Chinese People’s Liberation Army Insights into the Evolving Trends of Cognitive Warfare
外文音譯：
Cognition is the process by which people obtain, process and apply information and knowledge. At present, the cognitive domain has gradually become a new battlefield for competition, and cognitive warfare has gradually attracted attention from all countries. With the development of the technological revolution and the expansion of warfare practice, cognitive warfare is showing an accelerated evolution trend.
Cognitive technology is becoming a fundamental driving force in the evolution of warfare. Technology changes the form of warfare and also changes the way of cognitive warfare. If the large-scale popularization of information networks has promoted the information domain to become a combat domain, and the exponential growth of data and network scale is a sign of the maturity of the information domain, then the large-scale application of cognitive technology and the continuous iterative development of cognitive technology will become A sign of maturity in driving cognitive warfare. In the future, technologies such as cognitive environment, cognitive perception, cognitive control, and artificial intelligence will reflect the transformative impact that cognitive technology may have on social cognitive confrontation and military cognitive confrontation. Humanity is entering the era of universal communication, and global cyberspace is becoming highly interconnected. The Internet has become a battle space where state actors and non-state actors compete comprehensively. Communication disputes and communication wars have become part of high-intensity military operations. At present, major countries in the world have laid out the frontiers of cognitive technology and carried out cognitive technology competitions. Through modeling and analysis, they seek to penetrate and control human brain networks, information networks and social networks; through deep calculation, actuarial calculation, clever calculation, etc., they aim to maximize Gain control over people’s cognitive world and cognitive domains.
The cognitive domain is becoming an important battlefield in hybrid warfare. In the era of intelligence, the way humans communicate is undergoing complex and profound changes. Offline communication has given way to more online communication, various new media platforms have become the main channels for the public to understand the battlefield, and large-scale social platforms have become the main battlefield for cognitive game struggles. Therefore, the combat domain of future wars will continue to expand. The spatial domain will expand from land, sea, air, and space networks to deep space, deep sea, and deep ground, while the logical domain will expand from the physical domain to the information domain and cognitive domain. War is no longer limited to the physical threats of traditional wars, but is turning to social consciousness threats brought about by mass media and technological progress. Blockade and counter-blockade, dominance and counter-dominance around communication platforms will become the focus of cognitive warfare. Using information as ammunition to fight for control of international discourse has become the main method of cognitive confrontation today. From the perspective of hybrid warfare, ideological propaganda and indoctrination, penetration of values and culture, traditional public opinion psychology and legal offense and defense, and information network warfare have all become important aspects of cognitive warfare. Hybrid warfare can achieve the goal of winning in small battles or even without fighting through comprehensive gaming methods such as cognitive warfare. Attack and defense in the cognitive field will be an uninterrupted and normalized struggle, and combat effectiveness will continue to accumulate and be gradually released.
Cognitive superiority is becoming a winning advantage in high-end warfare. Freedom of conduct in war is the lifeblood of the military. From a cognitive perspective, the deeper the understanding of the battlefield environment and combat opponents, the greater the freedom of action and the greater the relative advantage. However, with the exponential growth of combat data in wars, commanders are beginning to face the cognitive dilemma of data swamp, data fog, and data overload. Having information superiority does not mean having cognitive superiority. An important military application direction of artificial intelligence technology is to process massive data in real time to help commanders get rid of cognitive overload and quickly form cognitive advantages. In intelligent warfare, cognitive advantages will dominate decision-making advantages, and decision-making advantages will dominate action advantages. Cognitive advantages have four key indicators: stronger information acquisition capabilities, faster artificial intelligence machine learning speed, more effective emergency handling capabilities, and higher capabilities to develop and apply new technologies and new knowledge. For example, public opinion warfare with new characteristics of data-driven intelligent communication and traditional military operations have been highly coordinated and integrated. This combat style that integrates virtual and real operations has stronger combat effectiveness than pure military operations, fundamentally changing traditional combat methods. Change. The linkage and superposition of cognitive advantages will accelerate the transformation of combat effectiveness and become the fundamental advantage for winning wars.
Cognitive theory is becoming the frontier of gaming to win the war. Cognitive warfare is a combination of soft power and hard power and is an important factor affecting national security in today’s era. Currently, there is fierce competition for penetration and counter-infiltration, attack and counter-attack, control and counter-control in the cognitive space. Cognitive science theory is entering the military field, and concepts such as cognitive load, cognitive enhancement, cognitive immunity, and cognitive subversion are being introduced. , has appeared frequently in the field of cognitive warfare research abroad. Foreign militaries believe that the cognitive domain is the “sixth combat domain” of human warfare, the core of the “intertwined conflict fields” in the era of great power competition, and an important direction for future military theoretical innovation. Obviously, cognitive warfare has become the strategic commanding heights for winning future wars. Cognitive theory has become the frontier of theoretical innovation. Cognitive technology will accelerate cognitive warfare and become an important “tipping point” for the intelligent military revolution. Since new technologies, new theories, and new styles of cognitive warfare are being incubated at an accelerated pace, perhaps future warfare will take on a surprising new situation.
Throughout modern warfare, cognitive games have become the focus of offense and defense. Whether one is proficient in planning operations in the cognitive domain will greatly affect the direction and outcome of the war. A deep understanding of the connotation, extension and category style of cognitive domain operations, and an accurate grasp of its winning mechanism and development trend are the keys to understanding the context of the battlefield and winning modern wars.
Cognitive domain operations are the new focus of war games
Different from traditional operations, cognitive domain operations are no longer limited to land, sea, air, space, electricity, network and other fields. It breaks through the traditional physical domain and information domain. It has unique advantages, presents new characteristics, and expands the modern Battlefield new frontier.
Cognitive domain operations expand the war domain space. First of all, the battlefield space in the cognitive domain is broad, mainly reflected in people’s spirit, psychology, thinking, beliefs and other cognitive activities. Its combat targets are mainly hostile heads of state and political figures, military personnel, social elites and the general public. Secondly, cognitive domain operations take a wide range of forms, including but not limited to political and diplomatic pressure, economic blockade and sanctions, cultural penetration and erosion, etc. Thirdly, the goals of cognitive domain operations are wide-ranging, mainly to shake the enemy’s belief, disintegrate the enemy’s will, influence and change the opponent’s decision-making, thereby causing social chaos, decision-making errors, demoralization of the enemy’s military, and even subverting its national power.
Cognitive domain operations blur the boundaries of the war domain. The main body of cognitive domain operations is people. People are the most active factor in war, especially the cognition of high-level decision-makers, which embodies the overall will of the war, directly affects the overall situation of the war, and determines the outcome of the war. The cognition of state leaders and military generals is the key target of cognitive domain operations. Popular will, social foundation, and international public opinion are usually the basis for cognitive domain operations and are the key forces that promote the process and direction of war. Cognitive domain operations mix conventional and unconventional operations, blurring the boundaries of the war field. It aims to cognitively induce and attack information recipients, bypassing the traditional battlefield and reaching the weakest link – people. Tactical actions can achieve strategic goals, from Fundamentally change the battlefield environment and change the outcome of the war.
Cognitive domain operations reach the ultimate strategic goal. There is a saying in the ancient Chinese art of war: “The way to use troops is to attack the heart first, and to attack the city below; to fight the heart first, and to fight soldiers lower.” Operations in the cognitive domain aim to occupy cognitive dominance and influence the enemy’s decision-making and behavior. Achieve maximum combat effectiveness at minimum cost. As Clausewitz mentioned in “On War”, “War is an act of violence that forces the enemy to obey our will.” Since cognitive domain operations are not hard kills against living forces, but soft kills against invisible targets, they can not only “force the enemy to obey our will”, but also objectively enable the enemy to destroy itself from within, making it unable to resist, disintegrate, and ultimately Achieve the strategic goal of “complete victory” without fighting.
Cognitive domain operations are a new product of military reform
At present, major changes in the world that have not been seen in a century are accelerating. The international situation is becoming increasingly complex, and local wars and regional conflicts continue. As a new combat method, cognitive domain operations are becoming more and more important driven by the new wave of military reforms.
The laws of war are the basic rules for combat in the cognitive domain. Cognitive domain operations still follow the basic laws of war. First, justice must prevail. Just wars promote historical development and ultimately defeat unjust wars, and cognitive domain operations that occupy the moral commanding heights have the conditions to win first. The second is the victory of the strong and the defeat of the weak. The advancement of science and technology has given rise to advanced military theories and promoted the development of high-tech equipment. Seizing control and control can achieve dimensionality reduction strikes and disintegrate enemy forces. Third, subjective guidance is consistent with objective reality. Cognitive domain operations must be based on a certain objective material basis. The battlefield environment must be comprehensively considered, the situations of both parties must be weighed, and favorable decisions must be made. Fourth, key operations affect the overall situation. In network-centered system operations, the cognitive domain often becomes the most critical link, and its success or failure can determine the battle situation.
Theoretical innovation is the basic support for cognitive domain operations. In recent years, the US military has successively proposed new combat theories such as “hybrid warfare”, “mosaic warfare” and “gray zone conflict”. It regards cognitive domain operations as the main combat method and has formed a relatively mature theory. The Russian army has also developed its own set of hybrid warfare methods in long-term military practice, especially in the Syrian battlefield, where it skillfully used “Gerasimov” tactics to deal with “hybrid warfare.” Japan has also vigorously developed its military power in recent years. In its new version of the “Defense White Paper”, it first mentioned the concept of “domain transversal” operations, aiming to break through traditional fields and regard new fields such as the cognitive domain as the key direction of its military power development, making it more proactive. and extraversion.
