, and the systems are interconnected and interoperable, forming an advantage of division over combination; third, the kill network is complicated. The kill network based on the new operational concept has more diverse functions. A single system can perform multiple tasks, and its failure has little impact on the combat system, forming an advantage of many over single; fourth, the response time is agile. The new operational concept emphasizes quick battles and quick decisions, taking the initiative to catch the enemy off guard, forming an advantage of fast over slow; fifth, the combat field is multidimensional. The new operational concept pays more attention to multi-domain linkage, expanding the battlefield from the traditional land, sea and air to the electromagnetic, network and cognitive domains, forming an advantage of invisible over visible.

The development of combat concepts should adhere to the systematic design approach

Using operational concepts to guide military force construction is a common practice among the world’s military powers. In comparison, the US military’s operational concept development mechanism is relatively complete, and a relatively complete operational concept development system has been established, consisting of concept types, organizational structures, normative standards, and support means.

In terms of concept types, the U.S. military’s combat concepts can basically be divided into three categories: First, a series of combat concepts developed by each service, mainly from the perspective of the service, to study potential enemies and future battlefields, redefine combat styles, and seek new ways to win. Second, a series of joint combat concepts developed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, mainly composed of three levels: top-level concepts, action concepts, and supporting concepts. Third, combat concepts developed by academia, think tanks, etc., the number of such combat concepts is not as large as the first two categories, but it is still an important part of the combat concept system. Through this system, the U.S. military has implemented the grand military strategy through combat concepts layer by layer into various combat operations, various combat capabilities, and various types of weapons and equipment performance for the troops, guiding the construction of joint forces and various services.

In terms of organizational structure, taking the development of joint operational concepts as an example, the US military has established a working system consisting of five types of institutions. The first is the Joint Concept Working Group, whose main responsibility is to review the overall issues of the concept outline and concept development; the second is the Joint Concept Steering Committee, whose main responsibility is to supervise and guide the concept development plan; the third is the core writing team, whose main responsibility is to transform the original ideas in the concept outline into joint operational concepts; the fourth is the concept development team, whose main responsibility is to provide operational concept development methods and plans; the fifth is the independent red team, whose main responsibility is to conduct independent evaluations to judge the rigor and scientificity of the concept.

In terms of norms and standards, the U.S. military has a complete system of institutions to constrain and guide the development of joint operational concepts, making them standardized, standardized, and procedural, so as to manage the entire chain of concept development, which is mainly reflected in a series of directives of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and joint publications. For example, the “Joint Concept Development and Implementation Guide” aims to establish a governance structure for joint concept development, clarify the framework for joint operational concept planning, execution, and evaluation, and promote the implementation of joint operational concepts; the “Joint Regulations Preparation Process” aims to standardize the preparation process of joint regulations and provide a clear process framework for converting operational concepts into operational regulations.

In terms of support means, the design, development and verification of operational concepts is a systematic project that cannot be separated from the support of various development tools and means. For example, tools such as the DODAF2.0 model, IDEFO model and SYSML modeling language can provide standardized structured analysis models and logical description models for operational concept designers; model-based system engineering methods can provide operational concept designers and evaluation and verification personnel with capability models of equipment elements in operational concepts for designing and building operational concept frameworks. The U.S. military’s joint operational concept development uses network-based digital software with strong interconnection capabilities. All institutions involved in the development can share information in real time to improve development efficiency.

The development of combat concepts requires collaboration among multiple parties

Developing operational concepts is a multidisciplinary and multi-field task that involves many fields such as military science, philosophy, operations research, and systems science. It requires collaboration among multiple parties to ensure that it is both advanced and forward-looking in theory and applicable and feasible in practice.

Establish a small core and large peripheral research team. The department initiating the development of the operational concept should give full play to its leading role, coordinate and dispatch the research work from a global perspective; establish a joint research and development team, give full play to the collective wisdom, and widely obtain various new ideas, new methods and new viewpoints on the research of operational concepts from all parties; establish a cross-domain and cross-departmental expert committee to supervise, review and guide related work from multiple angles.

Form a multi-departmental working mechanism. To ensure smooth communication and efficient operation among departments, we must first clarify their respective tasks and responsibilities. For example, the concept initiating department is responsible for overall planning and implementation, the laboratory is responsible for technical verification, the industrial department is responsible for equipment research and development, and the combat troops are responsible for actual combat testing. Secondly, relevant normative documents should be formulated to ensure that all work has rules to follow and is carried out in an orderly manner, providing institutional guarantees for the development of combat concepts. Finally, it is also necessary to establish demand traction mechanisms, collaborative research mechanisms, iterative feedback mechanisms, etc., to open up the link from research and development to practical application of combat concepts.

