Category Archives: Dimensionality Reduction Strikes

Asymmetric Warfare, China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Dimensionality Reduction Strikes, 中國軍隊對耗散戰的戰術運用

Chinese Military Analysis of New Features and Trends of US Information Warfare

Leave a comment

中國軍事分析美國資訊戰新特色新趨勢

由國語音譯為現代英語

Information warfare has become an important topic in today’s international politics and security. As the world’s largest military and intelligence agency, the United States has very strong strength and resources in information warfare. It is an important initiator and participant in information warfare, and its information warfare capabilities have attracted much attention. In addition to adjusting the goals of information warfare, comprehensively advancing in various ways, and integrating domestic departments to unify actions, the US government is also actively expanding its information warfare alliances, by absorbing more countries to form a broad information warfare alliance, enhancing the effectiveness of information warfare, and further restricting the activity environment of rival countries.

    【Key words】Information warfare, U.S. national strategy 【Chinese Library Classification Number】D815 【Document Identification Code】A

    After the Biden administration came to power, the US national strategy has been further strengthened in terms of offensiveness and targeting, which has also brought about many new changes in the US information warfare. On the one hand, the Biden administration proposed the “integrated containment” strategy in the national security strategy, and information warfare has become an important tool to contain opponents in diplomacy, intelligence, economy and trade. On the other hand, the United States uses the Internet as the main field and widely uses modern information technology to comprehensively promote information warfare in various ways, trying to influence and change the public opinion and cognition of the target country. In addition, the United States has also vigorously expanded its information warfare alliances and included more countries in its alliance system to further restrict the activity environment of its competitors. Domestic academic circles have also conducted some research on US information warfare, such as: discussing the development of US information warfare from the aspects of origin, method, technical support and equipment, analyzing the implementation basis of information warfare from the perspective of US information security strategy, or exploring the training of US military information warfare talents. However, there is still a lack of relevant discussions in the academic community on the new changes and trends of US information warfare in recent years, especially under the Biden administration. This article focuses on analyzing the new characteristics and new trends of US information warfare.

    The historical origins of the United States launching information warfare around the world

    On May 4, 2023, the latest report released by the National Virus Emergency Response Center and 360 Company disclosed the main technical means by which the CIA planned, organized and implemented “color revolution” events around the world, including a non-traditional regime change technology called “swarming”, which was used to encourage young people connected by the Internet to join the “shoot and change places” mobile protests. For a long time, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States has secretly implemented “peaceful evolution” and “color revolutions” around the world and continued to carry out espionage activities. Information communication and on-site command are the decisive factors affecting the success or failure of “peaceful evolution” and “color revolutions”. The United States’ communication technology and its media applications are in a leading position internationally, which provides unprecedented technical support for the US intelligence agencies to launch “peaceful evolution” and “color revolutions” abroad.

    Entering the 21st century, with the further development of the Internet, driven by social media, the speed, diversity and breadth of information dissemination have been unprecedentedly improved. All over the world, information can be shared and transmitted in real time. Due to the development of information technology, many countries have begun to realize the importance of information warfare: on the one hand, countries can contain opponents and create an information environment that is beneficial to their own country through information transmission and control. On the other hand, the mobility and uncontrollability of information will pose a threat to national security. Therefore, information warfare has become an important issue in today’s international politics and security. The United States has the world’s largest military and intelligence agencies, has very strong strength and resources in information warfare, is an important participant and initiator of information warfare, and its information warfare capabilities have attracted much attention.

    After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the United States mainly adopted a defensive posture in information warfare, strengthening the construction and security monitoring of network facilities to prevent attacks from terrorism and opponents. Although during the Obama and Trump administrations, the United States gradually moved from defense to active offense, proposing “preemptive” cyber sanctions against countries suspected of cyber attacks. However, judging from the National Cybersecurity Strategy released in March 2023, the United States focuses mainly on cyber deterrence, using “forward defense” to prevent attacks and infringements on key national facilities. According to media reports, when Musk announced the “amnesty” of Twitter, Meta, the parent company of another American social platform Facebook, announced a list of banned accounts, among which a group of accounts were related to the US military. This shows that the purpose, method and characteristics of the United States in information warfare are undergoing major changes, from cyber defense and deterrence to the field of influencing and shaping cognition.

    In 1995, Colonel Szafranski of the US Army defined information warfare as a conflict that directly attacks information systems to attack the knowledge or concept fields of the opponent. Information warfare can be conducted as part of a larger, more comprehensive hostile activity (such as cyber warfare), or as the only form of hostility. In 2021, Field, an expert at the Hoover Institution in the United States, also made a similar definition: information warfare aims to convey information to the target audience, which is selected to influence emotions, motivations, reasoning, attitudes, understandings, beliefs or behaviors, thereby promoting the interests of the actors. This shows that there is a general consensus among American elites on the form and purpose of information warfare, that is, to influence the cognitive system of the target object in a variety of ways. Previously, although the United States mainly adopted network defense and attack to target the opponent’s network facilities, with the changes in the international environment and the comprehensive strength of the United States, the United States gradually shifted the operational field and goals of information warfare to the cognitive system of the target country to create an international environment more favorable to the United States.

    Information warfare is an important part of the U.S. national strategy and changes with strategic adjustments.

    Information warfare is an important part of the US national strategy and an important means to achieve its national strategic goals. Today is an information age. Information and information technology not only determine the direction of social change, but are also key factors affecting competition between countries. Countries adjust their national strategies based on changes in the external environment and their own strength, and the content, characteristics, methods and fields of information warfare will also change accordingly.

    In 2016, the Obama administration issued a cybersecurity strategy called the National Cybersecurity Action Plan, which mainly includes: innovation and protection of networks, prevention of cybercrime, strengthening cybersecurity education, enhancing international cooperation and strengthening government cybersecurity management. During this period, the US government’s information warfare mainly focused on preventing cyber attacks from opponents and protecting its own network facilities and security. In September 2018, the Trump administration also issued the National Cybersecurity Strategy, which also emphasized the protection of network facilities and ensuring network security. However, in this strategy, Trump proposed the concept of “forward defense”. When it is believed that there is a possibility of an attack, the United States will take the lead in attacking the opponent, which means that the US information warfare has shifted from defense to active offense. In March 2023, the Biden administration released the latest National Cybersecurity Strategy, which further emphasized the offensive posture and greatly expanded the scope of information warfare. In this strategy, five pillars are proposed. In addition to protecting critical infrastructure and establishing international partnerships, it also emphasizes the need to combat and destroy threat actors, expand the scope of information warfare, expand public-private cooperation, combat adversaries through cooperation between public and private sectors, and shape market forces to promote security and resilience. This shows that in information warfare, the United States will further infiltrate the private sector through various means, promote American ideology and rules through the market and investment, and restrict the development environment of its competitors.

    After the Biden administration came to power, the US national strategy has also added more targeted and offensive elements. In the 2021 National Security Strategic Guidance, it is proposed to build a global strategy around the long-term competition with China and Russia; strengthen the US presence and cooperation in the Pacific region, while strengthening cooperation with Asian allies and partners to deal with the so-called “China threat”. The 2022 National Security Strategy clearly proposes the implementation of an “integrated containment strategy”, requiring the comprehensive use of comprehensive national security tools, including military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, trade and financial means, to prevent any potential challenges to the United States and its allies. According to this strategy, information warfare is no longer just a function of defending against adversary cyber attacks and protecting domestic infrastructure. Information warfare occupies an important position in the “integrated containment strategy”. It not only undertakes the function of military strikes, but will also become an important tool for containing opponents in diplomacy, intelligence, economy and trade.