Military practice is an important basis for cognitive domain operations. Judging from the recent local wars, cognitive domain warfare has become the main combat method of modern warfare and has achieved high combat effectiveness. The confrontation between cognitive warfare and counter-cognitive warfare is quite fierce. In 2010, the United States and other Western countries launched a cognitive war, hyped up the Tunisian democratic movement and created the “Arab Spring”, which plunged the Middle East into chaos and allowed terrorist organizations to take advantage of the opportunity to wreak havoc. The United States attempted to consolidate its hegemony by overthrowing the Egyptian government, launching a war in Libya, and intervening in the Syrian war. In 2014, the Russian army took control of Crimea through a combination of strategies, multi-dimensional breakthroughs, and public opinion building. Its cognitive domain operations also have very distinctive characteristics.
Cognitive domain operations are a new direction in war planning
With the continuous development of high and new technologies and their widespread application in the military field, the shape of future wars will evolve at an accelerated pace, and the complexity and unknown nature of wars will increase dramatically. To this end, we should plan in advance, coordinate scientifically, strengthen the construction of combat capabilities in the cognitive domain, deeply integrate into the future battlefield, and effectively control the initiative in future wars.
Promote research on the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations. As an important combat method in future wars, the status and role of cognitive domain operations will be more prominent, and the development prospects will be broader. Controlling cognitive power has become an important part of seizing war control. To win future wars, we must keep up with the trends in the development of war forms, vigorously study the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations, use theoretical innovation to drive innovation in tactics, and seek advantages and opportunities.
Strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive capabilities in cognitive domain operations. From individuals to organizations to countries, the impact of cognitive domain operations spans all time and space and all elements, spans different combat fields, and affects the entire combat process. In future wars, commanders and combatants will face huge cognitive offensive and defensive challenges. Seizing control of cognitive power, and then seizing comprehensive battlefield control, will become the key point of control in future wars. We should adhere to demand-driven efforts, strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive forces in cognitive domain operations, build a cognitive domain combat system that integrates offense and defense, peacetime and war, and multi-dimensional integration, establish and improve drill and evaluation mechanisms, and continuously improve capabilities through long-term military practice.
Accelerate the research and development of high-tech cognitive domain operations. Currently, with the rapid development of high-tech technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, and cloud computing, the acquisition of open source information has become more convenient and efficient. Cognitive domain operations are increasingly characterized by fast start-up, low cost, and high efficiency. In addition, with the quiet development of emerging technologies such as neuroscience and brain science, it can be inferred that cognitive warfare weapons will become increasingly abundant and widely used in future wars. We should keep up with the development of the times, plan and design in advance, vigorously develop cutting-edge technologies oriented to seizing cognitive advantages, and promote the update of cognitive domain combat concepts and methods, so as to seize the initiative in future wars.
Chinese Military From “Cyber Warfare” to “Mosaic Warfare”
Theory is the precursor to action. Strengthening innovation in combat concepts and promoting innovation in combat guidance have always been important ways for militaries around the world to cultivate military advantages. In recent years, the U.S. military has successively proposed cutting-edge combat theories such as “cyber warfare” and “mosaic warfare” in order to realize that the “production relationship” of combat mode can be more adaptable to the development of “productivity” of combat capabilities. By comparing and analyzing these two combat theories, the world can get a glimpse of the changes in the US military’s combat capability building thinking, especially the understanding of the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare”, so that it can be targeted and find effective checks and balances.
● From threat response to war design——
Actively shape and promote the improvement of combat capabilities
“Threat-based” or “capability-based” are two basic ways to build military combat capabilities. “Threat-based” embodies demand traction and focuses on solving practical problems in the near and medium term, which is the basic law that should be followed in the construction of military combat capabilities; “capability-based” embodies goal traction, aims at future strategic missions, and supports strategic concepts with new combat theories, which is the key to military operations. The only way to achieve innovation and transcendence in capabilities. The development from “cyber warfare” to “mosaic warfare” reflects the differences and evolution of the inherent laws of the above two approaches, and also reflects the changes in the US military’s ideas and concepts for promoting combat capability building in recent years.
The concept begins to change. Cyberspace was originally created to solve human communication needs. Later, it gradually evolved into a new combat domain independent of land, sea, air and space. From this, the “cyberspace” with the core of fighting for cyberspace dominance was derived. war”. In contrast, “mosaic warfare” is a new operational concept actively developed and designed by the US military in order to maintain its strategic advantage and directly target competitors. Its formation process reflects the integration of demand-driven and capability-driven, strategic, proactive, and Traction is more prominent.
New ideas for technology application. “Cyber warfare” emphasizes the development of new generation technologies to support the transformation and implementation of combat concepts. “Mosaic warfare” breaks out of this model and does not overemphasize the research and development of new generation equipment technology. It pays more attention to the rapid transformation of common military and civilian technologies and the incremental iteration of mature technologies. The basic idea is to “mosaic” various combat system units into single-function, flexibly assembled units based on existing equipment and through module upgrades and intelligent transformation in accordance with the application concepts of service platforms such as online ride-hailing and crowdfunding development. , easy-to-replace “building blocks” or “pixels” to build a dynamically coordinated, highly autonomous, and seamlessly integrated combat system, embodying new technology-driven ideas.
Path development new design. “Cyber warfare” is an accompanying concept of the cyberspace. Wherever the cyberspace develops, “cyber warfare” will follow. Generally speaking, we first consider the “objective” material conditions before making the “subjective” conceptual design. , has strong dependence on path development. “Mosaic warfare” first evolved from “subjective” to “objective”. By developing a force design model that can dynamically adjust the functional structure, it can adapt to different operational needs and changes in the battlefield environment.
It can be seen that compared with previous combat concepts such as “cyber warfare”, “mosaic warfare” has clearer goals, more mature technology, and more reliable paths, reflecting the change in thinking actively shaped by the US military.
● From network center to decision-making center——
Group intelligence to achieve optimal energy release of the system
Artificial intelligence technology is a key variable in the information age and a core increment in the development of the “mosaic warfare” system. “Cyber warfare” emphasizes “network center”, while “mosaic warfare” tightly focuses on the core of artificial intelligence technology, adjusts the key to victory from “network center” to “decision center”, and changes the combat system architecture from system level to Platform-level alliances are transformed into functional-level and element-level integration, seeking to use group intelligence technology to achieve the optimal release of system energy on the premise that the network is fully energy-gathered, giving new connotations to the winning mechanism of war in the intelligent era.
Use “fast” to control “slow” and gain the upper hand in cognition. In future wars, the battlefield situation will change rapidly, and the weight of the time element will continue to rise. “Fast” versus “slow” can create a nearly dimensionally reduced combat strike effect. “Mosaic Warfare” uses data information technology and artificial intelligence technology to improve the single-loop decision-making speed of one’s own “OODA” loop, expand the breadth of parallel decision-making, reduce the granularity of group-loop decision-making, speed up the progress of system operations, and overall create a model that is always one step ahead of others. The “first move” posture aims to firmly control the dominance of cognitive decision-making on the battlefield.
Use “low” to control “high” and accumulate cost advantages. Different from the traditional combat concept of pursuing high-end weapon platforms, “mosaic warfare” focuses on using artificial intelligence technology to tap the potential and increase efficiency of existing weapon platforms and combat resources. By loading and running intelligent algorithms and specific functional modules on many mid- to low-end weapon platforms, they can achieve combat performance comparable to that of high-end weapon platforms. This overall improves the cost-effectiveness of the input-output of the weapon platform, thereby accumulating cost advantages.
Use “dispersion” to control “gathering” and seek sustainable survival. “Mosaic warfare” emphasizes the use of decentralized ideas and asymmetric checks and balances, using an open system architecture to decentrally configure various functions such as reconnaissance, positioning, communication, and strike on various manned/unmanned platforms to achieve Distributed deployment of power. At the same time, intelligent algorithms are used to improve the self-organization, self-coordination, and independent attack capabilities of each platform, so as to achieve centralized firepower. When some combat platforms are eliminated, disrupted, or stripped away, the entire combat system can still operate normally, thus enhancing the battlefield survivability of the force cluster.
Use “dynamic” to control “quiet” and improve system flexibility. “Mosaic warfare” emphasizes further breaking through barriers in each combat domain. By turning fixed “kill chains” in different combat domains into dynamically reconfigurable “kill nets”, the “OODA” large ring is disassembled into small rings, and a single ring is differentiated into multiple rings. According to changes in the combat process and combat needs, rely on intelligent networking to realize on-the-go splitting, on-the-go deployment, and on-the-go combination of combat forces. In this way, on the one hand, it can enhance the flexibility and adaptability of the combat system; on the other hand, it can also offset the node aggregation effect of complex networks, making it difficult for opponents to find key nodes to defeat one’s own system.
“Mosaic warfare” provides a reference prototype for intelligent warfare. But at the same time, as an idealized force design and application framework, “mosaic warfare” also needs supporting support such as technology, doctrine, and policies that are closely related to it. There is still a long way to go before it can be fully realized. Compared with traditional warfare, The situation of system coexistence will exist for a long time.
● From element integration to system reorganization——
Dynamic structure to enhance the flexibility of the combat system
Structure and relationships often determine functions and properties. “Cyber warfare” and “mosaic warfare” are built on the same material foundation in the information age and follow the same evolutionary paradigm, but the principles and effects of system construction are different. The architecture formed by “cyber warfare” can be statically deconstructed, while “mosaic warfare” dynamically combines functional units according to certain construction rules to form an elastic architecture with self-organizing and adaptive characteristics, similar to a “dynamic black box”. Conventional The means are difficult to track and predict. This flexible structure often “emerges” new capabilities to empower and increase the efficiency of the combat system.
