現代戰爭視角下的中國“殲滅戰”

現代英語：

“Based on the evolution of war, grasp the “cautious first battle””

　　Written in front

　　In the history of our army, fighting a war of annihilation is one of the most distinctive and important guiding ideas for operations. As early as the Agrarian Revolutionary War, based on the war purpose of “preserving ourselves and destroying the enemy”, our army clearly proposed that the basic policy in operations was to fight a war of annihilation. Since then, in different historical periods, according to different environments, situations and tasks, our army has maintained a high degree of flexibility and maneuverability in combat guidance, and has resolutely implemented the principle of fighting a war of annihilation, continuously enriched and developed combat theories, and wrote classic examples of the weak defeating the strong in the history of world wars.

　　With the advent of the information age, the form of warfare, battlefield environment, military technology, and warfare mechanisms have undergone major changes. How the traditional theory of annihilation warfare can adapt to the changes of the times, give full play to our strengths, attack the enemy’s weaknesses, and innovate and develop is a question of the times that our generation of soldiers must answer well.

　　Depriving the enemy of its combat power is the key to winning a war of annihilation

　　In the long-term practice of revolutionary wars, our army is often at a disadvantage in terms of quantity, scale and equipment. In order to dampen the enemy’s spirit, seize the initiative and defeat the enemy, while emphasizing the cautiousness of the first battle, we pay great attention to planning and fighting a war of annihilation to quickly weaken the enemy’s strategic advantage. Therefore, “it is better to cut off one finger than to injure ten fingers”, completely depriving the enemy of its combat capability, avoiding a war of attrition or a war of defeat, has also become a key indicator for measuring the success or failure of a war of annihilation and the comprehensive effectiveness of combat. Combat under traditional conditions is often the physical superposition of troops and weapons in the same time and space, emphasizing hard killing as the main method, and the strength of combat effectiveness is mainly manifested through parameters such as mobility, firepower, and protection. Correspondingly, quickly and effectively eliminating the enemy’s living forces has become the most effective means of winning hearts and minds and disintegrating the enemy.

　　Entering the information age, information power has driven the displacement of combat effectiveness measurement standards in an exponential manner. While becoming the dominant factor in the informationized battlefield, it has strongly promoted the organic integration of combat power with early warning detection, reconnaissance intelligence, command and control, and rear-end support. The warring parties are showing a trend of full-system and full-factor confrontation. The informationized battlefield no longer simply emphasizes the spatial and temporal concentration of troops and weapons to suppress and attack the enemy, but focuses on relying on the network information system to seize information space and compete for information advantages, so that the enemy “cannot see clearly, cannot connect, and cannot hit accurately”, thereby completely depriving the enemy of its combat effectiveness. In the Kosovo War, after suffering 78 days of continuous air strikes by NATO, although the Yugoslav army did not suffer major losses in its manpower, it was always in a passive position because the material basis of the war and the reconnaissance and early warning, command and control, air defense and anti-missile systems were destroyed and paralyzed by the enemy, and was forced to sign a humiliating treaty.

　　In today’s era, destroying the enemy’s key war support elements, depriving it of the objective material basis for continuous combat, and undermining its will to wage war are not only important options for annihilation warfare to pursue deterrence effects and deprive the enemy of its combat effectiveness, but also a necessary way for annihilation warfare to achieve combat intentions and defeat the opponent.

　　Attacking the key points and breaking the system is the key to winning a war of annihilation

　　For a long time, pulling teeth out of a tiger’s mouth and striking the enemy’s vital points have been important indicators for testing the courage and command art of commanders and fighters, and are also effective means to defeat the enemy and achieve the goal of annihilation warfare. During the Hujia Wopeng Battle of the Liaoshen Campaign during the War of Liberation, the 3rd Column of the Northeast Field Army first destroyed the Liao Yaoxiang Corps Command through bold penetration, infiltration, and division, and quickly trapped the enemy in a state of collapse and defeat. But at the same time, we should also see that due to the constraints of military technology level and the effectiveness of weapons and equipment, in traditional operations, there are often many practical difficulties in accurately striking core targets such as enemy command organizations and key defense positions, and there is a lack of effective means to “go straight to Huanglong”. It can be said that traditional annihilation warfare is still more about annihilating the opponent’s living forces. This also makes it an important factor in designing the combat process and considering the success or failure of operations in traditional operations to measure and compare the number and scale of troops and weapons of both sides.