    The United States is comprehensively advancing information warfare with cognitive systems as its target

    Some scholars believe that the Gulf War was the beginning of information warfare, but as early as during the Cold War, the United States had conducted large-scale information warfare against the Soviet Union. The United States used the media it controlled to carry out extensive and in-depth false news propaganda on the Soviet people, instilling American ideology, and to a certain extent affecting the cognition of the Soviet people. After the end of the Cold War, American decision-makers are believed to have gradually reduced their emphasis on the non-material elements of war because they have defeated their ideological opponents. In the following decades, regarding information warfare, the United States is more inclined to frame these activities in a narrower military context. The “integrated containment strategy” proposed by the Biden administration shows that relying solely on a defense-oriented strategy may no longer be enough to limit competitors. The United States intends to contain its opponents in all areas of national strength, including diplomacy, economy, and information. This comprehensive containment approach focuses on mobilizing all elements of national power in competition other than military means. It requires not only the coordination of various important U.S. agencies, including the Department of Defense, the State Department, the CIA, the FBI, and the U.S. Agency for International Development, but also conventional military capabilities – focusing on destroying the target country and occupying its territory. It also requires the development of unconventional military capabilities – competing for influence and legitimacy among the people of various countries, enhancing the influence of the United States by influencing and changing the cognitive system of the people of the target country, and thereby undermining the opponent’s information environment and decision-making ability.

    The information market assumes that people will process information rationally, but psychological research shows that people often do not do so. Instead, the information environment in which people live affects their cognition, decision-making, and behavior, and the information environment is the operational environment of information warfare. In recent years, the U.S. Department of Defense has adopted an increasingly comprehensive understanding of the information environment. In the updated definition of the information environment, it points out that it “contains and aggregates many social, cultural, cognitive, technological, and physical attributes that affect the knowledge, understanding, beliefs, worldview, and ultimate actions of individuals, groups, systems, communities, or organizations.” Information warfare acts on the opponent’s information environment, by analyzing the opponent’s decision-making methods, psychological advantages and weaknesses, changing the information environment, and then affecting the “key factor” of the cognitive system, changing its national behavior to achieve the goal of winning.

    In the networked era, the transmission, aggregation and processing of information are mostly carried out through the network. The network constitutes the most important information environment, and the combat field of information warfare is also concentrated on the network. The United States not only uses its global media and cultural communication power to spread American culture and values ​​to the world through television, movies, music, games, etc., to strengthen its international influence and soft power. In addition, the US government and military also make extensive use of social media, search engines, artificial intelligence, the Internet and other information means, and through professional and systematic information operation agencies and cross-border cooperation between different agencies and departments, they carry out various forms of information warfare, such as posting political propaganda on social media, launching cyber attacks, conducting network monitoring and surveillance, and organizing network sabotage activities. It should be noted that social media is increasingly becoming an important medium for the United States to launch information warfare. This is because social media platforms can have a huge impact on a large number of people with their speed and breadth of information dissemination. At the same time, because people are irrational in cognition, large-scale simple repetition on social media has become a reliable way for people to believe in fallacies. The United States is deploying a large number of fake accounts on social media platforms to widely spread false information, manipulate information, incite emotions, create public opinion, mislead opponents’ decision-making behavior, and formulate and disseminate strategic narratives to prompt national behavior to change in a direction that is beneficial to the United States.

    Expanding the information warfare alliance and further constraining the environment for competitors

    In addition to adjusting the goals of information warfare, advancing it comprehensively in a variety of ways, and integrating domestic departments into unified actions, the U.S. government is also actively expanding its information warfare alliances by absorbing more countries to form a broad information warfare alliance, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of information warfare and further restricting the environment in which rival countries can operate.

    In Europe, the United States has been strengthening its cooperation with its NATO allies on information warfare. In November 2010, NATO updated the “Lisbon Strategic Concept”, emphasizing the need to more thoroughly respond to the rapidly evolving security challenges of the 21st century, including cyber attacks. The policy focuses not only on protecting NATO’s own networks, but also on establishing agreed benchmarks to protect the national networks of allies. The 2014 Wales Summit proposed a policy to strengthen cyber defense, making the cyber field one of its key political and strategic priorities, emphasizing the cooperation and unified action of member states, and linking the cyberspace with the collective defense of the alliance. At the 2016 Warsaw Summit, NATO recognized cyberspace as a new field of military operations. In February 2018, NATO member states established a cyber operations center within the NATO military command structure, which aims to strengthen the defense and response capabilities of NATO member states in cyberspace and improve the overall level of cyber security. These measures show that under the leadership of the United States, NATO has gradually established a strong cyber cooperation platform for information warfare. On the basis of this platform, the United States will implement information warfare more comprehensively and across fields. During the Ukrainian crisis, the United States and its allies used this platform to provide cyber defense for Ukraine and launch a large number of cyber attacks. They also used the Internet to spread various false information, distorting and shaping the country’s image that was unfavorable to Russia.

    In Asia, based on the existing military alliance, the United States has been deepening its security alliances to maintain its interests in the Indo-Pacific region, vigorously promoting the “four-country mechanism” consisting of the United States, Japan, India and Australia, deepening its relations with India, and striving to promote trilateral cooperation between the United States, Japan and South Korea, further promoting network rules that are beneficial to the United States and expanding the alliances led by the United States. This makes it easier for the United States to insert information operators in the networks of allied countries, spread information that is beneficial to the United States in multiple networks, and shape the information environment dominated by the United States to exclude and restrict competing countries in the information environment. At the same time, this transnational network is still expanding, and the United States’ network standards and norms are constantly being implemented in other countries, which has greatly helped the US government and military to infiltrate these networks and conduct information warfare. The United States has also actively engaged with ASEAN countries and their individual member states, including Indonesia, Singapore and Vietnam, and has achieved certain results in network expansion. Despite the differences in governance systems and technical capabilities among these countries, as well as competing domestic priorities, ASEAN has become the first region among developing countries to adopt a consistent e-commerce legal framework. They have adopted the cybersecurity framework of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the United States as a global common language to communicate with different industry sectors and other countries.

    In February 2022, the Biden administration issued a new Indo-Pacific Strategy, which is the first Indo-Pacific Strategy issued by the Biden administration and the second Indo-Pacific Strategy issued by the US government. The strategy proposes five major policy goals, including promoting freedom and openness, regional security and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region, and also proposes an “integrated containment” strategy. For China, the Indo-Pacific Strategy points out that “our goal is not to change China, but to shape the strategic environment in which it operates.” Especially in such a media age, the transmission and release of information are more convenient, and we need to pay more attention to the importance of information warfare. In this regard, we may also need to grasp the psychological demands and emotional needs of the masses more accurately. Taking the latest report released by the National Virus Emergency Response Center and 360 Company as an example, it is particularly important for domestic government agencies, scientific research institutions, industrial enterprises and commercial institutions to quickly “see” and deal with the highly systematic, intelligent and concealed cyber attacks launched by the CIA against my country in the first place. The report recommends that in order to effectively respond to imminent network and real threats, while adopting independent and controllable domestic equipment, we should organize self-inspection and self-examination of APT attacks as soon as possible, and gradually establish a long-term defense system to achieve comprehensive and systematic prevention and control to resist advanced threat attacks.