The integrated development of network and cloud makes combat space and time more dynamic and malleable. The Internet and cloud are the basic environment for the operation of the information combat system. They have reshaped the process elements of intelligence, command, attack, and support in traditional operations, and at the same time derived new combat time and space. “Cyber warfare” mainly focuses on the cyberspace, and its combat time and space are relatively static. “Mosaic warfare” is not limited to a single combat space. Under the development trend of information infrastructure network moving with the cloud and integrating cloud and network, the tangible and intangible space can be further hinged, the boundaries of combat space and time are more flexible, and the allocation of combat resources is more flexible. The combat architecture is more dynamic.
Data flows across domains, making combat control more seamlessly coordinated. In the command and control link, “cyber warfare” focuses on the command and control of combat units by joint combat command institutions, and the cross-domain exchange and flow of data is mainly concentrated on theater battlefields. “Mosaic warfare” further lowers the level of joint operations to the tactical end. Through the independent cross-domain exchange and seamless flow of data at the tactical level, various data islands can be gathered into data clusters on demand, thereby generating significant “overflow” “” effect makes the dynamic, discrete, agile, and parallel characteristics of the combat command and control loop more obvious, and is more conducive to realizing agile connection and efficient coordinated actions of various combat units on demand.
The algorithm penetrates all dimensions, making the system run more autonomously and efficiently. Algorithms are the mapping of human consciousness in cyberspace, forming two basic forms: compiled codes transformed by intentions and neural networks transformed by knowledge. In “Cyber Warfare”, compiled code is used extensively and neural networks are only used locally. In the “mosaic war”, the algorithm has expanded to two key functions: shaping rules and providing engines, and the breadth and depth of its application are more prominent. The shaping rules mainly focus on compiled code, supplemented by neural networks, to construct the process framework and operating logic of the “mosaic warfare” system, laying a structural foundation for its uncertainty, adaptability and “emergent” capabilities; providing the engine mainly integrates intelligence The algorithm model is distributed to edge elements for operation, forming a knowledge diffusion effect, thereby comprehensively improving the intelligent autonomous combat capabilities of the “mosaic warfare” system.
The independent release of energy at the edge makes the combat style more flexible and diverse. The edge is an abstract model of various manned/unmanned combat functional units and is also the direct source of the “emergence” of system capabilities. In the “cyber warfare” system, edge elements are closely coupled with the superior and subordinate command and control processes and are in a state of precise control. In the “Mosaic Warfare” system, the perception, interaction, reasoning, and decision-making capabilities of edge elements are greatly improved. Its “OODA” loop does not need to be linked back to the higher-level command organization, which is conducive to supporting the formation of a decentralized combination of high-low and manned/unmanned. The optimized combat cluster form can give edge elements more self-organizing authority, which significantly enhances battlefield confrontation advantages.
It can be seen that if “cyber warfare” is called a sophisticated war machine, “mosaic warfare” can be regarded as a complex “ecology” that can stimulate the dynamic growth of combat capabilities. New technologies generated by network clouds, data, algorithms, and edge devices Changes promote the formation of a dynamic and complex “architecture”. This structure in turn regulates elements, platforms, and systems in reverse, constantly emerging new capabilities, and playing an important role in empowering and evolving the combat system.
● From system breach to compound confrontation——
Analyze the pros and cons and seek effective checks and balances
“Mosaic warfare” represents, to a certain extent, the possible direction for the development of future joint operations. We should fully study and grasp the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare”, shape the information and communication field as a new domain that breaks the time and space boundaries of traditional wars, create a new concept of cloud-enabled operations, and build a strong defense information infrastructure support capability. Highlight the security and defense capabilities of military information networks, enhance the basic support capabilities for the operation of strategic and campaign command institutions, and continuously improve the network information system.
On the other hand, the emergence of the “mosaic warfare” theory makes it difficult for traditional combat methods to seize and control limited target nodes to achieve the system-breaking effect of destroying points and breaking links. However, it should be noted that any system has its inherent contradictions. Even the seemingly “impeccable” decentralized structure of “mosaic warfare” can still find ways to effectively crack it. For example, grasp the complexity characteristics of the system, use its correlation and dependence, highlight the functional suppression of the communication network, build a network and electricity composite attack path, and achieve the disassembly and isolation of each unit of the combat system; grasp the dissipative characteristics of its structure, Make use of its dependence on external information to highlight the camouflage and misleading of information data, prompting the combat system to transform into abnormal states such as information closure and information overload; grasp its group autonomy characteristics, use its dependence on key technologies to highlight the confrontation against intelligent algorithms Reduce efficiency and inhibit the intelligent driving force of each combat unit; grasp its functional non-linear characteristics, take advantage of its unknown vulnerabilities, highlight differentiated strike assessment on the battlefield, and explore and discover imbalance points in the combat system with higher efficiency and faster speed , looking for key weaknesses in the system to break.
With the continuous development of science and technology, the form of war has entered the era of information warfare. Information has become the dominant element of combat effectiveness. Both combatants are engaged in fierce confrontation around the collection, transmission and processing of information. Cyberspace is a channel for the transmission of data and information. The bridge between modern combat units.
The U.S. military was the first to militarize cyberspace. In 2008, the United States established the Air Force Cyber Command and defined cyberspace as the entire electromagnetic spectrum space, extending cognition and practice from the narrow information domain to the broad cyber domain. . In January 2018, the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) released “TP 525-8-6 U.S. Army Cyberspace and Electronic Warfare Operational Concept 2025-2040”, which describes how the U.S. Army will operate in cyberspace and electronic warfare. operate in the electromagnetic spectrum to meet the challenges of future operational environments. Compared with other traditional combat domains, what impact will cyberspace have on future operations? In the context of future integrated joint operations, what breakthroughs can it bring to multi-domain joint operations?
Mysterious – Cyberspace Operations
The fifth major area of information warfare. The term cyberspace first appeared in the 1982 Canadian science fiction novel “Fragments of the Holographic Rose”, which describes a cyberspace where the Internet and human consciousness are integrated. According to the U.S. Department of Defense Military Vocabulary Dictionary, cyberspace is a global domain within the information environment that consists of independent information technology infrastructure networks, including the Internet, telecommunications networks, various local area networks and computer systems, and embedded processors and controller. With the continuous development of network technology, cyberspace has expanded from computer networks to the invisible electromagnetic spectrum, which is a physical field in the electromagnetic environment. It includes not only computer networks as we usually recognize them, but also all physical systems that use various types of electromagnetic energy.
In addition, in modern warfare, cyberspace is a new field of information warfare. It has been listed by the US military as one of the five areas that are as important as land, sea, air and space and must maintain decisive advantages. It involves network warfare, information warfare, electronic warfare, space warfare, command and control warfare, C4ISR and other fields. It is a fifth-dimensional battle space that transcends the traditional four-dimensional battle space of land, sea, air and space. It is both relatively independent and embedded in other fields. Compared with traditional fields, cyberspace has the characteristics of blurred border boundaries, wide coverage, and complex and changeable situations.
Cyberspace operations transcend the limitations of time and space. Due to the lack of geographical boundaries and natural boundaries in the electromagnetic spectrum, cyberspace transcends the limitations of geographical boundaries, time and distance, allowing cyberspace operations to occur almost anywhere, across land, sea, space and air operations, integrating traditional In the four-dimensional combat space field, attacks on remote targets can be carried out instantly. Since the propagation speed of information in cyberspace is close to the speed of light, high-speed information transmission will greatly improve combat efficiency and capabilities, and provide the ability to make quick decisions, guide operations, and achieve expected combat effects. More importantly, according to operational needs, achieving military goals or military effects in or through cyberspace can be divided into two types: offensive cyber operations and defensive cyber operations.
Offensive cyber operations refer to preventing, weakening, interrupting, destroying or deceiving the enemy’s network in cyber space to ensure one’s own freedom of action in cyber space. Its main actions include the implementation of electronic system attacks, electromagnetic system blockade and attack , network attacks and infrastructure attacks, etc. Defensive cyber operations include activities to defend, detect, characterize, counter and mitigate cyberspace threat events, aiming to protect the U.S. Department of Defense network or other friendly networks, maintain the ability to passively and proactively exploit friendly cyberspace, and protect data , network and other specified system capabilities.
Electromagnetic warfare in cyberspace
Strategic deterrence, public opinion wins. In recent years, there have been an increasing number of cyber attacks against economic, political, military and other targets. Due to the characteristics of large scale, good concealment, and ability to attack infrastructure networks, these attacks have become an advantage for some countries in political conflicts. means of advantage. During the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Russia used cyberspace as its position and radio-electronic warfare as assistance to cut off the Ukrainian system in communications and interrupt the Ukrainian command; it resisted negative news in public opinion and released positive news; it paralyzed the enemy on the Internet. Use the enemy’s website to create panic, and then cooperate with the frontal attack of the troops to achieve the goal of quick victory.
Global layout, capturing enemies from thousands of miles away. In the process of establishing a cyberspace security framework dominated by its own country, the United States has mastered the cyberspace operations of its allies and established global military bases and cyberspace interconnectivity. Relevant intelligence personnel complete network presets through intelligence operations in peacetime, such as using the Internet and other means to monitor and collect enemy network data through intelligence analysis. Through network presets, when necessary, network vulnerabilities can be exploited to invade the enemy’s network, control the system, destroy data, etc., to achieve “taking the enemy’s life thousands of miles away.” In July 2010, the United States invaded Iran’s nuclear power plant through a certain worm virus and took control of its core equipment, greatly delaying Iran’s nuclear program.