Promote the organic combination of theory and practice. Only through the iterative cycle of “design research-deduction verification-actual troop test” can the operational concept be gradually adjusted, optimized and improved, and the development of war theory can be driven. Therefore, the development of operational concepts should pay special attention to the combination of theoretical innovation and practical application, and achieve the fundamental purpose of driving the generation of new quality combat power through the mutual drive of theory and practice. Specific methods include timely incorporating mature operational concepts into operational regulations, compiling training outlines or teaching materials accordingly, and gradually promoting them to troops for use; organizing relevant exercises or tests to test the maturity and feasibility of operational concepts under conditions close to actual combat, and finding and solving problems; using the capability indicators determined by the operational concept as a reference for equipment demand demonstration, driving the development of equipment technology, and promoting the improvement of combat capabilities.

The rapid development of science and technology in the new era has brought many new opportunities and challenges to the construction of military capabilities. The development of new operational concepts will help us to seize the military opportunities brought by scientific and technological progress, actively respond to the threats and challenges formed by scientific and technological development, and timely grasp the direction and laws of the evolution of war forms, which can provide important support for leading future war styles and seizing the first chance to win. At present, the international security situation is complex and changeable. To win the future information war, we need to take the development of operational concepts as the origin of national defense and military construction, actively carry out military technological innovation, promote the upgrading of weapons and equipment, achieve leapfrog development, and thus lead the trend of the new military revolution.

(Author’s unit: Second Academy of China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation)

現代國語：

宋曉明

中國軍網 國防部網
2022年6月22日 星期三

自21世紀以來，隨著世界新軍事革命的深入推進，世界軍事強國提出了一系列新作戰概念，並在戰爭實踐中不斷改進，從而牽引戰爭加速演變。隨著雲端運算、區塊鏈、人工智慧、大數據等資訊科技的日新月異，以及在軍事領域的廣泛應用，人們理解戰爭的模式逐漸由歸納總結實戰經驗向研判未來戰爭轉變。目前，作為軍事能力建構源頭，作戰概念開發能力強弱，將直接影響勝戰先機的奪取。尤其是世界新軍事革命蓬勃發展，無時無刻不在呼喚作戰理論創新，只有以前瞻眼光開發新作戰概念、設計未來戰爭，才能獲得軍事鬥爭準備的主動權。

作戰概念從根本解決仗怎麼打

一流軍隊設計戰爭，二流軍隊應對戰爭，三流軍隊尾隨戰爭。所謂“真正的戰爭，發生在戰爭之前”，意思是戰爭開打之前，戰爭的理論、樣式、打法早已被設計出來。依照設計好的戰爭來打，豈有不勝之理？設計戰爭，關鍵在於摸清戰爭特徵規律的基礎上，設計發展新作戰概念，推動作戰樣式和戰法創新，從根本上解決「仗怎麼打」。

設計戰爭，理論先行。近年來，美軍先後提出「網路中心戰」「空海一體戰」等理論，反映了世界軍事強國都在大力研究作戰理論，搶佔軍事制高點。從某種程度上說，作戰概念是作戰理論形成的“組織細胞”，沒有完善的概念生成能力，很難催生先進的理論。當一個作戰理論提出時，需要發展相關作戰概念，才能使作戰理論「下沉」具象化，更好地完善並向軍事實踐轉化。當沒有作戰理論構想時，作戰概念創新可以為研究作戰理論提供「原料」。軍事領域是最具不確定性的領域，人們對戰爭的認知始終在不斷發展。但是，作戰理論創新不能坐等認識成熟後再起步，而是需要在現有認識的基礎上，透過主動開發、創新作戰概念，構設未來作戰圖景，探索未來制勝機理，牽引並指導軍事實踐，才能掌握戰爭主動權。因此，作戰概念創新，正成為軍隊建設與發展的戰略支點與槓桿。

作戰概念開發，重點在於設計核心作戰概念。核心作戰概念，是作戰概念的細胞核、胚胎，集中反映作戰本質要求，包含著作戰概念生長的“遺傳基因”，整個概念體係由此衍生與發展。目前，對資訊化、智慧化戰爭的致勝機理等的認識漸趨清晰，將設計戰爭的重心聚焦到主要作戰理論、關鍵作戰概念開發正當其時。