    As the US information warfare continues to advance, the meaning of shaping the environment has become more prominent, that is, not only to contain China politically, economically and militarily, but also to “shape” China’s activity environment in terms of network and information. For China, facing the more complex and severe international situation under the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Ukrainian crisis and the US’s continuously advancing information warfare strategy, it should make the following responses: First, strengthen network and information security construction to improve its own information security level and guard against attacks on network facilities and key infrastructure. Be vigilant against the spread of false information on the Internet and in the media, trace the source of the spread, and prevent the spread of information by large-scale false accounts and the conscious guidance of the public’s cognitive system. Secondly, continue to promote high-level reform and opening up, actively develop foreign trade, and further strengthen economic ties with countries around the world. This is the most effective strategy to prevent the US “integrated containment” and information warfare. Tell the Chinese story well in foreign exchanges, let the world know more about China, and promote mutual trust and cooperation with other countries through extensive exchanges and strengthening economic interdependence. Thirdly, adhere to economic development. Developing the economy is a necessary condition for the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and is also a core task of the country. Through economic development, the world can also understand the Chinese plan and the Chinese road more clearly and vividly, and thus more effectively defend against false information and information distortion in information warfare. Finally, in terms of Sino-US relations, while maintaining the bottom line and preventing conflicts, China can also establish and restore exchanges and cooperation in certain important areas or important groups, increase and accumulate trust, and further expand cooperation to divide and ease the US integrated containment strategy.

    (The author is a professor at the Institute of Contemporary Socialism of Shandong University, a researcher at the Institute of National Governance of Shandong University, and a researcher at the Institute of South Asian Studies of Shandong University)

    【references】

    ① Liu Boran and Wei Xiuming: “U.S. Cyber ​​Security Strategy: Development Process, Evolutionary Characteristics and Essence”, Journal of Liaoning University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), Issue 3, 2019.

    ②Huang Yingxin: “Information Warfare and Its Development”, “Intelligence Command Control System and Simulation Technology”, Issue 6, 2000.

    ③Lu Xinde: “On the Expansiveness of the US Information Security Strategy”, Contemporary Asia-Pacific, Issue 7, 2005.

    ④Liu Xiaoyuan and Pang Bo, “A Perspective on the Training of Information Warfare Talents in the US Military and Its Implications”, Journal of Higher Education Research, No. 3, 2005.

    ⑤[Japan] Kosawa Kunio and Jiang Xinfeng, translators: “IT Revolution and the Development of the U.S. and Japanese Navies”, International Outlook, No. 15, 2001.

    ⑥Wu Fei and Li Xuan: “The Role of the Media in the Information War between Russia and the United States under Geopolitical Game”, “External Communication”, Issue 6, 2022.

    ⑦Yang Guangbin et al.: “Characteristics of the Era of Turbulent Change”, “World Economy and Politics”, Issue 2, 2023.

繁體中文

《 人民論壇 》（ 2023年10月09日 第 04 版）
【摘要】資訊戰已成為當今國際政治和安全領域的重要議題。因其全球最大的軍事和情報機構，在資訊戰方面有著非常強的實力和資源，是資訊戰的重要發起者和參與者，其資訊戰的能力備受關注。除了調整資訊戰的目標，以多種方式全面推進，整合國內各部門而統一行動外，美國政府還積極擴展資訊戰的同盟，透過吸收更多國家以形成廣泛的資訊戰聯盟，增強資訊戰的效果，並進一步限制對手國家的活動環境。

【關鍵字】資訊戰 美國國家戰略 【中圖分類號】D815 【文獻標識碼】A

拜登政府上台後，在美國國家戰略上進一步加強了攻擊性和針對性，這也使美國的資訊戰發生了許多新的變化。一方面，拜登政府在國家安全戰略中提出了「一體化遏制」策略，資訊戰在外交、情報、經濟和貿易等方面成為遏制對手的重要工具；另一方面，美國以網路為主要場域，廣泛運用現代資訊科技以多種方式全面推進資訊戰，試圖影響和改變目標國家的輿論風向和認知；此外，美國還大力擴展資訊戰同盟，將更多國家納入其同盟體係以進一步限制競爭對手的活動環境。國內學界對美國資訊戰也進行了一定的研究，例如：從起源、方式、技術支援和裝備等方面討論美國資訊戰的發展，從美國資訊安全戰略角度分析資訊戰的實施基礎，抑或探析美軍信息戰人才的培養。但對於近年來，特別是拜登政府治下美國資訊戰的新變化及其趨勢，學界仍缺乏相關討論，本文則聚焦於剖析美國資訊戰的新特徵與新動向。

美國在世界各地發動資訊戰的歷史溯源

2023年5月4日，國家病毒緊急處理中心和360公司發布的最新報告披露了CIA在全球各地策劃組織實施「顏色革命」事件的主要技術手段，其中包括一款被稱為「蜂擁」的非傳統政權更迭技術，用於推動透過網路連線的年輕人加入「打一槍換一個地方」的流動性抗議活動。長期以來，美國中央情報局（CIA）在世界各地秘密實施“和平演變”和“顏色革命”，並持續進行間諜竊密活動。資訊通信和現場指揮是影響「和平演變」和「顏色革命」成敗的決定性因素。美國的通訊技術及其媒體應用在國際上處於領先地位，這給美國情報部門對外發動「和平演變」和「顏色革命」提供了前所未有的技術支援。

進入21世紀，隨著網路的進一步發展，在社群媒體的推動下，資訊傳播的高速性、多樣性和廣泛性得到了空前的提升。在世界範圍內，各地資訊都能夠即時共享和飛速傳遞。因資訊科技的發展，許多國家開始意識到資訊戰的重要性：一方面，國家可以透過資訊傳遞和控制來遏制對手並創造有利於本國的資訊環境。另一方面，資訊的流動性和不可控性會對國家安全造成威脅。因此，資訊戰已成為當今國際政治和安全領域的重要議題。美國擁有全球最大的軍事和情報機構，在資訊戰方面有著非常強的實力和資源，是資訊戰的重要參與者和發起者，其資訊戰的能力備受關注。

在「911」恐怖事件後，美國在資訊戰方面主要是採用防禦為主的態勢，加強網路設施的建設和安全監控，以防止恐怖主義和對手的攻擊。雖然在歐巴馬和川普政府時期，美國由防禦逐漸走向主動進攻，提出對疑似網路攻擊國進行「先發制人」的網路制裁。但從2023年3月發布的《國家網路安全戰略》來看，美國的重點主要放在網路威懾上，透過「向前防禦」來防備對國家關鍵設施的攻擊和侵害。根據媒體報道，馬斯克宣布「大赦」推特之際，美國另一家社群平台臉書（Facebook）的母公司Meta公佈了一份封禁帳號名單，在名單中，有一批帳號與美國軍方有關。這顯示美國在資訊戰上的目的、方式和特徵正在發生重大變化，由網路防禦和威懾進入到影響和塑造認知領域。