Give full play to the advantages of asymmetric combat and improve combat benefits. The “Shute” plan was proposed by the U.S. Air Force to suppress the enemy’s air defense capabilities. It uses asymmetric combat theory to destroy the enemy’s air defense system. The core goal is to invade the enemy’s communications, radar, computer and other network power systems. In war, the “Shute” attack can invade the computer network of the enemy’s air defense early warning system and communication system through remote radio, and then attack and paralyze the enemy’s air defense system, or attack the enemy’s available electronic systems and network systems to break through the enemy’s network. Block, and then use corresponding professional algorithms (mainly “Trojan horse” viruses) to invade the enemy’s radar or network system, monitor or steal relevant information, and leak important information about the enemy’s combat plan, troop deployment, and weapons and equipment, thereby helping Adjust the combat plan, combat structure and weapon ratio to your own side to obtain the maximum benefits at the minimum cost.
The future development of cyberspace operations
Paying increasing attention to it, countries are vigorously developing it. As countries’ understanding deepens, developing cyber capabilities and winning cyber wars have become an important part of countries seeking military advantages and winning future wars. In 2015, based on comments and photos posted online by members of an “Islamic State” organization, the U.S. military used big data analysis and reconnaissance positioning, and finally destroyed an “Islamic State” command post within 22 hours. At present, the United States has established a Cyberspace Command, organized a cyberspace combat force, deepened research on combat theory, and developed preliminary cyberspace combat capabilities. Other countries have also launched cyber competitions. In order to strengthen its cyberspace combat capabilities, France established a new Information Systems Security Agency. The British government released the National Communications Security Strategy and announced the establishment of a Cybersecurity Office and a Cybersecurity Action Center. Japan has established a cyber warfare force mainly composed of computer experts, which shows that cyber space warfare has aroused the interest of more and more countries.
Integration of multiple technologies to enhance cyberspace combat capabilities. With the breakthrough of new technologies, big data technology, 5G technology, and artificial intelligence technology can be applied to cyberspace operations. Big data technology can store large amounts of data, collect complex types of data, and can quickly calculate and obtain useful information. It can speed up the execution of all aspects of cyberspace warfare and make it more accurate. 5G technology has the characteristics of low latency, high transmission and large capacity, making cyberspace warfare more threatening in a global environment and multi-domain coordinated operations. In addition, artificial intelligence deep learning, reasoning and other capabilities can be used to simulate cyberspace warfare. In the process, the weaknesses of one’s own weapon systems can be found and improved. Through the deep integration of these technologies, cyberspace can be built into an intelligent A network environment with high transmission and precision can create an intelligent brain for future information-based joint operations and grasp the initiative in future operations.
Effectively promote joint operations. The use of cross-domain information-based joint operations is essentially a new combat form that jointly achieves operational goals by establishing a stable and efficient cyberspace information activity situation based on the deployment of geographical space. The joint forces have different information capabilities. Achieve a high degree of sharing and deep integration to enhance real-time situational awareness, improve command efficiency, and improve integrated combat effectiveness. Cyber capabilities can not only serve a single service branch or unit, but can also prioritize the protection of strategic-level goals, organize cyber wars and operations of various arms with a high overall level, and plan cyber operations in land, sea, air, and space dimensions. battle target.
Future wars will be intelligent and systematic wars. The “joint information environment” is a strategic move to achieve “cross-domain collaboration” and build “global integrated operations” capabilities. With the continuous improvement and development of technology, cyberspace Operations will become one of the core operational domains, which will greatly improve the effectiveness of future systematic operations and provide important support for seeking information advantages and winning wars.
Judging from the latest local war practice, cognitive domain operations have become an important variable that profoundly affects the direction of war. In cognitive domain operations, all parties compete fiercely for control of public opinion, information guidance, and cognitive shaping. There are not only physical confrontations, but also competitions in virtual space, demonstrating the distinctive characteristics of “technology +” in the digital era. Exploring the way to win in cognitive domain operations is of great practical significance for controlling the initiative in cognitive domain operations and winning future wars.
Seizing control of the brain has become the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations
The brain is the material basis of all thinking activities and the command center that influences and controls human behavior changes. Feeling, perception and consciousness constitute the three aspects of the world that the brain reflects. How to win the right to control the brain has increasingly become the focus of research and attention by all warring parties in the field of cognitive domain operations.
Actively fight for sensory control. Feeling is the reaction caused by the characteristics of objective things in the human brain, and is the basis for various complex psychological processes. With the rapid development of brain science, molecular biology, neurochemistry and other disciplines, humans have gradually gained the ability to intervene and control the brain at the physiological level. According to foreign experimental results, inhaling oxytocin will make people more trusting of others and more empathetic, thereby affecting a person’s prosociality and moral performance. In future operations, the warring parties will use physical stimulation such as sound, light and electricity, or chemical drugs to act on the target’s hearing, vision, smell and other sensory systems. They may even directly act on the human brain to stimulate the target’s brain. Specific emotional reactions can achieve cognitive influence and control on the physiological level.
Effective competition for perceptual suppression. Perception is a psychological process formed on the basis of sensation and reflects the overall image and surface connection of objective things. Among them, the individual’s attitude, motivation, interest, as well as past experience and future expectations are the key variables that affect the individual’s perception of the perceptual target. During wartime, warring parties aim at the target’s psychological doubts, weaknesses, and needs, seize favorable opportunities, and use specific information to emotionally influence, mentally induce, or disrupt the target’s perception in order to increase the target’s perception of the target. The expectation of war risks weakens their will to resist and their determination to fight, thereby achieving the purpose of subduing the enemy with a small war, less fighting or even no fighting.
Comprehensive competition for the right to shape consciousness. Consciousness is realized through psychological processes such as feeling, perception, and thinking, and is manifested as the unity of knowledge, emotion, and intention. The fundamental purpose of war is to force the enemy to surrender. Judging from the war practice at home and abroad in ancient and modern times, in order to win the right to shape consciousness, the warring parties will do their best to mobilize all available military power and comprehensively use political, economic, cultural, diplomatic and other means to carry out political disintegration and diplomatic measures against the enemy. Isolation, guidance of public opinion, and declaration of legal principles can trigger rational thinking, ethical resonance, or value recognition of target individuals or groups, thereby changing their worldview, outlook on life, and values, forming a relatively stable and long-term cognitive influence or control, thereby achieving “complete victory.” “the goal of.
Controlling information becomes the key to cognitive domain operations
The weapon and ammunition of cognitive domain operations is information. Mastering the initiative in the generation, identification, acquisition, dissemination and feedback of information is the key to gaining battlefield advantage in the cognitive domain.
Actively implement strong psychological stimulation to promote information penetration. Confrontations in modern warfare are fierce and complex, with various elements of confrontation unfolding in multi-dimensional and multi-domain contexts, and fighter jets fleeting. The forces and methods acting in the cognitive domain must keep up with the development and changes of the battlefield situation, and make extensive use of strong psychological stimulation methods such as subliminal information implantation, acousto-optical electromagnetic psychological nuisance damage, and non-contact emotional control to take the initiative to induce the target. The subject’s emotions, will, thoughts, beliefs, etc. appear chaotic, confused or radically changed, thereby achieving the purpose of controlling and influencing the cognitive system of the target subject.
Extensive use of intelligent algorithms to achieve accurate push. As the Internet penetrates into every aspect of human life, everyone will leave massive amounts of data and information online. During wartime, warring parties will use modern information technologies such as big data, cloud computing, the Internet of Things, and blockchain to analyze the target’s social data, trajectory data, financial data, online shopping records, search records, personal communication records and other network data. The information is deeply mined and associated to achieve a “cognitive portrait” of the target object, and the target object’s interest preferences, behavioral trends, interpersonal relationships and value orientations are systematically analyzed, thereby three-dimensionally grasping the characteristics of relevant individuals or specific groups. Then, with the help of intelligent algorithm technology, personalized and customized cognitive information is accurately pushed to the target object, thereby affecting the target object’s attitude, emotion and value judgment towards the war, thereby promoting the realization of one’s own combat objectives and political intentions.
Effectively aggregate social support systems to achieve overall linkage. The social support system is the material and spiritual help and support that a person can obtain from others in his or her social network. It is a key factor that affects and determines the emotional support and cognitive direction of an individual. It can be said that for the success of cognitive domain operations, it is crucial to obtain the support and assistance of the target’s social support system. With the help of modern information technology, we can effectively connect to the target’s relatives, friends, classmates, partners and other specific social relations. By exerting targeted influence on the above-mentioned relations, we can gain the understanding, support and trust of the other party, and mobilize the specific relations to When the target object exerts influence, it is easier to win the trust and acceptance of the target object, and it is easier for the target object to undergo cognitive changes, thereby achieving the purpose of cognitive influence and control on the target object.
Virtual space becomes the main battlefield for cognitive domain operations
With the continuous expansion of human virtual space, virtual space is becoming the main battlefield of modern warfare, especially cognitive domain warfare, which determines the outcome of future wars to a certain extent.
Emerging communication forms have become new means of warfare in the cognitive domain. With the continuous development of mobile Internet technology, emerging communication forms represented by social media have gradually become a new platform and mainstream position for cognitive confrontation. Judging from recent local wars, the status and role of social media has become more and more prominent. All warring parties use personal blogs, forums and other platforms to publish battlefield graphics, video recordings and comments in real time, which has not only become a global mobile network media terminal It has also become the main battleground for the value perception game among different countries and different factions around the world. Emerging communication forms such as social media, with their unique decentralization and interactivity characteristics, have broken the information monopoly and information control in traditional communication methods and spawned numerous product styles. While meeting people’s information needs, they are also Unknowingly changing people’s perceptions. It is foreseeable that social media will play an increasingly prominent role in future cognitive domain operations.