作戰概念是作戰思想的抽象表達

「作戰概念」一詞源自美軍，是對未來如何作戰的描述，正日益成為推進軍隊建設發展的重要抓手。美《陸軍訓練與條令司令部概念開髮指南》指出，作戰概念是理念、想法、總體認識，是依據作戰環境中具體事件的推斷，在最廣泛的意義上勾勒將要做什麼，在更具體的舉措上描述仗怎麼打。美《海軍陸戰隊作戰發展司令部作戰發展與一體化指令》指出，作戰概念是表達如何打仗，用來描述未來作戰景象及如何利用軍事藝術和科學能力迎接未來挑戰。美《空軍作戰概念發展條令》則指出，作戰概念是戰爭理論層面的概念描述，透過對作戰能力和作戰任務的有序組織，實現既定的作戰構想和意圖。

綜上所述，作戰概念可以理解為是針對當前或未來的具體作戰問題，提煉的對作戰思想與行動方案的抽象認知。一般而言，作戰概念包括三部分內容：一是對作戰問題的描述，即作戰概念的提出背景、作戰環境、作戰對手等；二是對解決方案的描述，即概念內涵、應用場景、行動樣式、制勝機理、能力特徵及優勢等；三是對能力需求的描述，即實施該作戰概念所需的裝備技術、基礎條件、實現手段等。可以看出，作戰概念應具備針對性、科學性、適應性與可行性等特徵，其內涵與外延會隨著戰略背景、軍事方針、威脅對手、時空環境、能力條件等因素的變化而不斷調整。

從某種意義上說，作戰概念其實是作戰理論的過渡形態，最終價值是指導牽引軍事實踐。發展新作戰概念的目的和歸宿，是挖掘和提升軍隊戰鬥力，只有把作戰概念轉化為作戰條令、作戰計劃，才能充分發揮其價值。

作戰概念創新牽引作戰樣式變革

進入21世紀以來，世界軍事強國根據國家戰略要求，針對新威脅挑戰，把開發新作戰概念作為軍事能力轉型的關鍵抓手，推動作戰樣式變革，謀求贏得在未來戰場中的製勝先機。為進一步強化軍事上的領先優勢，世界軍事強國正加速推出一系列新作戰概念。

美軍積極搶奪科技進步帶來的機遇，綜合運用新一代資訊科技、人工智慧技術、無人自主技術等尖端技術，提出馬賽克戰、多域作戰、分散式殺傷、決策中心戰、聯合全局指揮控制等一系列新作戰概念，推動作戰思想、作戰樣式、作戰空間和作戰體系發生根本性變化。

與美軍不同，俄軍是在軍事實踐中實現作戰概念的迭代創新。近期，俄軍致力於推動聯合作戰能力建設，加速發展部署新型無人裝備，注重打造網路資訊戰場優勢，不斷豐富其傳統作戰概念的內涵，並與混合戰爭、心智戰等新作戰概念相集成，用以指導戰爭實踐。

整體而言，近幾年，世界軍事強國提出的新作戰概念正牽引作戰樣式發生深刻變化，其能力特徵及優勢主要體現在以下五個方面：一是作戰裝備無人化，基於新作戰概念的無人裝備體系佔比顯著提高，有人無人協同作戰成為主要作戰樣式之一，形成以無人制有人的優勢；二是部署方式分散化，基於新作戰概念的力量部署呈分佈式，系統間互聯互通，具備互操作能力，形成以分制合的優點；三是殺傷網複雜化，基於新作戰概念的殺傷網功能更加多樣，單一系統可執行多種任務，且其失效對作戰體系影響較小，形成以多製單的優勢；四是響應時間敏捷化，新作戰概念更強調速戰速決，先發制人使敵方措手不及，形成以快製慢的優勢；五是作戰領域多維化，新作戰概念更注重多域聯動，將戰場從傳統的陸海空拓展到電磁、網絡和認知域，形成以無形制有形的優勢。

作戰概念開發應堅持體系化設計思路

以作戰概念指導軍事力量建設，是世界軍事強國的共同做法。比較而言，美軍的作戰概念開發機制較為完善，建構了相對完整的作戰概念開發體系，由概念類型、組織架構、規範標準、支撐手段等部分組成。

在概念類型方面，美軍作戰概念基本上可分為三類：一是各軍種主導開發的系列作戰概念，主要從本軍種角度出發，研判潛在敵人和未來戰場，對作戰樣式進行重新定義，謀求打贏的新途徑。二是參會主導開發的一系列聯合作戰概念，主要由頂層概念、行動概念和支持性概念等三個層次構成。三是學術界、智庫等主導開發的作戰概念，這類作戰概念的數量沒有前兩類那麼多，但仍是作戰概念體系的重要組成部分。透過此體系，美軍把宏大的軍事戰略透過作戰概念逐層落實為面向部隊的各類作戰行動、各種作戰能力、各型武器裝備性能，指導聯合部隊及各軍兵種建設。