美軍上校沙弗蘭斯基（Szafranski）在1995年對資訊戰進行過界定，資訊戰是一種直接攻擊資訊系統以攻擊對手知識或觀念領域的衝突。資訊戰可以作為更大規模、更全面的敵對活動的組成部分（如網路戰），或作為唯一的敵對形式進行。 2021年，美國胡佛研究所專家菲爾德（Field）也做出了類似的定義：資訊戰旨在向目標受眾傳達訊息，這些訊息被挑選出來，以影響情感、動機、推理、態度、理解、信仰或行為，從而促進行動者的利益。這說明在美國菁英中對於資訊戰的形式和目的有大致一致的認識，即透過多種方式影響目標對象的認知系統。此前，美國雖然主要採用網路防禦和攻擊，有針對性地打擊對手的網路設施，但隨著國際環境和美國綜合實力的變化，美國逐步將資訊戰的作戰領域和目標轉移到對象國的認知系統，以營造更有利於美國的國際環境。

資訊戰是美國國家戰略的重要組成部分，隨戰略調整而變化

資訊戰是美國國家戰略的重要組成部分，也是實現其國家戰略目標的重要手段。當今時代是資訊化時代，資訊與資訊科技不僅決定社會變革的方向，同時也是影響國家間競爭的關鍵因素。國家依據外部環境和自身實力的變化調整國家戰略，而資訊戰的內容、特徵、方式和領域也會隨之改變。

歐巴馬政府在2016年推出了名為《網路安全國家行動計畫》的網路安全策略，其主要內容包括：創新和保護網絡，預防網路犯罪，加強網路安全教育，增強國際合作與加強政府網路安全管理。在這段時期，美國政府在資訊戰上主要是防範對手的網路攻擊，保護自身的網路設施和安全。在2018年9月，川普政府也頒布了《國家網路安全戰略》，同樣強調對網路設施的防護，並確保網路安全。但在這份戰略中，川普提出了「向前防禦」的概念，當認為有可能遭遇到襲擊時，美國將率先攻擊對方，這意味著美國資訊戰由防禦轉向了主動進攻。 2023年3月，拜登政府公佈了最新的《國家網路安全戰略》，進一步強調了進攻的態勢，並大大擴展了資訊戰的範圍。在該戰略中，提出了5項支柱，除了保護關鍵基礎設施和建立國際夥伴關係外，還強調要打擊和摧毀威脅行為體，並且擴展資訊戰的範圍，擴大公私合作，透過公私部門間的合作來打擊敵手，並塑造市場力量以推動安全和彈性。這說明在資訊戰上美國將進一步透過各種方式滲透入私人領域，透過市場和投資宣揚美國的意識形態和規則，以限制競爭對手的發展環境。

拜登政府上台後，美國國家戰略中也加入了更多的針對性和攻擊性。在2021年的《國家安全戰略指導》中提出：圍繞與中國和俄羅斯的長期競爭，建構全球性戰略；強化美國在太平洋地區的存在和合作，同時加強與亞洲盟友和夥伴的合作，以應對所謂「中國的威脅」。 2022年的《國家安全戰略》更是明確提出實施“一體化遏制戰略”，要求綜合運用全面的國家安全工具，包括軍事、外交、情報、經濟、貿易和金融等手段，以防止對美國和其盟友的任何潛在挑戰。依照這個策略，資訊戰就不再只是發揮防禦對手網路攻擊和保護國內基礎設施的功能，資訊戰在「一體化遏制戰略」中佔據著重要的地位，不僅承擔著軍事打擊的功能，在外交、情報、經濟和貿易等方面也將成為遏制對手的重要工具。

美國以認知系統為目標全面廣泛推進資訊戰

有些學者認為海灣戰爭是資訊戰的開端，但早在冷戰期間，美國就對蘇聯進行大規模的資訊戰。美國利用掌控的媒體對蘇聯民眾進行了廣泛深入的假新聞宣傳，灌輸美國的意識形態，在一定程度上影響了蘇聯民眾的認知。冷戰結束後，美國的決策者被認為對於戰爭的非物質元素的強調逐漸減少，因為已經戰勝了其意識形態對手，在其後幾十年中，關於信息作戰，美國更傾向於在更狹窄的軍事背景下框定這些活動。而拜登政府所提出的「一體化遏制戰略」則表明僅依賴一種以防禦為主的策略，可能已不足以限制競爭對手，美國意圖在包括外交、經濟和資訊在內的所有國家實力領域去遏制對手。這種全面遏制方式著重於在軍事手段之外的競爭中調動國家力量的所有要素，不僅要求能夠協調美國各個重要機構，包括國防部、國務院、中情局、聯邦調查局和美國國際開發署等，並且除了常規軍事能力——專注於摧毀目標國並佔領其領土，還要發展非常規軍事能力——在各國民眾中爭奪影響力和合法性，透過影響和改變目標國家民眾的認知系統，增強美國的影響力，進而破壞對手的資訊環境與決策能力。

資訊市場假定人們會理性處理訊息，但心理學研究表明，人們往往不會這樣做。相反，人們所處的資訊環境會影響其認知、決策和行為，而資訊環境就是資訊戰的作戰環境。近年來，美國國防部對資訊環境採取了越來越全面的理解，在關於資訊環境的定義更新中指出，它「包含和聚合了許多社會、文化、認知、技術和物理屬性，這些屬性對個人、群體、系統、社區或組織的知識、理解、信仰、世界觀和最終行動產生影響」。資訊戰則是作用於對手的資訊環境，透過分析對手的決策方法、心理優勢和弱點，改變資訊環境，進而影響認知系統這一“關鍵因素”，改變其國家行為以實現制勝目的。

在網路化時代，資訊的傳遞、聚合與處理絕大部分經由網絡，網絡構成了最主要的資訊環境，資訊戰的作戰場域也集中在網絡。美國不僅運用其全球性的媒體和文化傳播力量，透過電視、電影、音樂、遊戲等方式向全球傳播美國文化和價值觀，加強其國際影響力和軟實力。並且，美國政府和軍方也大量使用如社群媒體、搜尋引擎、人工智慧和網路以及其他資訊手段，並透過專業化和系統化的資訊操作機構以及不同機構和部門的跨界合作，進行各種形式的資訊戰，例如在社群媒體上發布政治宣傳、發動網路攻擊、進行網路監聽和監控、組織網路破壞活動等。需要注意的是，社群媒體越來越成為美國發起資訊戰的重要媒介。這是由於社群媒體平台以其訊息傳播的速度和廣度，能夠對龐大人群產生巨大影響，同時又因為人們在認知上的非理性，使得社群媒體的大規模簡單重複成為人們相信謬誤的可靠方法。美國正大量地在社群媒體平台中投放虛假帳號，廣泛傳播假訊息、操縱訊息、煽動情緒、製造輿論導向，誤導對手的決策行為，並制定和傳播戰略大敘事，促使國家行為朝著有利於美國的方向轉變。

擴大資訊戰同盟並進一步限制競爭對手的環境

除了調整資訊戰的目標，以多種方式全面推進，整合國內各部門而統一行動外，美國政府還積極擴展資訊戰的同盟，透過吸收更多國家以形成廣泛的資訊戰聯盟，增強資訊戰的效果，並進一步限制對手國家的活動環境。