Cyberspace has become a new space for cognitive domain operations. Under the conditions of informatization and intelligence, the threshold of network technology has been greatly reduced, making it possible to watch the game in real time around the world. Modern warfare has developed from “living room warfare” in the television era to “handheld warfare” in today’s all-media era. Online live broadcast is more intuitive and richer than any form of battlefield reporting, and “global synchronicity” has become a prominent feature. Through live broadcasts on the Internet, videos and pictures of fierce battles between the two warring parties, as well as numerous burned tanks and armored vehicles, as well as homes destroyed by the war and refugees fleeing their homes, can be visually displayed. People can see the micro-state of individual civilians and soldiers on both sides through the Internet. The “transparency” of the battlefield makes any attempt to conceal the truth and false statements more and more difficult. But on the other hand, the emergence of technologies such as intelligent voice cloning and video portrait simulation replacement means that what people see may not necessarily be “as seen” and what they hear may not be “as heard”. Cognition under online live broadcasts Domain operations add more room for possibility and imagination.
The intelligent network army has become a new force in cognitive domain warfare. The development of information networks has broken through the authenticity limitations of interpersonal communication, and it is difficult for us to determine whether the other end of the network is a real person. Based on the needs of large-scale interaction, intelligent, automated, and large-scale cyberspace robots are emerging. They are widely active in every corner of cyberspace. These intelligent network armies have the capabilities of intelligent recognition, intelligent response and even brain-like thinking. They are tireless and work around the clock. Intelligent network armies are becoming an important force in future cognitive domain operations. Judging from the current development trends of related technologies, major countries and even business organizations in the world are focusing on the potential prospects of network robots in group penetration, live broadcast follow-up, shaping public opinion, and managing network crises. In the flexible guidance of network intelligent robots, Increase research and development efforts on key technologies such as automatic acquisition of technology groups, automatic cultivation and group penetration, and provide intelligent and efficient technical support for public opinion guidance, cognitive shaping, and behavioral guidance and control by discovering and effectively utilizing the behavioral patterns of network users.
●Practice has proven that cognitive domain operations break the traditional online and offline data barriers. By integrating the use of telecommunications networks, the Internet, the Internet of Things and other channels, and with the help of advanced algorithms, the initiator can effectively switch between various spaces and optimize the combat style. , and even focus on private spaces and public spaces to accurately release interference information, thereby achieving effects that traditional combat methods cannot achieve.
●In future battles in the cognitive domain, the influence of rational factors such as science and logic on individual cognition is likely to be weakened, and cognitive confrontation may become a battle between emotion and emotion.
At present, the rapid development of intelligent technology is changing the logic of information dissemination in all aspects, making the impact of information on thinking and consciousness more profound and comprehensive, and human brain cognition has truly become an important field of military confrontation. In the era of intelligence, the continuous evolution of information dissemination mechanisms will systematically reshape cognitive confrontation from many aspects, thereby promoting fundamental changes in cognitive domain operations.
Artificial intelligence becomes the main driving force for cognitive domain operations
In the era of intelligence, information dissemination is based on data, and artificial intelligence technology runs through the entire process of information collection, production, and feedback. The extensive and in-depth application of artificial intelligence, a disruptive technology in the military field, will be a key support for the entire process of planning and implementation of future cognitive domain operations.
Artificial intelligence technology will run through multiple scenarios of future cognitive domain operations. In the process of deployment and rhythm control of combat operations in the cognitive domain, all parties involved in the war rely on advanced algorithms as the “regulators” and “gatekeepers” of the action. A large amount of information about battlefield operations from various combat domains provides the warring parties with Provide driving force for efficient decision-making and implementation of cognitive domain operations. Practice has proven that cognitive domain operations break the traditional online and offline data barriers. By integrating the use of telecommunications networks, the Internet, the Internet of Things and other channels, and with the help of advanced algorithms, the initiator can effectively switch between various spaces and optimize the combat style. It even focuses on private spaces and public spaces to accurately release interference information, thereby achieving effects that traditional combat methods cannot achieve.
In addition, artificial intelligence has evolved from empowering a single link to connecting all links and the entire process of combat. At present, artificial intelligence is still limited to locating target audiences in information dissemination to improve the matching rate between information and information sources. In future cognitive domain operations, artificial intelligence will play a “one-stop” role in the planning and implementation of cognitive domain operations, and will continue to strengthen the coupling between various links. Foreign militaries believe that in future operations in the cognitive domain, differentiated delivery of data can be used to activate robots to instantly create public opinion trends and influence cognitive effects. At the strategic and campaign level, based on long-term tracking data and continuously adjusted and optimized algorithm strategies, we can measure the cognitive status of different regions and groups, assist decision-makers in planning core narratives, major issues, etc., thereby regulating the implementation of actions and coordinated actions.
Autonomous confrontation has become a distinctive feature of cognitive domain operations
As intelligent programs move from collaborative and participatory dissemination to independent dissemination, and the connection ecology of intelligent terminals continues to expand, on the future battlefield, officers and soldiers will increasingly be able to receive various types of information sent by intelligent programs and intelligent terminals. In the virtual space, the interactive communication between digital twins and virtual people will affect people’s cognition in the real world. Judging from the development trend of cognitive domain operations under intelligent conditions, human intervention will gradually decrease, the collection, synthesis, and transmission of information ammunition will become more autonomous and efficient, and the formulation and execution of discourse strategies and action strategies will become more autonomous. The whole process is faster than ever. But in terms of results, people are still the ultimate target of cognitive domain operations, and the process accelerated by autonomous weapon empowerment will continue to strengthen the control of human cognition.
With the help of autonomous countermeasures tools such as intelligent programs, intelligent terminals, digital twins, and virtual humans, all parties involved in the war will have more flexibility in cognitive domain combat situation layout, time and space application, and information content design. Information authenticity confrontation will be more protrude. In future cognitive domain operations, autonomous weapons will likely break through the limitations of power and time and space, and their action patterns will become more complex. The practice of foreign military forces shows that using the Internet to carry out “sprinkler-type” communication for the general public and “drip-type” communication for specific groups will become a common pattern of cognitive domain operations. Smart programs and smart terminals can support the development of more and more complex behavior patterns due to their features such as batch copy deployment and non-intermittent operation. For example, you can focus on specific issues and target specific attack targets, quickly mobilize a large number of social robots, and take turns to spread information, or use smart devices around specific individuals to collect relevant data, and use conversational robots and virtual humans to interact with individuals for a long time and continue to induce them. achieve combat objectives.
In future cognitive domain operations, autonomous weapons covertly control the cognitive domain battlefield will become the norm. Social robots can create fake public opinions and fake hot spots as needed, thereby generating more individual perception fog; intelligent synthesis technology will lower the threshold for producing false information. This will increase the cost and difficulty of identifying counterfeiting; it will be more difficult to identify robot accounts and virtual human information sources, and “one-on-one” cognitive fraud will become increasingly common.
Emotional conflict becomes a prominent attribute of cognitive domain operations
In the era of intelligence, new technologies will broaden the scope of human cognition and deepen people’s perception. Technologies such as extended reality and the metaverse will present battlefield environments, event scenes, etc. more holographically and transparently, and the scenes will be touchable, perceptible, and interactive. The audience will be more subject to the influence of perceptual logic when recognizing the truth of events.
Thanks to the development of the mobile Internet, the speed of information dissemination has increased rapidly. The centralized release of large batches of information in a short period of time can greatly shorten the reaction time of individuals, making it difficult for individuals to think deeply. Before the full picture of the incident is fully revealed, the audience has often formed a stance or even turned their attention to a new focus. The mode of outputting conclusions based on fragmented clues intensifies irrational and emotional reactions to the information. In future battles in the cognitive domain, the influence of rational factors such as science and logic on individual cognition is likely to be weakened, and cognitive confrontation may become a battle between emotion and emotion. In the decision between appealing to reason and appealing to emotion, all parties involved in the war are paying more and more attention to moving people with emotion, using emotional means to stir up, occupy and even polarize the minds of the target objects, and dominate the confrontation situation in the cognitive domain.
In the era of intelligence, cognitive leveraging relies more and more on rational competition. On the one hand, emotional arousal strategies are used to enhance cognitive resonance. In future cognitive domain operations, action initiators will selectively present cruel and fierce battle scenes, post-war tragedies, or the casualties and current status of soldiers participating in the war to the audience, thereby strongly stimulating the audience’s emotions and awakening the audience’s innermost feelings. emotional identification. As a node in the communication network, people can collect various physical data through intelligent algorithms, allowing action initiators to more accurately judge the emotional effects of information, thereby dynamically adjusting content and strengthening emotional responses. Action initiators use data calculations to select groups with similar understanding contexts and the same emotional characteristics, or select specific individuals who are susceptible to influence and have greater influence value, and target and disseminate homogeneous information flows to stimulate them. Group cognitive resonance.
On the other hand, moral coercion strategies are used to stimulate value recognition. Faced with the accumulation of fragmented and irrational cognitive response patterns, combat action initiators can occupy the moral high ground through a binary oppositional discourse system, gather a torrent of self-interested value cognition, and then achieve a coercion effect. The rich presentation formats and social channels that directly reach the public in the intelligent communication environment provide convenient means for action initiators to use this strategy. In local wars in recent years, technological evolution has gradually promoted moral coercion strategies. For example, social media has exposed past secret diplomacy to the public. Leaders and politicians of warring parties have used this method to live broadcast or make the entire decision-making process public with other countries. The details of communication among political leaders, elite groups, etc., and the discourse strategies increasingly highlight moral arbitration and criticism, thereby influencing and stimulating the international public to support one’s own value position.