　　In the information age, on the one hand, the environmental situation and war thinking have undergone profound changes. The necessity and possibility of expanding the size of the army in exchange for improved combat effectiveness and then winning the war by annihilating a large number of enemy heavy troops are becoming less and less; on the other hand, new weapons and equipment such as precision guidance and unmanned intelligence, with the support of powerful information networks and aerospace reconnaissance capabilities, can implement “decapitation operations” and “targeted elimination” more quickly and accurately, and quickly achieve the goal of annihilation warfare. The combat mode of seizing the key nodes and parts of the enemy’s combat system, carrying out precise strikes and structural destruction, paralyzing the enemy’s combat system while reducing collateral damage and achieving combat objectives is becoming more and more respected. As a result, command centers, communication hubs, radar positions, network nodes, etc. have become sensitive parts that the warring parties focus on protecting and the key points of attacking. In the Iraq War, the US military launched a comprehensive structural paralysis operation against the Iraqi army. By implementing “decapitation operations” against Iraqi military and political leaders and “targeted elimination” of the Iraqi army’s communication command and air defense systems, the Iraqi army was placed in a completely passive position throughout the process, and the war process was accelerated.

　　In today’s era, with the rapid development of information technology and war practice, “system destruction” is becoming a keyword in modern combat theory, and is gradually promoting the overall transformation of combat modes. It has not only become a new way and means to win wars, but also an important way to win modern annihilation wars.

　　Controlling operational control is the key to winning a war of annihilation

　　In previous war practices, the combat environment faced by our army was relatively simple, and the battlefield was mainly carried out on land. Although our army is often at a disadvantage compared to the opponent’s weapons and equipment, it can often defeat the strong with the weak and defeat the enemy by exploring its own advantages, exploiting the enemy’s weaknesses, and actively looking for opportunities. In the second battle of the War to Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea, the volunteer army adopted the combat strategy of internal operations, luring the enemy deep into the enemy, and defeating them one by one. They made full use of the darkness of night and terrain to secretly engage the enemy, dared to cut off the enemy’s retreat, interspersed attacks, and divided and surrounded the enemy, giving the enemy an annihilating blow, and finally won the battle and reversed the entire situation in one fell swoop. This shows that for a party that is temporarily unable to seize comprehensive control of the battlefield in combat, as long as it is good at exploiting the enemy’s weaknesses and cleverly reducing the enemy’s sharp attack momentum, it can still seek the initiative to win in difficult and difficult situations and achieve the goal of annihilation warfare.

　　In the information age, wars are fought on vast battlefields, both visible and invisible. In addition to the traditional battlefields of land, sea and air, they are also further extended to deep sea, space, electromagnetic, network, intelligence, biology and other space fields, presenting a complex situation. The armies of the world’s powerful countries have taken the seizure of comprehensive control and the initiative in war as important indicators and necessary ways to build their army and defeat their opponents. Dimensionality reduction strikes have become a must-have in battlefield confrontations. In recent years, the US military’s foreign aggression has relied on the battlefield comprehensive control dominated by the advantages of air and space control and information control. However, we must also see that no matter how powerful the opponent is, there will be fatal weaknesses. Even if it is difficult for the party with relatively backward weapons and equipment to fully seize the battlefield comprehensive control, it can still “attack the incapable with the capable” in the local battlefield, seek local combat initiative, and thus win the local annihilation war, and use the local initiative to drive the overall initiative, and use asymmetric single control to help seize local comprehensive control and achieve final victory.

　　In today’s era, we must accelerate the construction of all aspects of the military and step up the forging of capabilities and means to seize comprehensive control and take the initiative on the battlefield. We must also follow the winning mechanism of modern warfare, flexibly use “total war”, “cognitive war”, “cross-domain war”, “intelligent war” and other tactics, use dimensionality reduction strikes, asymmetric strikes and other tactics, turn disadvantages into advantages, turn passivity into initiative, control combat control by “attacking the incapable with the able”, and win the war of annihilation.