在歐洲，美國不斷強化與其北約盟友在資訊戰上的合作。 2010年11月，北約更新了“里斯本戰略概念”，強調需要更徹底地應對快速發展的21世紀的安全挑戰，包括網路攻擊。該政策的重點不僅是保護北約自身的網絡，還包括建立商定的基準來保護盟國的國家網絡。 2014年的威爾斯高峰會提出了加強網路防禦的政策，將網路領域作為其關鍵的政治和戰略重點之一，強調成員國的合作與統一行動，把網路與聯盟的集體防禦聯繫起來。 2016年華沙峰會上，北約承認網路空間是軍事行動的新領域。 2018年2月，北約成員國在北約軍事指揮機構內設立了一個網路行動中心，該中心旨在加強北約成員國在網路空間的防禦和應變能力，並提升網路安全的整體水準。這些舉措顯示在美國主導下，北約在資訊戰上逐步建立起一個強大的網路合作平台。在這一平台的基礎上，美國將更為全面且跨領域地實施資訊戰。在烏克蘭危機中，美國及其盟友就利用這個平台，為烏克蘭提供網路防禦，並實施大量的網路攻擊，也利用網路散播各種虛假訊息，歪曲和塑造對俄羅斯不利的國家形象。

在亞洲，在原有的軍事同盟基礎上，美國為維持其在印度—太平洋地區的利益，不斷深化其安全聯盟，大力推動「美、日、印、澳」組成的四國機制，深化與印度的​​關係，努力促進美、日、韓三邊合作，進一步推廣有利於美國的網路規則和擴展美國主導的同盟。這使得美國可以更為便利地在同盟國家的網絡中安插信息操作人員，在多個網絡中散佈有利於美國的信息，塑造美國主導的信息環境，以形成在信息環境上對競爭國家的排斥和限制。同時，這個跨國網絡仍在不斷擴展，美國的網路標準和規範不斷在其他國家得以實施，這為美國政府和軍方滲入這些網路並實施資訊戰提供了極大助益。美國也積極與東協國家及其個別成員國，包括印尼、新加坡和越南等國接觸，在網路擴展上取得了一定的成效。儘管這些國家在治理體系和技術能力上存在差異，並且存在競爭性國內優先事項，但東協成為發展中國家中第一個採用一致的電子商務法律框架的地區，他們採用了美國國家標準技術研究所

（NIST）的網路安全框架作為全球通用語言，以與不同產業部門和其他國家溝通。

2022年2月，拜登政府推出了新的《印太戰略》，這是拜登政府發布的首份，也是美國政府發布的第二份印太戰略。該戰略提出了促進印太地區的自由開放、區域安全和繁榮等五大政策目標，也提出了「一體化遏制」策略。對於中國，《印太戰略》指出「我們的目標不是改變中國，而是塑造其運作的戰略環境」。尤其是在這樣一個媒體時代，訊息的傳遞和發布更加方便，我們更需要重視資訊戰的重要性。在這方面，我們也可能需要更精確地抓住群眾的心理訴求和情感需求。以國家病毒緊急處理中心和360公司發布的最新報告為例，針對CIA對我國發起的高度體系化、智慧化、隱蔽化的網路攻擊，境內政府機構、科研院校、工業企業和商業機構如何快速「看見」並第一時間進行處置尤為重要。報告建議，為有效應對迫在眉睫的網路和現實威脅，我們在採用自主可控國產化設備的同時，應盡快組織開展APT攻擊的自檢自查工作，並逐步建立起長效的防禦體系，實現全面系統化防治，抵禦高階威脅攻擊。

隨著美國資訊戰的不斷推進，塑造環境的意義得以彰顯，即不僅是在政治、經濟和軍事上對中國進行遏制，同時在網路和資訊上也要「塑造」中國的活動環境。對中國而言，面對在新冠疫情和烏克蘭危機衝擊下更為複雜嚴峻的國際局勢以及美國不斷推進的信息戰策略，應該做好以下應對：首先，加強網絡和信息安全建設提高自身信息安全水平，防備對網路設施和關鍵基礎設施的攻擊。警惕網路和媒體中的假訊息傳播，追溯傳播源頭，防範大規模假帳號所進行的資訊散播和有意識地對民眾認知系統的引導。其次，持續推動高水準的改革開放，積極發展對外貿易，進一步加強與世界各國的經濟聯繫。這是防範美國「一體化遏制」和資訊戰最有效的策略。在對外交往中講好中國故事，讓世界更了解中國，透過廣泛交流和加強經濟互賴，促進和其他國家的互信與合作。再次，堅持經濟發展。發展經濟是中華民族復興的必要條件，同時也是國家的核心任務。透過經濟發展也可以讓世界更清楚、形象化地理解中國方案和中國道路，進而更有效地防禦資訊戰中的假訊息和訊息扭曲。最後，在中美關係上，中國在守住底線、防止衝突的同時，也可以建立和恢復某些重要領域或重要團體的交往與合作，增加和積累信任，並進​​一步擴展合作，分化和緩解美國的一體化遏制戰略。

（作者為山東大學當代社會主義研究所教授、山東大學國家治理研究院研究員、山東大學南亞研究所研究員）

【參考文獻】

①劉勃然、魏秀明：《美國網路資訊安全戰略：發展歷程、演進特徵與實質》，《遼寧大學學報（哲學社會會科學版）》，2019年第3期。

②黃迎馨：《資訊戰及其發展》，《情報指揮控制系統與模擬技術》，2000年第6期。

③盧新德：《論美國資訊安全戰略的擴張性》，《當代亞太》，2005年第7期。

④劉曉元、龐波：《美軍資訊戰人才培養透視及其啟示》，《高等教育研究期刊》，2005年第3期。

⑤[日]小繩國雄，江新鳳編譯：《IT革命與美日海軍發展》，《國際展望》，2001年第15期。

⑥吳非、李旋：《地緣政治博弈下俄美訊息戰中的媒體角色》，《對外傳播》，2022年第6期。

⑦楊光斌等：《動盪變革期的時代特徵》，《世界經濟與政治》，2023年第2期。

原始中國政府資源：http://paper.people.com.cn/rmlt/html/2023-10/09/content_26023698.htm

Asymmetric Warfare, Dimensionality Reduction Strikes, 非對稱戰爭

Chinese Military and Using the Ability to Attack the Impossible With Dimensionality Reduction Strikes – Asymmetric Warfare

Leave a comment

中國軍隊利用降維攻擊不可能的能力進行打擊——非對稱戰爭

外文音譯：

There are many different explanations for dimensionality reduction attacks, such as the crushing of lower civilizations by higher civilizations, the killing of cross-generation equipment, the control of high dimensions against low dimensions, asymmetric strikes that deprive the opponent of its strong points, etc. But in essence, it is “to attack the impossible with the able”. If viewed from this perspective, dimensionality reduction strikes have long existed in the history of human warfare and have manifested themselves in various forms. In the future, the characteristics of dimensionality reduction strikes will be more obvious and more decisive.