The Internet of Everything expands the battlefield space for cognitive domain operations
With the development of information communication technology, social media has gradually become the main battlefield for shaping cognition. Institutions, individuals and the public on all warring parties can directly contact and interact with each other through social media, making it possible to compete for cognition around the clock.
In the era of intelligent communication, the Internet of Everything has become a new social connection model, and communication subjects and communication behaviors are everywhere. Under this influence, the cognitive domain battle space will expand to smart IoT terminals and scenarios, and extend to both the physical space and the virtual space. The Internet of Everything has led to the ubiquity of the cognitive domain battle space, which will further promote the ubiquity of combat subjects. Natural people, intelligent terminals with information sending and receiving capabilities, and even virtual characters in the online world may become combat subjects, and cognitive domain operations will participate in the war. The types of forces will be greatly expanded, and the organization method of cognitive domain operations will shift towards distributed collaboration.
In future cognitive domain operations, humans and machines deep in the hinterland of conflicts will become important forces in combat. With the support of intelligent technology, they will collaborate to draw battlefield pictures and participate in “writing” the entire process of war. Frontline soldiers continuously share their personal battlefield experiences through social networks, then push them to the world in a timely manner after personalized packaging. Individual soldier equipment and combat platforms will be responsible for collecting and transmitting battlefield images, and trigger automatic processing and release mechanisms according to preset procedures. , cooperate with physical space combat operations in various ways to compete for information and brain control. With the continuous development of communication technology, frontline soldiers and intelligent equipment can also reprocess and reprocess the information they have in a targeted manner according to superior instructions, so as to more conveniently and panoramically present the battlefield scene that one wants to express. , to achieve the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations to capture the mind and capture the will.
——Thinking of “decision-centered warfare” and cognitive complexity
中国军网-解放军报
Editor’s Note Complexity science is one of the frontier fields of contemporary scientific development. British physicist Stephen Hawking said that “the 21st century will be the century of complexity science.” As a social phenomenon in human society, war has always been a complex giant system full of possibilities. In recent years, with the evolution of war forms, the epistemology under the traditional scientific system has become increasingly difficult to meet the needs of the development of war practice. Paying attention to the scientific principles and thinking methods of complexity may be the key to opening the door to modern warfare. This article studies and discusses “decision-centered warfare” from the perspective of complexity science.
“Decision-centered warfare” is a new concept that has emerged in recent years. Why was the “decision-centered war” proposed? According to the US military, it is necessary to “fight a war that the opponent cannot understand.” Since the beginning of the 21st century, with the evolution of war forms and continuous changes in combat methods, the US military has found that network-centric warfare in the traditional sense has become increasingly difficult to adapt to the reality of the battlefield. In this context, “decision-centered warfare” came into being.
1. Create complexity
The so-called “decision-centered warfare” is to achieve diversified tactics through the upgrading and transformation of combat platforms and distributed deployment with the support of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence. While ensuring its own advantages in tactical selection, it imposes high complexity on the enemy. , in order to interfere with its command and decision-making capabilities and achieve an overwhelming advantage over the enemy in a new dimension.
Why “the opponent can’t understand”? In fact, through distributed deployment, flexible combination, and intelligent command and control, the opponent will not understand the battlefield situation and combat mechanism cognitively, and will be at a loss as to what to do. This is another transformation of war confrontation from competing for “greater power” in mechanized warfare, to competing for “faster” in information-based warfare, to competing for “making the right decisions” in future wars. In the words of Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese military strategist, “One who subdues the enemy without fighting is a good person.” Through clever command, control and decision-making, the battlefield situation becomes more complicated, making it impossible for the opponent to fight.
How to do this? Simply put, it is to use the nature of complex systems to find the opponent’s “vital gate” to exploit and control. A basic method is to reshape the opponent’s decision-making process by increasing complexity, forcing the opponent to introduce new decision-making parameters, causing its decision-making to become complicated, thereby changing the causal relationship and decision-making process, and ultimately leading to chaos. Adversarial situations have been able to balance in the past because all participants knew the outcome of the game, making it easy to make trade-offs, but complexity often destroys this balance. This is why complexity can be used as a weapon.
It should be noted that the battlefield is fair to any party. In the future battlefield, in order for the enemy to feel the complexity of decision-making in one direction and not to be troubled by the complexity, we must first be superior to the opponent in command and control capabilities. The complexity of battlefield decision-making is mainly reflected in the judgment and decision-making links of the “OODA” loop. Under normal circumstances, the “OODA” cycle can complete the complete cycle from observation, judgment, decision-making to action. However, if there is a way to make the battlefield more complex so that the opponent cannot make effective judgments in a timely manner, and thus cannot enter the decision-making and action links, the opponent’s “OODA” loop can always be limited to the observation and judgment links, and a closed loop cannot be formed. This may be the result of “decision-centered warfare” trying to create complexity. Therefore, how to make quick judgments has become a primary concern. If this cognitive process can be completed quickly with the support of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, that is, so-called intelligent cognition can be achieved, the speed of the “OODA” cycle can be greatly accelerated and unilateral advantages can be achieved.
Drawing correct judgments based on observation is the prerequisite for making correct decisions. But this can only be done under the condition of “having cognitive ability”. Currently, in systems such as command information systems and war game deduction systems, these cognitive tasks are basically completed by humans. Past attempts to autonomously complete judgments and decisions by artificial intelligence systems have been almost unsuccessful because the problem of intelligent cognitive modeling has never been solved. The behaviors displayed by various models are more or less “mechanical” and cannot truly show the characteristics of intelligence. Foreign militaries have also been focusing on “human behavior modeling” in recent years, but progress is still slow at present. Why is intelligent cognition so difficult, and what is the difficulty? The author believes that the core difficulty lies in how to understand and deal with complexity.
2. Understand complexity
At the beginning of this century, the Rand Corporation of the United States used a simulation system to conduct more than 1,700 deductions on the combat needs of the U.S. Air Force in response to possible military conflicts in a certain hotspot area around 2005. It then conducted statistical analysis and finally concluded how the U.S. Air Force Conclusion to maintain superiority on the battlefield. This statistical analysis method has a basic assumption: each trial is independent and unordered, and the rules do not affect each other. It’s like tossing a coin. If you toss it heads once, it’s likely to be heads the second time. But if you throw it 10,000 times, the probability of the result being a certain side will get closer to 50%. This method is scientifically accurate when used in physical research, but when transplanted to the study of human social issues such as war, the situation becomes different.
Human beings are cognitive and do not just obey the laws of physics like physical entities. Commanders will not simply repeat mechanically when analyzing combat problems. Normally, when people make decisions, they will consider the previous results, which will lead to adjustments to the next action. In this way, the inherent power law characteristics of human behavior will appear, which is often called the “eight-eighth law”. Therefore, we cannot simply copy physical thinking to think about human society.
The reason for this is mainly because we are often accustomed to thinking about problems in a simple way of reductionism. The simple system structure remains unchanged, the results are deterministic, the cause and effect correspondence is clear, repeatable, predictable, decomposable and reducible, etc., have become our default scientific thinking method. But there are still many complex systems in the world, and these systems have a holistic nature, such as the human body, society, economy, war, etc., all fall into this category. What is the overall nature? That is, what cannot be seen locally, but exists when viewed as a whole, is the overall nature. For example, a living person and a dead person are the same in terms of composition, but the difference between a dead person and a living person lies in whether there is life, and life is a holistic quality. The structure of complex systems is variable and has characteristics such as adaptability, uncertainty, emergence, and nonlinearity, and the results are neither repetitive nor predictable. Society, economy, war, cities, including intelligent systems, these human-related systems all have these characteristics. In fact, they are all typical complex systems. Therefore, war has the characteristics of “no return after victory”, which actually reflects the “unrepeatable” nature of the complex system of war.
It is precisely because of the complexity of complex systems that causes and results cannot correspond one to one, which will lead to the failure of the similarity principle, so it cannot be modeled and studied using traditional methods. In order to solve complex problems, some traditional physics methods were mainly adopted in the past, such as statistical methods and simple life body modeling methods based on Agent. This is the case with the Rand Corporation study mentioned earlier. Although it can solve some problems, when it is used to solve problems related to people, especially cognition, the results obtained deviate greatly from reality and are unsatisfactory. .
Why is this happening? This is because the origins of war complexity and physical complexity are different. The source of physical complexity often lies in the complex laws of physical motion; while the complexity of war comes from human cognition. Because humans are not chaotic particles without thoughts, nor are they lower creatures with simple life logic, but are intelligent creatures with cognitive abilities of judgment and decision-making. People will reflect on the results through causal relationships, sum up experiences and make adjustments, and then decide how to act next. Moreover, human cognition will continue to develop, which will further affect subsequent cognition. However, because cognition is highly uncertain, future actions are difficult to predict.
It can be said that under the current technological conditions, what can be predicted are basically simple systematic laws of the physical world, while the impact of human cognition on society or war is often difficult to predict. Therefore, it is a common mistake we make to use physical thinking to think about human society. Based on the complexity of cognition, which is completely different from those immutable physical laws, when we deal with the complexity of war, we must focus on the core feature of “cognition” and work hard on command and control.
3. Coping with Complexity
The core of “decision-centered warfare” lies in the acceleration of cognition. Because almost all changes in war can be seen as cognitive upgrades and complications. In the author’s opinion, to deal with the “decision-centered battle”, we need to “fight complexity with complexity” and start from the basic work.