在組織架構方面，以聯合作戰概念發展為例，美軍建立了由五類機構組成的工作體系。一是聯合概念工作小組，主要職責是審查概念大綱及概念研發的整體問題；二是聯合概念指導委員會，主要職責是對概念研發計畫進行監督指導；三是核心編寫團隊，主要職責是將概念大綱中原始理念轉化為聯合作戰概念；

在規範標準方面，針對聯合作戰概念的開發，美軍有完善的製度體系約束、指導，使其規範化、標準化、程序化，以便對概念開發進行全鏈條管理，主要體現在一系列參謀長聯席會議主席指令及聯合出版物中。例如，《聯合概念開發與實施指南》旨在為聯合概念發展建立治理結構，明確聯合作戰概念規劃、執行和評估的框架，推動聯合作戰概念落實；《聯合條令編制流程》旨在對聯合條令的編制流程進行規範，為把作戰概念轉化為作戰條令提供一個明確的流程框架。

在支撐手段方面，作戰概念的設計開發與驗證是一項系統工程，離不開各類開發工具與手段的支撐。例如，DODAF2.0模型、IDEFO模型及SYSML建模語言等工具，可為作戰概念設計人員提供規範的結構化分析模型與邏輯描述模型；基於模型的系統工程方法，可為作戰概念設計人員和評估驗證人員提供作戰概念中裝備要素的能力模型，用於設計並搭建作戰概念框架。美軍聯合作戰概念開發使用了基於網路的數位化軟體，具有較強的互聯互通能力，所有參與開發的機構都可以即時共享訊息，提高開發效率。

作戰概念開發成熟需要多方協同合作

發展作戰概念是一項多學科、多領域交叉的工作，涉及軍事學、哲學、運籌學、系統科學等諸多領域，需要多方協同合作，以確保其既在理論層面具備先進性、前瞻性，又在實踐層面具備適用性、可行性。

組成小核心大外圍研究團隊。作戰概念開發發起部門要充分發揮群體智慧作用，從全局角度出發，對研究工作進行統籌與調度；成立聯合研發團隊，充分發揮群體智慧作用，廣泛獲取各方對作戰概念研究的各種新方法與新觀點；設立跨領域、跨部門的專家委員會，多角度對相關工作進行監督、審查與指導。

形成多部門連動的工作機制。為確保各部門之間溝通順暢、運作高效，首先要明確各自的任務與職責。例如，概念發起部門負責總體計畫與實施、實驗室負責技術驗證、工業部門負責裝備研發、作戰部隊負責實戰檢驗。其次，要製定相關規範文件，確保各項工作有章可循、有序推進，為作戰概念研發提供製度保障。最後，還要建立需求牽引機制、協同攻關機制、迭代回授機制等，打通作戰概念從研發到實務運用的連結。

推動理論與實務有機結合。作戰概念只有透過「設計研究—推演驗證—實兵檢驗」的循環迭代，才能逐步調整、優化、完善，牽引戰爭理論發展。因此，作戰概念發展要特別注重理論創新與實務運用結合，透過理論與實務的相互驅動，達成牽引新質戰鬥力生成的根本目的。具體方式包括，將開發成熟的作戰概念及時納入作戰條令，相應地編寫訓練大綱或教材，逐步推廣至部隊使用；透過組織相關演訓或試驗，在貼近實戰條件下檢驗作戰概念的成熟度與可行性，查找並解決問題；把作戰概念確定的能力指標作為裝備需求論證的參考，促進引裝備技術發展，尋找並解決問題；把作戰概念確定的能力指標作為裝備需求論證的參考，促進引裝備技術發展，找到並解決問題；把作戰概念確定的能力指標作為裝備需求論證的參考，促進引裝備技術發展，找到並解決問題；把作戰概念確定的能力指標作為裝備需求論證的參考，促進引裝備技術發展，作戰能力提升。

新時代科技發展態勢迅猛，為軍事能力建設帶來許多新機會與新挑戰。發展新作戰概念，有助於敏銳抓住科技進步帶來的軍事機遇，積極應對科技發展形成的威脅與挑戰，及時掌握戰爭形態演進方向與規律，可為主導未來戰爭樣式、搶佔制勝先機提供重要支撐。當前，國際安全情勢複雜多變，打贏未來資訊化戰爭，需要我們把作戰概念開發作為國防和軍隊建設的原點，積極開展軍事技術創新，推進武器裝備更新換代，實現跨越式發展，從而引領新軍事革命潮流。

（作者單位：中國航太科工集團第二研究院）

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/gfbmap/content/2022-06/22/content_31822288.htm