Mixed to make pure

“Those who understand change according to the times, and those who know know how to adapt to the circumstances.” As the field of war confrontation continues to expand into more “grey areas,” hybrid warfare is simultaneously unfolding in the physical, information, cognitive, and social domains, and is not limited to a single field or form. Hybrid warfare is purely about integration, that is, the comprehensive use of political, economic, diplomatic, military, public opinion and other fields of power, focusing on the comprehensive use of military and non-military means, conventional and unconventional tactics, showing the integration and development of traditional warfare and non-traditional warfare. Distinctive properties of force. Combat effectiveness pays attention to the realization of superposition and integration, so as to achieve quick results with less investment, and achieve political intentions and military objectives with the minimum strike. The pure nature of hybridization is chaos, that is, the boundaries between war and peace will become more blurred, the forms of expression will become more diverse, and combat styles will become more integrated. It is often difficult to judge the specific launch time of war. War and peace will be superimposed in the same time period, and war and peace will be superimposed. Non-combat status is even more difficult to confirm. The chaotic nature of hybrid warfare makes it difficult to warn of wars, prepare for wars, and respond to wars in a timely manner. The use of hybrid warfare is purely confusing. That is, compared with traditional warfare, the methods of hybrid warfare are more concealed. More struggles in non-military fields and the use of more non-military means allow war goals to be broken down into all aspects of daily communication and interaction, which reduces the risk of war. The sensitivity of war implementation is highly confusing and controllable.

Use wisdom to control one’s weakness

“Soldiers who, deception also”. War is not only a competition of strength but also a competition of intelligence. Among the “Five Virtues of Generals” in “The Art of War”, wisdom is listed as the first virtue, which fully shows that the ancients have long been aware of the role of wisdom in war. There are thousands of books on war tactics written all over the world, both at home and abroad, all with the purpose of enlightening wisdom. The victory of wisdom over clumsiness lies in knowing things beforehand and seizing the opportunity. Taking the initiative in combat can take the initiative, make time and space choices, mobilize various resources, and create advantageous conditions for victory. The victory of wisdom lies in understanding the overall situation and creating one-way transparency. He is good at uncovering the fog of war, has a clear understanding of the development and changes of the war situation, and can choose reasonable tactics for victory. The victory of wisdom over clumsiness lies in accurately grasping the center of gravity and grasping the key. Scientifically coordinate resources, focus on the focus of operations, and optimize key nodes to lay a foundation of strength for victory. The key to victory over clumsiness with intelligence lies in keenly seizing opportunities and winning by surprise. Seize the favorable conditions, avoid defeating the enemy, implement unexpected asymmetric operations, and obtain the maximum value at the lowest cost to defeat the enemy. The victory of wisdom over clumsiness lies in the correct use of human subjective initiative. People are still the decisive factor in winning the war. No matter how the times develop and the shape of war evolves, this will never change. In future intelligent warfare, the contribution rate of intelligence superiority to combat effectiveness is much higher than other factors. Human intelligence has widely penetrated into combat fields and been transformed into weapon systems. All-domain, multi-dimensional, and various types of intelligent combat platforms can quickly couple combat forces. According to Mission requirements build a combat system and independently implement coordinated operations, and the “smart victory” mechanism will become more prominent.

Use high to control low

“Technology is the core combat capability.” Technology changes the face of war, and technology also affects the outcome of war. The history of the development of human warfare shows that the military has always been a collection of technologies of the times. Whoever seizes the technological advantage and is the first to use a new type of weapons and equipment or a new combat force by surprise will easily gain a significant advantage in combat and will occupy Winning the battle. It has the advantages of cross-generation equipment and is the combat condition that countless generals dream of. It can achieve suppressive operations with high control of low. High energy defeats low power, which lies in the cross-generational crushing of equipment performance. New weapons and equipment are more advanced than old equipment in terms of information acquisition, maneuverability, strike distance, firepower yield and protection capabilities, and have combat performance that old equipment does not have. In the confrontation between old and new equipment, new equipment can give full play to its high technical performance advantages and achieve all-round crushing of the performance of old equipment. High energy suppresses low power because emerging technologies often trigger radical changes on the battlefield, causing combat methods to spiral upward and combat effectiveness to increase by leaps and bounds. The combat effect is like the crushing of hot weapons against cold weapons, informationization against mechanization, thus achieving The new way of fighting crushes the old way. Once emerging technologies mature and are introduced into warfare, they can often lead to changes in the shape of warfare. High energy controls low power, which lies in the unpredictability of disruptive technologies, which in turn leads to technological sneak attacks. Disruptive technologies can stand at a high technological level and target the weak links of the opponent’s equipment to implement contradictory special attacks. Due to the high probability of disruptive technology itself, it is very easy to produce a technological sneak attack, achieving a fatal blow without the other party being aware of it and unable to defend itself. Making good use of new quality and new domain combat forces in future intelligent warfare will become an important part of the outcome of the war.

Use fast to control slowness

“UI”. The history of war shows that speed is a key indicator to measure the military’s combat capabilities and the performance of weapons and equipment, and it is also an important fulcrum for leveraging the door to victory. Using speed to control slowness is considered to be the general principle of victory. War exists in time and space and must be affected by time and space. Therefore, time will also become a weapon. “Time is the army.” From ancient times to the present, time has often been an important object of combat operations. With the advent of the information age, the value of time has increased, and the special effect of using fast to slow down has become more obvious. The ability to control slowness by being fast lies in “being first”. You can discover and attack before the enemy. “Strike first to gain strength, strike later to suffer disaster”, by mastering the first move and playing the first move, we can suppress and disrupt the opponent’s actions, so that he can only be tired of dealing with it and be passively beaten. The speed that can control the slowness lies in the “surprise”, which can have the effect of catching the enemy by surprise and attacking them unprepared. Through quick judgment, quick decision-making, and quick maneuvers, the opponent’s reaction time is greatly reduced, making the opponent unable to keep up, make inaccurate judgments, and fight, making it impossible to defend and passive. The ability to control slowness lies in “agility”, which allows you to act quickly and gather excellence in real time. Through agile response, agile deployment, agile maneuver, and agile aggregation, real-time optimization is achieved, making the enemy invincible and defenseless. In the information age, some people have pointed out that “the past philosophy of war was to eat the big and the small, and the current philosophy of war is to eat the fast and the slow.” The phenomenon of time outliers in intelligent warfare is even more significant. Hypersonic weapons, laser weapons, microwave weapons, New rapid-kill weapons such as electromagnetic pulse weapons further push the pace of war to “instant kill”, making it possible to “destroy upon discovery”. Therefore, competing for time advantage and improving response speed are the keys to winning intelligent warfare.

Use groups to control isolation

“Two fists are hard to beat with four hands, and a vicious tiger is afraid of a pack of wolves.” Therefore, the use of large numbers to attack the small number, and the use of groups to control the isolated ones, have been regarded as the norm by military strategists throughout the history. The ability of the group to control the isolation lies in the “superposition effect”. By using large-scale forces to surround and divide the space, using more to defeat the smaller in number, using the numerical advantage to form a strength advantage, and using the implementation of super saturation strikes to continuously output the strongest strike force , to achieve cumulative combat effectiveness. The ability of groups to control isolation lies in the “aggregation effect”. By organizing a cluster combat system integrating inspection and attack, through multi-domain linkage, strengthening information empowerment, network energy gathering, system energy enhancement and other methods to enhance combat effectiveness and achieve 1+1> 2’s combat effectiveness aggregation. The ability of a group to prevent isolation lies in the “anti-damage effect”. There are many similar individuals in the cluster, and it is a decentralized group configuration. The overall combat group will not affect the overall function due to damage to a single individual or a few individuals, and can maintain long-term Time-continuous combat capability. The ability of groups to control isolation lies in the “intelligent change effect”. In future intelligent warfare, swarm weapons will be cluster combat weapons supported by intelligent unmanned control technology and network information systems. They will be networked, intelligent and distributed. Combat capabilities, capable of autonomously coordinating actions and completing corresponding combat tasks, represent the development trend of unmanned combat and intelligent combat in future wars. In future intelligent warfare, each combat group will be driven by “intelligence + data” to independently conduct online mission planning around combat objectives, and flexibly mobilize “material + energy” for combat operations to freely gather and disperse.