The first is to understand the core concept of “decision-centered warfare”. That is to seize the initiative on the battlefield by actively creating complexity. For one’s side, one needs to manage one’s own complexity; for one’s enemy, it means imposing more complexity on the opponent. The second is to understand the changes in the mechanism of war. The evolution speed of combat systems is increasing exponentially, which will make it difficult to perceive, control and manage complex battlefields, and the role of intelligent cognition will become more prominent. To this end, it is necessary to focus on the focus of “command and control” and regard battlefield management capabilities as the key. The third is to find the correct concepts and methods of coping. Starting from war design, we take the direction of decision-making intelligence as a breakthrough.
In recent years, a series of achievements in the field of artificial intelligence have brought hope to solving the problem of intelligent command and decision-making. The AlphaGo series of research has brought breakthroughs to decision-making intelligence technology; and the emergence of the GPT large model has further confirmed that decision-making intelligence and even general artificial intelligence are possible in the future. It now seems that artificial intelligence will be deeply involved in wars in the future, which is a reality that must be faced. And this will bring more complexity to war and battlefields.
Decision intelligence research should be placed at the command and control level. To win a war, command and control decisions need to embody both “science” and “art.” The scientific nature of command and control is mainly reflected in how to do it “when you know how to do it”, such as using the obtained command data (weapons and equipment, force formation, battlefield environment, opponent intelligence, etc.), command methods (tasks, processes, procedures, operations planning, etc.) , planning, optimization, etc.), formulate a combat plan and implement it. The artistry of command and control is reflected in knowing how to do it “when you don’t know how to do it.” This is where true intelligence lies. The method is nothing more than continuous trial and error, accumulating experience, finding ways to solve problems, and forming new scientific knowledge. In fact, in reality, commanders continue to discover and summarize winning rules through trial and error, and each commander also has his own intuition and experience.
Therefore, true intelligence is actually finding solutions to exceptions. Following rules is not intelligence, finding your own way to solve problems is the key. Perhaps this is the core of decision-making intelligence and a goal that requires further efforts.
With the dawn of the intelligent era, artificial intelligence is approaching at a speed beyond people’s imagination, not only impacting all walks of life, but also changing our understanding and concepts. As a field that is inherently sensitive to technological changes, the military development and application of artificial intelligence is booming.
Currently, with the rapid development of information technology, sensors, big data and the Internet of Things, the military application of artificial intelligence is ushering in a new round of opportunities. Penetrating into all fields of military applications, artificial intelligence weapons and equipment with efficient command, precise strike, automated operation and intelligent behavior will contribute unique “machine intelligence and power” to the future battlefield.
Engels once said that the application of cutting-edge technology first began in the military field. When new technologies significantly enhance military combat capabilities, they will lead to new military changes. Traditional military powers such as the United States and Russia foresee the broad application prospects of artificial intelligence technology in the military field. They all regard artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology that “changes the rules of the war game” and believe that future wars will be intelligent wars and future armaments. The competition will be an intelligent arms race, and has been planned in advance, hoping to seize the opportunity of artificial intelligence military applications and strive to create a “generation gap” with potential opponents. A few months ago, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Shanahan officially issued a memorandum on the establishment of a “Joint Artificial Intelligence Center”, which will further increase the application of artificial intelligence in U.S. military military projects. Russia also regards artificial intelligence as the commanding heights of future military competition, and is stepping up the development of humanoid robots that can drive vehicles and the formation of robot troops that can fight side by side with human soldiers.
It should be noted that the military application of artificial intelligence is a “double-edged sword.” “It may become the best thing that has ever happened to mankind, or it may become the worst thing.” Hawking’s evaluation of artificial intelligence enlightens us to maintain sufficient caution in the face of the “menacing” military applications of artificial intelligence. careful. In the future, as a large number of intelligent unmanned systems are used on the battlefield, the cost of war will be greatly reduced, and “zero casualties” of combatants are expected to become a reality. This can easily lead to more casual use of force by military powers. In a complex battlefield environment, highly intelligent unmanned combat systems are very likely to encounter problems such as recognition errors, communication degradation, and even “defection and counterattack” after enemy electromagnetic and network attacks. Indiscriminate killing of innocent people and loss of control of the system are even more likely to occur. It brings endless worries to the military application of smart weapons.
It can be seen that major issues related to war must not be easily left to machines to make decisions. Even if the military application of artificial intelligence becomes increasingly mature, we cannot allow the “barbaric growth” of smart weapons. We need to be alert to the security and safety risks that artificial intelligence may bring. Legal, ethical and many other issues. Social security supervision and control should be strengthened to form a social governance model adapted to the era of artificial intelligence; actively participate in discussions and negotiations on international arms control of artificial intelligence, and contribute Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to the security, legal and ethical issues brought by artificial intelligence; firmly establish The idea that humans are the leaders in the human-machine relationship enables safe and effective control of artificial intelligence and allows it to serve the peaceful development of mankind, rather than letting artificial intelligence become an “accomplice of the devil.”
Regarding this technological form that is expected to profoundly change the form of future warfare, we must not only keep a clear mind, but also fully stimulate its vitality. Judging from the history of military changes, science and technology have played a stimulating and basic supporting role in previous changes. Whoever has the sensitivity to technological changes and achieves technological breakthroughs first can master the new rules of war and control the war. The commanding heights to win future wars. For an army, the inability to correctly predict the direction of military technological breakthroughs and grasp changes in war patterns will not only lead to “technological generational differences”, but also lead to crises such as core capabilities and national security.
Today, in the face of “big changes” and “big breakthroughs” in the development of science and technology, we should deeply grasp the intrinsic driving influence of artificial intelligence on the evolution of war forms from the perspective of designing wars and mastering the rules of victory, and truly seize the initiative to win future wars. We need to firmly grasp the major historical opportunities for the development of artificial intelligence, do a good job in strategic planning, highlight the goal traction and planning leadership of intelligence, closely track cutting-edge technologies, and take proactive actions to effectively safeguard national security.
A brief analysis of cognitive domain combat styles in the era of intelligence
As modern warfare accelerates towards intelligence, the bottom physical domain, the middle information domain and the top cognitive domain are characterized by multi-domain linkage. Cognitive domain operations are gradually becoming the focus of the war arena. The main purpose of cognitive domain operations is to seize brain control and lay a solid foundation for seizing land, sea, air, space, and network power. Accurately grasping and fully utilizing the main modes of cognitive domain operations is an inevitable requirement to seize opportunities and gain the initiative in future wars.
1. Cognitive electronic warfare – the “tentacles” of cognitive warfare
Cognitive electronic warfare is the product of the combination of electronic warfare and artificial intelligence technology. It is the main combat style for fighting for electromagnetic control and is also a model of the integration of tactics and technology. The United States is the first country to carry out cognitive electronic warfare research. Its Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the Army, Navy and Air Force have carried out projects including adaptive radar countermeasures and adaptive electronic warfare behavioral learning. Implementing cognitive electronic warfare requires focusing on three aspects.
One is cognitive electronic reconnaissance. It mainly uses electronic means to quickly, accurately and comprehensively obtain battlefield data, promptly discover threat signals, identify target characteristic signals, establish and dynamically update signal databases, and provide necessary information for commanders to judge situations, make decisions, and evaluate effectiveness. support.
The second is cognitive electronic modeling. Mainly in view of the characteristics of various types, large power and large number of electromagnetic radiation sources in the battlefield and surrounding areas, the frequency, bandwidth, waveform characteristics, protection mode, arrival direction and other information of the radiation source are distinguished between dynamic and static categories, and a unified system is established. The information describes the model architecture, thereby providing the basis for electromagnetic perception.
The third is cognitive electronic interference. Mainly in view of the complex and diverse characteristics of battlefield electronic warfare equipment and strong anti-interference capabilities, it combines active interference with passive interference, suppression interference and deception interference, and flexibly implements adaptive interference pattern decision-making, adaptive interference waveform optimization and adaptive interference. Interference resource scheduling to ensure interference quality and efficiency.
2. Cognitive intelligence warfare—the “bloodline” of cognitive warfare
The International Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers once proposed the concept of “cognitive information science”; some domestic scholars define cognitive information science as the study of people’s cognitive structures, processes and characteristics in all aspects of information production and utilization from a psychological perspective field or discipline. The concept of “cognitive intelligence warfare” is proposed here, which is consistent with cognitive logic and the nature of intelligence, and can borrow concepts and principles from cognitive intelligence science. Depending on the motivation for obtaining and using intelligence, three strategies can be used to implement cognitive intelligence warfare.
The first is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on individual cognition. It mainly uses the cognition of combat subjects as an intermediary for intelligence coordination, adheres to battlefield user-driven rather than combat system-driven, and is based on “meaning construction theory” and “knowledge abnormality hypothesis” to improve the cognitive structure of intelligence service subjects and realize subject cognition. Positive interaction between knowledge and intelligence services.
The second is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on group cognition. It mainly focuses on the common cognitive structure formed by factors such as the battlefield environment and social background of the user group, and makes full use of advanced analysis methods such as situation analysis, domain analysis, and value analysis to strive to improve the pertinence and applicability of group intelligence services. sex.
The third is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on brain-body cognition. It mainly understands the cognitive structure and cognitive activities of the human brain as computing logic and computing activities, makes full use of machine intelligent cognition and intelligent computing capabilities, strives to improve the human-machine integration environment on the battlefield, and smoothes the information link from intelligence to cognition. Implement programmed and large-scale intelligence services.