　　Accurately releasing energy is the key to winning a war of annihilation

　　Traditional warfare is restricted by factors such as command and communication, mobility, firepower speed, and weather conditions. The use of forces is often limited to a certain combat area. There is little change in combat command and troop actions, and offensive and defensive actions are relatively clear. In the past, annihilation warfare was more often achieved through echelon (group) deployment, continuous attack (resistance), layer-by-layer capture (defense), combined with interspersed detours, segmentation and encirclement, and cutting off the enemy’s flanks. For this reason, “concentrating superior forces and annihilating the enemy one by one” often becomes the fundamental principle and important way to plan annihilation warfare.

　　In the information age, the combat force structure has undergone major changes. With the emergence of space combat, intelligent combat, stealth combat forces, as well as a large number of new weaponry and equipment such as hypersonic aircraft and kinetic weapons, the military’s information power, mobility, and strike power have unprecedentedly increased, and the effectiveness of unmanned intelligent combat has become increasingly prominent. Although quantity and scale are still important criteria for measuring the combat effectiveness of an army, “newer, faster, more accurate, and smarter” has begun to become an important indicator for measuring an army’s ability to adapt to modern warfare. Correspondingly, scientifically and rationally organizing combat forces and focusing on the best to release combat effectiveness have become important links in winning modern annihilation wars.

　　Structural strength determines combat effectiveness, and advanced and applicable structural formation is an important prerequisite for multi-functional and powerful combat effectiveness. In the information age, only by jointly using new and old combat forces, realizing the organic integration of new quality capabilities and traditional capabilities, and then building a new force formation that integrates multiple capabilities, can we promote the overall optimization of the combat system and the aggregation of advantages, and accurately control the combat rhythm, combat time and space, combat operations and combat process. In the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Azerbaijan adopted a flexible formation mode for manned and unmanned combat forces, using low-cost An-2 drones to lure the Armenian air defense system to open fire, and followed up with Habib-2 anti-radar drones and TB-2 reconnaissance and strike drones to destroy more than a dozen air defense systems on the Armenian side in one fell swoop, and then calmly defeated the Armenian ground armored forces.

　　In today’s era, as the status and role of combat operations such as network and electronic warfare, air and space attacks, and unmanned combat become more prominent, more attention should be paid to scientific design and rational organization of troops and weapons, so as to achieve the effect of clenching fingers into a fist through the accumulation of quality and integration of efficiency, and fight a war of annihilation that is quick to strike and quick to retreat, and wins with precision.

現代國語（繁體）：

《立足戰爭演變把握「慎重初戰」》

寫在前面

在我軍戰史上，打殲滅戰是最鮮明、最重要的作戰指導思想之一。早在土地革命戰爭時期，基於「保存自己，消滅敵人」這場戰爭目的，我軍明確提出作戰中基本的方針是打殲滅戰。此後在不同歷史時期，根據環境、情勢和任務的不同，我軍在作戰指導上既保持了高度的靈活機動，又堅決貫徹打殲滅戰的原則，不斷對作戰理論予以豐富發展，在世界戰爭史上寫下了一個以弱勝強的經典戰例。

進入資訊時代，戰爭形態、戰場環境、軍事科技和戰爭機理等已發生重大變化，傳統的殲滅戰理論如何適應時代之變，揚我之長、擊敵之短並創新發展，是我們這代軍人必須回答好的時代課題。

剝奪敵方戰力是打好殲滅戰的關鍵

在長期革命戰爭實踐中，我軍在數量、規模和裝備上常常處於劣勢。為挫敵銳氣、奪取主動、克敵制勝，在強調慎重初戰的同時，十分注重籌劃和打好殲滅戰，以迅速削弱敵方戰略優勢。由此，“傷其十指，不如斷其一指”，徹底剝奪敵方作戰能力，力避打成消耗戰、擊潰戰，也成為衡量殲滅戰成敗和作戰綜合效益的關鍵指標。傳統條件下的作戰，往往是兵力兵器在同一時空的物理疊加，強調以硬殺傷為主要方式，戰鬥力強弱主要透過機動、火力、防護等參數表現。與之相應，迅速有效消滅敵有生力量，成為攻心奪志、瓦解敵方最有效的手段。