Make something out of nothing

“Unmanned operation is the trend and the future.” Unmanned combat systems are the basic force of unmanned combat. Compared with manned combat systems, they have “asymmetric” innate advantages in terms of combat capabilities and combat methods. Using nothing to own something means that the unmanned combat equipment system is becoming more and more complete, its capabilities are becoming more powerful, it can support diversified combat operations, and it has the development trend of being highly autonomous, intelligent, unmanned, and networked. Compared with manned combat platforms, unmanned combat platforms have many advantages such as ease of use, good adaptability, low requirements for combat environments, good concealment, and strong battlefield survivability. With their endurance, Characteristics such as high efficiency, operational flexibility, and unique combat application modes occupy a prominent position in modern warfare and have become an important means to seize information advantages, carry out precision strikes, and complete special combat missions. Intelligent unmanned combat systems overcome the inherent physiological and psychological limitations of humans. The physical space that humans themselves cannot enter will not be an obstacle to intelligent unmanned combat systems. It is foreseeable that future military operations without intelligent unmanned combat systems will become increasingly difficult to imagine. The extension of the boundaries of intelligent unmanned combat will induce new combat methods, from physical destruction in the physical domain to invisible destruction in the information domain, and then to cognitive domain intelligence battles, from cluster-type saturation coverage to extremely micro-type ant nest penetration, and so on. This not only requires the participation of intelligent unmanned combat systems, but also requires intelligent unmanned combat systems to be widely distributed in various spatial dimensions of the battlefield and gradually play a leading role. When an intelligent unmanned combat system carries out a sneak attack, the opponent will inevitably fall into a situation where it is impossible to prevent and passively deal with it.

Conquer cowardice with courage

“Husband fights with courage.” War is a contest between brave men. The brave ones win when they meet on a narrow road. From Achilles, who bravely championed the three armies in the Greco-Persian War, to Huo Qubing, who was granted the title of a wolf in the Han Dynasty of China, to those armies with strong combat effectiveness in modern times, most of them run their armies with courage and win with courage. Courage not only embodies the fighting style of disregarding death, but also reflects the fearless and high morale. It can overwhelm the opponent mentally and defeat the strong enemy willfully. It is said that “victory comes from gaining power, defeat comes from losing spirit.” Courage can control. Cowardice lies in a strong fighting style and the courage to risk one’s life to frighten the opponent. If a person is not afraid of death, his will will be strong, with an overwhelming momentum that can shock people, frighten people’s courage, destroy people’s will, and force opponents to give up in fear. Courage can control timidity, which lies in having a firm goal and daring to be the first. In order to achieve the goal, you can overcome all difficulties and obstacles, move forward courageously, do things that your opponents dare not do or think of, and achieve the effect of surprising the enemy. Courage to overcome cowardice lies in going all out, leaving no room for oneself or retreat, fully stimulating super combat potential, exerting extraordinary combat effectiveness, and greatly improving combat effectiveness. Different from the main purpose of traditional war, which is to eliminate the enemy’s physical strength, intelligent warfare will pay more attention to weakening the enemy’s morale, disintegrating the enemy’s will, and destroying the enemy’s cognition. In intelligent warfare, the struggle for the heart and mind will become more intense, and the party with the cognitive advantage will win over the other party and be more likely to take the initiative. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the offensive and defensive confrontation in the cognitive field, strengthen cognitive protection through the comprehensive use of multiple means, and at the same time interfere with, influence and control the thinking and cognition of enemy personnel, making their thinking confused, decision-making chaotic, and their will collapsed.

原始繁體中文：

以混製純

「明者因時而變，知者隨事而製」。 隨著戰爭對抗領域不斷拓展到更多“灰色地帶”，混合戰爭在物理域、資訊域、認知域、社會域中同時展開，不囿於單純某一領域和形式。 以混製純在於融合性，即綜合使用政治、經濟、外交、軍事、輿論等多領域力量，注重綜合運用軍事和非軍事手段、常規和非常規戰術，呈現出傳統戰與非傳統戰聚合發 力的顯著特性。 作戰效能講究實現疊加融合，以實現投入少見效快，用最低限度打擊就能實現政治意圖和軍事目的。 以混合純在於混沌性，即戰與和的界限將更加模糊，表現形式更加多樣，作戰樣式更加融合，往往難以判斷戰爭的具體發起時間，戰爭與和平在相同時間段內疊加呈現，戰與 非戰的狀態更加難以確認。 混合戰爭形態的混沌性，讓人難以及時預警戰爭、準備戰爭、應對戰爭。 以混制純在於迷惑性，即與傳統戰爭相比，混合戰爭的手法更加隱蔽，更多非軍事領域鬥爭、更多非軍事手段運用讓戰爭目標被分解到日常交流交往過程的方方面面，降低了 戰爭實施的敏感度，具有很強的迷惑性和可控制性。

以智制拙

「兵者，詭道也」。 戰爭是力量的比拼更是智力的競賽，《孫子兵法》「為將五德」中將智列為首德，充分說明古人早就意識到智在戰爭中的作用。 古今中外煌煌萬冊戰法，無不以啟智為目的。 智能勝拙，在於料事在先，掌握先機。 先機在作戰中可以掌握作戰主動，進行時空選擇，調動各種資源，為制勝創造優勢條件。 智能勝拙，在於洞悉全局，製造單向透明。 善於揭開戰爭迷霧，對戰局發展變化洞若觀火，為製勝選擇合理戰法。 智能勝拙，在於準確掌握重心，把握關鍵。 科學統籌資源，聚焦作戰重心，聚優關鍵節點，為致勝奠定實力基礎。 智能勝拙，在於敏銳捕捉戰機，出奇制勝。 抓住有利條件，不失敵之敗，實施出其不意的非對稱作戰，用最低成本獲取最大價值實現克敵制勝。 智能勝拙，在於正確發揮人的主觀能動性。 在戰爭制勝問題上人仍然是決定性因素。 無論時代如何發展，戰爭形態如何演變，這一條永遠不會變。 未來智慧化戰爭中智力優勢對戰鬥力的貢獻率遠高於其他要素，人的智慧廣泛滲透到作戰領域、轉化到武器系統，全局多維、各種類型的智慧化作戰平台能夠快速耦合作戰力量，根據任務 需求建立作戰體系，自主實施協同作戰，「智勝」機理將會更加凸顯。