進入資訊時代，資訊力以指數級方式推動戰鬥力衡量標準發生位移，在一躍成為資訊化戰場主導要素的同時，強力推動作戰力量與預警探測、偵察情報、指揮控制、後裝保障等要素有機融合，交戰雙方呈現全系統全要素對抗之勢。資訊化戰場不再單純強調兵力兵器時空集中以壓制打擊敵方，而是注重依托網路資訊體系，透過搶佔資訊空間、爭奪資訊優勢，使敵“看不清、聯不上、打不準”，進而全盤剝奪敵方戰力。在科索沃戰爭中，在遭受北約78天持續空中打擊後，南聯盟軍隊有生力量儘管沒有遭受重大損失，但由於戰爭物質基礎和偵察預警、指揮控制、防空反導體係等被敵毀癱，始終處於被動挨打境地，被迫簽訂城下之盟。

當今時代，摧毀敵方戰爭關鍵支持要素，剝奪其持續作戰的客觀物質基礎，瓦解其遂行戰爭意志，既是殲滅戰追求震懾效應、剝奪敵方戰力的重要選項，也是殲滅戰達成作戰企圖、制勝對手的必要途徑。

擊要害破體係是打好殲滅戰的重心

一直以來，虎口拔牙、擊敵要害既是考驗指戰員膽略勇氣、指揮藝術的重要指標，也是克敵制勝、達成殲滅戰目標的有效手段。解放戰爭期間遼沈戰役的胡家窩棚戰鬥，東北野戰軍3縱經過大膽穿插、滲透、分割，首先搗毀了廖耀湘兵團指揮部，迅速陷敵於土崩瓦解、潰不成軍的境地。但同時我們也應當看到，因為軍事技術水準、武器裝備效能的製約，在傳統作戰中，要對敵指揮機構等核心目標和重點防禦部位實施準確打擊，往往存在諸多現實難題，缺乏「直搗黃龍」的有效手段。可以說，傳統殲滅戰仍是殲滅對方有生力量。這也使得在傳統作戰中，衡量對比雙方兵力兵器數量與規模，始終是設計作戰進程、考量作戰成敗的重要因素。

資訊時代，一方面，環境情勢、戰爭思維發生了深刻變化，那種以擴充兵力規模換取作戰效能提高，進而透過大量殲滅敵方重兵集團奪取戰爭勝利的必要性和可能性越來越小；另一方面，精確導引、無人智慧等新型武器裝備在強大資訊網路、空天偵察能力加持下，可以更快捷精準地實施“斬首行動”“定點清除”，迅速達成殲滅戰目標。抓住敵作戰體系關鍵節點及部位，實施精確打擊和結構破壞，在減少附帶損傷的同時癱瘓敵作戰體系、達成作戰目標的作戰模式，越發受到推崇。由此，指揮中心、通訊樞紐、雷達陣地、網路節點等，則成為交戰雙方重點防護的敏感部位及尋隙打擊的要害。在伊拉克戰爭中，美軍對伊軍全面展開了結構癱瘓式作戰，透過對伊拉克軍政首腦實施“斬首行動”，對伊軍通信指揮、防空系統進行“定點清除”，全程置伊軍於完全被動挨打境地，戰爭進程得以加快。

當今時代，伴隨資訊科技與戰爭實踐的快速發展，「體系破擊」等正成為現代作戰理論的關鍵詞，並逐步推動作戰模式整體轉型，不僅成為戰爭制勝的新方式新手段，也成為打贏現代殲滅戰的重要途徑。

掌控作戰制權是打好殲滅戰的樞紐

以往戰爭實踐中，我軍面對的作戰環境相對單一，戰場主要在陸地展開。儘管相較於對手武器裝備我軍常處於劣勢，但透過發掘自身優勢、利用敵方弱點、主動尋找戰機，往往能夠以弱勝強、克敵制勝。在抗美援朝戰爭第二次戰役中，志願軍部隊透過採取內線作戰、誘敵深入、各個擊破的作戰方針，充分利用夜暗、地形等條件隱蔽接敵，敢於斷敵退路、穿插襲擊、分割圍殲，予敵殲滅性打擊，最終取得戰役勝利，一舉扭轉整個戰局。這表明，對於作戰中一時難以奪控戰場綜合製權的一方，只要善於利用敵方弱點，巧妙消減敵方攻擊銳勢，仍可在難局、困局中求得制勝先機，達成殲滅戰目標。

資訊時代，戰爭展開於有形無形廣大戰場，除了傳統的陸、海、空戰場，也進一步向深海、太空、電磁、網路、智慧、生物等太空領域擴展延伸，呈現出錯綜複雜的態勢。世界強國軍隊紛紛把奪控綜合製權、佔據戰爭主動，作為軍隊建設、制勝對手的重要指標和必要途徑，降維打擊成為戰場對決的必殺技。美軍近年來對外侵略就是依仗以製空天權和製資訊權優勢主導的戰場綜合製權。但是我們也要看到，對手再強大也會有致命的弱點，武器裝備相對落後的一方，即便難以全面奪控戰場綜合製權，卻依然可以在局部戰場“以能擊不能”，求得局部作戰主動，從而打贏局部殲滅戰，並以局部主動帶動全局主動，以非對稱的單項制權助力奪取局部綜合製權，並取得最終勝利。

當今時代，固然要加快軍隊各項建設，加緊鍛造奪控綜合製權、佔據戰場主動的能力手段，更要遵循現代戰爭制勝機理，靈活運用“總體戰”“認知戰”“跨域戰” 「智能戰」等戰法，以降維打擊、非對稱打擊等打法，化劣勢為勝勢，變被動為主動，在「以能擊不能」中掌控作戰制權，打贏殲滅戰。

聚優精準釋能是打好殲滅戰的要則

傳統作戰，受指揮通信、機動能力、火力速度、天候氣像等因素影響制約，力量運用往往局限於一定的作戰區域，作戰指揮和部隊行動臨機變化小，攻防行動比較分明。以往的殲滅戰，更多的還是透過梯隊（群隊）式部署，以及連續攻擊（抗擊）、層層奪佔（防守），結合穿插迂迴、分割包圍、斷敵側後等手段達成作戰目標。正因此，「集中優勢兵力，各個殲滅敵人」往往成為籌劃殲滅戰的根本遵循與重要途徑。

資訊時代，作戰力量結構發生重大變化。伴隨太空作戰、智慧作戰、隱身作戰力量，以及高超音波速飛行器、動能武器等新型武器裝備的大量湧現，軍隊資訊力、機動力、打擊力空前增大，無人智能作戰效能日益突出。儘管數量、規模仍是衡量一支軍隊戰鬥力的重要標準，但“更新、更快、更準、更智”，已開始成為衡量一支軍隊對現代戰爭適應能力的重要指標。與之相應，科學合理編組作戰力量，聚優釋放作戰效能，成為打贏現代殲滅戰的重要關節。

結構力決定戰鬥力，結構編成先進適用是戰鬥力多能、強大的重要前提。資訊時代，只有透過新舊作戰力量的聯合運用，實現新質能力與傳統能力的有機融合，進而建構集多種能力於一體的新型力量編組，才能促進作戰體系整體優化與優勢聚合，精準控製作戰節奏、作戰時空、作戰行動和作戰過程。在2020年的納卡衝突中，阿塞拜疆對有人和無人作戰力量採取了靈活編組模式，用價格低廉的安-2無人機引誘亞美尼亞防空系統開火，用哈比-2反雷達無人機和TB -2察打一體無人機跟進打擊，一舉摧毀亞方十餘套防空系統，進而從容打掉亞方地面裝甲部隊。

當今時代，隨著網電作戰、空天襲擊、無人作戰等作戰行動地位作用的進一步凸顯，更應注重科學設計、合理編組兵力兵器，透過質量累加、效能融合，達到攥指成拳的效果，打好快打快收、精打製勝的殲滅戰。

中國軍事資源：https://military.cctv.com/2022/07/07/ARTIWv2oVWmzfSsX9KKVoDPW220888.shtml

來源：解放軍報 | 2022年07月07日 08:OO