以高制低

「科技是核心戰鬥力」。 科技改變戰爭面貌，同樣科技也影響戰爭勝負。 人類戰爭發展史表明，軍隊始終是時代科技的集合體，誰奪取了科技優勢，出其不意地首先使用某一新型武器裝備或某一新型作戰力量，誰就易獲得作戰上的顯著優勢，也就佔據 了作戰勝勢。 具有跨代裝備優勢，是無數將帥夢寐以求的作戰條件，能夠實現以高制低的壓製作戰。 高能製低，在於裝備性能的跨代碾壓。 新型武器裝備在資訊取得、機動性能、打擊距離、火力當量和防護能力上都比老舊裝備先進，具備老舊裝備不具有的作戰性能。 在新舊裝備對抗中新型裝備就能發揮高技術性能優勢，實現對舊裝備性能的全方位碾壓。 高能製低，在於新興技術往往引發戰場激變，使作戰方式呈現出螺旋式上升，戰鬥力呈躍遷式增長，其作戰效果就如熱兵器對冷兵器、信息化對機械化的形態式碾壓，從而實現 新作戰方式對舊方式的碾壓。 新興技術一旦成熟並被引入戰爭，往往能引發戰爭形態的改變。 高能製低，在於顛覆性技術的不可預期，進而導致的技術偷襲。 顛覆性技術能站在技術高位，針對對手裝備的薄弱環節，實施矛盾相剋的專項碾壓。 由於顛覆性技術本身存在的高度蓋然性，極易產生技術偷襲效果，在對方毫無察覺和無法防備的情況下，實現一擊致命。 未來智慧化戰爭中善用新質新域作戰力量將成為影響戰爭勝負的重要一環。

以快製慢

「天下武功，唯快不破」。 戰爭史表明，速度是衡量軍隊作戰能力和武器裝備表現的關鍵指標，也是撬動勝利之門的重要支點，以快製慢被認為是製勝通則。 戰爭存在於時空，必受時空影響，因此，時間也會成為武器，「時間就是軍隊」。 從古至今，時間往往是重要的作戰運籌對象。 隨著資訊化時代的到來，時間升值，以快製慢的特效更加明顯。 快能製慢，在於“先”，可以先敵發現，先敵攻擊。 “先下手為強，後下手遭殃”，通過掌握先手，下先手棋，來壓制和擾亂對方行動，使其只能疲於應對，被動挨打。 快能製慢，在於“奇”，可達出其不意攻其不備的效果。 透過快速判斷、快速決策、快速機動，極大壓縮對手反應時間，使對手跟不上、判不準、打不了，防不勝防、處處被動。 快能製慢，在於“敏”，可敏捷行動，即時聚優。 透過敏捷響應、敏捷部署、敏捷機動、敏捷聚合實現即時聚優，使敵打無可打、防無可防。 在資訊時代就有人提出“過去的戰爭哲學是大吃小，現在的戰爭哲學是快吃慢”，而智能化戰爭中的時間異值現象更加顯著，高超聲速武器、激光武器、微波武器、 電磁脈沖武器等新型快速殺傷武器進一步將戰爭節奏推向“秒殺”，使“發現即摧毀”成為可能。 所以，爭奪時間優勢，提高反應速度是智慧化戰爭制勝的關鍵。

以群制孤

「雙拳難敵四手，惡虎還怕群狼」。 故而以多打少，以群制孤，被歷來兵家奉為圭臬。 群能製孤，在於“疊加效應”，通過利用大規模力量在空間包圍、分割，在數量上以多打少，以數量優勢形成力量優勢，借助實施超飽和打擊，持續不斷輸出最強打擊力， 以實現作戰效能累積。 群能製孤，在於“聚合效應”，通過籌組察打一體的集群作戰體系，通過多域聯動，強化信息賦能、網絡聚能、體系增能等方式來提升戰鬥力，實現1+1> 2的作戰效能聚合。 群能製孤，在於“抗損效應”，集群內部同類個體數量眾多，又是去中心化編組配置，整體作戰群不會因單個個體或少數幾個個體出現損傷而影響全局功能，能夠保持長 時間持續作戰能力。 群能製孤，在於“智變效應”，未來智能化戰爭中群化武器將是以智能化無人控制技術和網絡信息系統為支撐的集群式作戰武器，具備網絡化、智能化和分佈式作戰 能力，可自主協調行動並完成相應作戰任務，代表未來戰爭無人作戰和智能化作戰的發展趨勢。 未來智慧化戰爭中各作戰群隊基於「智慧+數據」的驅動作用，圍繞作戰目標自主進行線上任務規劃，靈活調動作戰的「物質+能量」自由聚散。

以無制有

「無人化是趨勢，也是未來」。 無人化作戰系統是無人化作戰的基本力量，與有人作戰系統相比，在作戰能力、作戰方式等方面擁有「非對稱」的先天優勢。 以無制有，在於無人化作戰裝備體係日趨完備，能力越發強大，能夠支持展開多樣化作戰行動，具備高度自主化、智能化、無人化、網絡化的發展趨勢。 以無制有，在於與載人作戰平台相比，無人作戰平台具有使用簡便、適應性好、對作戰環境要求低、隱蔽性好、戰場生存能力較強等諸多優點，以其持久力、高效 性、作戰靈活等特點以及獨特的作戰應用模式佔據了現代戰爭的突出地位，成為奪取資訊優勢、實施精確打擊、完成特殊作戰任務的重要手段。 智慧無人化作戰系統克服了人類固有的生理、心理限制，人類本身無法涉足的物理空間，對於智慧無人化作戰系統來說將不存在障礙。 可以預見，未來離開智慧無人化作戰系統的軍事行動將越來越難以想像，智慧無人化作戰的邊界延展，將誘發新的作戰方式，從物理域實體摧毀，到資訊域無形破壞，再到認知 域智力搏殺，從集群式飽和覆蓋到極微式蟻穴滲透等等。 這不僅需要智慧無人化作戰系統的參與，也需要智慧無人化作戰系統廣泛分佈於戰場各個空間維度，逐步發揮主導作用。 當智慧無人化作戰系統實施偷襲時，對方必然陷入防不勝防、被動應付的局面。

以勇制怯

「夫戰，勇氣也」。 戰爭是勇者的較量，狹路相逢勇者勝。 從希波戰爭中勇冠三軍的阿基里斯、中國漢代封狼居胥的霍去病，到近現代那些擁有強大戰鬥力的軍隊，大多以勇治軍、以勇制勝。 勇，既體現出視死如歸的戰鬥作風，又體現出無所畏懼的高昂士氣，能在精神上壓倒對手，意誌上打垮強敵，即謂「勝在得威，敗在失氣。」勇能製怯 ，在於強悍的戰鬥作風，敢以命相搏震撼對手。 人不畏死，其勢必盛，具有能壓倒一切的氣勢，震人心魄、懾人膽氣、毀人意志，迫使對手驚恐放棄。 勇能製怯，在於目標堅定，敢為人先。 為達成目標，能克服一切艱難險阻，勇往直前，做對手不敢做不敢想之事，達成出敵不意之功效。 勇能製怯，在於全力以赴，不給自己留餘量、留退路，充分激發出超強作戰潛能，發揮出超常作戰效能，極大提升戰鬥力。 與傳統戰爭中以消滅敵人有生力量為主要目的不同，智慧化戰爭將更著重於削弱敵方的士氣，瓦解敵方的意志，摧毀敵方的認知。 在智慧化戰爭中，圍繞著攻心奪誌所展開的鬥爭博弈將更加激烈，而佔據認知優勢的一方將比對方先勝一籌，更加容易掌握主動。 因此，必須強化認知領域攻防對抗，透過綜合運用多種手段，強化認知防護，同時對敵方人員的思維認知等進行幹擾、影響與控制，使其思維迷惘、決策混亂、意志崩壞。

來源：中國軍網-解放軍報 作者：柴山　許炎 責任編輯：郭妍菲
2022-09-08 07:02

中國軍事原文來源： http://www.81.cn/yw_208727/10183888.html