3. Cognitive algorithm warfare—the “brain” of cognitive warfare
In 2017, the U.S. Department of Defense officially proposed “algorithmic warfare” for the first time in a memorandum and clearly established an “algorithmic warfare cross-functional team.” Algorithmic warfare, like cognitive warfare, runs through the entire process of all fields of warfare, embodying the core requirements of intelligent warfare. The concept of “cognitive algorithmic warfare” is proposed here based on the similarities and intrinsic connections between cognitive warfare and algorithmic warfare. It can be said that there is algorithm in cognition, and cognition in algorithm. There are three main paths to implement cognitive algorithmic warfare.
The first is to clarify the fog of war. Military theorist Clausewitz pointed out, “War is a field full of uncertainty, and three-quarters of the situations on which war is based are as if hidden in fog.” Cognitive algorithm warfare is to calculate deterministic factors in this uncertain field, clarify the fog of the battlefield as much as possible, accurately identify information “bombs”, and strictly prevent falling into information “traps”.
The second is to clear up the blind spots of intelligence. The source of inspiration for artificial intelligence often comes from biological intelligence, especially human intelligence. Artificial intelligence is inseparable from human intelligence. Cognitive algorithm warfare is to make full use of the latest achievements in cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience to promote the military application of artificial intelligence and improve the intelligence level of the cognitive domain.
The third is to accelerate human-machine integration. Although machine computing power can surpass human brain power, machine algorithms cannot surpass human “ideas” after all. Artificial intelligence and human intelligence each have their own advantages. Cognitive algorithm warfare is to closely integrate machine algorithms in the information domain with human “ideas” in the cognitive domain, and continuously improve the level of warfare in the physical domain.
4. Cognitive political warfare—the “soul” of cognitive warfare
Political war is the opposite of military war. Mao Zedong once vividly pointed out that “war is bloody politics” and “politics is bloodless war.” Since political warfare usually directly affects the cognitive domain, cognitive political warfare can be said to be the inherent meaning of political warfare and should not be understood as a new concept. There are three forms of cognitive political warfare in the era of intelligence.
One is psychological attack and defense. The main purpose is to use intelligent and precise means to “read the mind” and “control the mind” to improve the quality and effectiveness of psychological attack and defense. On the offensive side, we mainly use psychological propaganda, will disintegration, emotional influence, mental induction and other tactics; on the defensive side, we mainly adopt measures such as psychological education and training, psychological counseling and regulation, and psychological diagnosis and treatment.
The second is the competition for public opinion. The main purpose is to use new media and new technologies to enhance the popularity, flow and influence of public opinion propaganda. In terms of offense, the focus is on taking the lead, being the first to take advantage of the situation, concentrating on building momentum and forming a strong force, attacking key points, and making key breakthroughs; in terms of defense, the focus is on making the best use of the situation, combining prevention with counter-attacks, and seeking advantages and avoiding disadvantages.
The third is the legal struggle. The main thing is to participate in legislation, accurately interpret the law, actively protect the law, stand up for the law, be tit-for-tat, and get to the point. On the offensive side, we mainly use legal deterrence, legal strikes, legal restraints, legal sanctions and other tactics; on the defensive side, we mainly strengthen the research on international law, especially the law of war, and legal protection of law-related actions to prevent others from being manipulated.
Cognition-centered warfare: operational concepts for dealing with complex wars
Complexity science is one of the frontier fields of contemporary scientific development. It is a new tool for understanding, understanding, and exploring the phenomena, laws, and mechanisms of war. As the form of war evolves from information war to intelligent war, the complexity of war shows an exponential growth trend, and it becomes increasingly difficult to seize control of information. The key to combat is to put the enemy into a “decision-making dilemma” so that it can even Even with information superiority, it cannot make correct decisions, thus losing its combat advantage. The focus of operations will change from “information-centered” to “cognition-centered”, and the winning mechanism will change from “information winning” to “cognitive winning”.
“Three changes” reveal the driving forces behind the increasing complexity of war
War is a field full of possibilities, and change is the basic characteristic that runs through it. President Xi stressed that we must pay close attention to changes in technology, war, and opponents. Changes in science and technology are the foundation, changes in war are the subject, and changes in opponents are the key. Changes in science and technology lead to changes in war, and changes in war prompt changes in opponents. The “three changes” have promoted the evolution of war forms, the expansion of war fields, the transformation of war goals, and the expansion of war influence, revealing the driving forces behind the growth of war complexity.
Technological changes have subverted the basis for winning wars. Science and technology are the core combat effectiveness and the most active and revolutionary factor in military development. Throughout the history of the world’s military development, every major scientific and technological innovation has started a new military revolution, and every military revolution has pushed military development into a new era. Scientific and technological innovation has become a huge engine to improve the military’s combat effectiveness. . At present, a new round of scientific and technological revolution and military revolution are accelerating. The degree of informatization of modern warfare is constantly increasing, and the characteristics of intelligence are becoming increasingly apparent. The role of driving the military revolution is becoming more and more prominent. The rapid development of some cutting-edge technologies may fundamentally change the face of war and war. According to the rules, the military game between great powers is more embodied in technological subversion and counter-subversion, raids and counter-raids, offsets and counter-offsets.
The U.S. Navy’s “Nemesis” project includes reconnaissance, decoy, jamming and other systems. The decoy system covers air, surface and underwater. Under the scheduling and control of the distributed artificial intelligence engine, it can complement each other, coordinate deception, and truly create a A “ghost aircraft carrier formation” completely subverted traditional electronic deception methods and raised information deception to an unprecedented level. It can be said that science and technology has never had such a profound impact on the overall situation of national security and military strategy as it does today. It has profoundly intervened in, supported, and dominated the evolution of war forms and the innovation of combat styles, and has even subverted the mechanism of winning wars.
The U.S. Navy’s “Nemesis” project is based on networked collaborative electronic warfare
Concept, integrating different systems and utilizing unmanned distributed Clusters of electronic warfare platforms enable large-scale collaborative electronic warfare
The changes in war highlight the complexity of war.
Modern warfare is undergoing profound changes, showing unprecedented diversity and complexity. This super complexity stems from many reasons: first, various advanced technologies or weapons are constantly emerging, bringing many uncertainties; second, the battlefield covers land, sea, air, space, network, electricity and cognitive and other multiple third, multiple combat objects, combat styles, combat areas, and combat methods are cross-correlated and combined to form a complex “hybrid war”; fourth, artificial intelligence algorithms build a large number of combat elements into a complex logic, and use human Machine speed beyond the reach of thinking prompts the combination, deconstruction, and recombination of various elements. In the Ukraine crisis in 2022, on the surface it is a confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, but in essence it is a “hybrid war” between the United States and Western countries and Russia; the Russian and Ukrainian armies extensively use military and civilian drones to expand The “unmanned +” application model shows the prototype of future unmanned intelligent operations; with the support of U.S. NATO air and space situational intelligence, the Ukrainian army frequently uses low-cost unmanned equipment to carry out raids on important Russian weapons platforms, highlighting its new qualities Combat forces have asymmetric attack advantages against large weapons and equipment in traditional combat systems. Changes in technology will eventually lead to changes in war. The impact of a single element on war will become weaker and weaker. The joint combat system composed of multiple elements will have a complex impact on war. War is non-linear, uncertain, chaotic and open. Complex characteristics such as adaptability and confrontation will increase exponentially, which will make it more difficult for people to judge the progress and outcome of the war.
Changes in opponents accelerate the growth of war complexity.
Changes in war prompt changes in opponents. Currently, we are experiencing major changes unseen in a century. Major military powers are actively making strategic adjustments and promoting a new round of military reforms, which exhibit the following characteristics: first, the trend of joint, miniaturized, and autonomous institutional establishments has become more obvious; second, The first is that weapons and equipment are showing a development trend of digitization, precision, stealth, unmanned, and intelligence; the third is that the combat form is moving towards the “four nons” (non-contact, non-linear, asymmetric and irregular) and the “three nos” (Invisible, silent, unmanned) combat; fourth, the military command form is developing in the direction of flattening, automation, networking, and seamlessness. The United States regards China as its main strategic opponent and strives to suppress and contain China. It has vigorously strengthened the innovation of operational concepts and has successively proposed new operational concepts such as “hybrid warfare”, “multi-domain warfare” and “mosaic warfare”, claiming that it will fight to defeat its opponents. A high-end war in which “technology cannot be understood, strikes are difficult to predict, and speed cannot keep up.” The core of the US military’s “mosaic warfare” is unmanned, low-cost, fast, lethal, flexible and reconfigurable. It is based on distributed situational awareness, with the help of intelligent auxiliary decision-making tools and the concept of building blocks and jigsaw puzzles to adaptively formulate mission planning. , dynamically reorganize combat forces, decompose the functions of the combat platform into a larger number of single-function nodes, and build a combat system with a large number of functional nodes. Replace the “kill chain” with a “kill network”. Several nodes will fail or be missing, and the combat system can be adaptively reorganized.
The increasing complexity of war drives the transformation of the winning mechanism of war
With the rapid development of national defense science and technology, the upgrading of weapons and equipment, and the rapid evolution of war forms, modern warfare has shown exponential and explosive complex changes. These changes may seem dazzling, but there are rules to follow behind them. The fundamental thing is that the winning mechanism of war has changed. Only by thoroughly understanding the winning mechanism of modern war can we accurately recognize changes, respond scientifically, be good at seeking change, and firmly grasp the initiative in future wars.
The form of war has changed from cold weapon warfare to intelligent warfare.
The shape of war is a holistic understanding of war. So far, human war has generally gone through four historical stages: cold weapon war, hot weapon war, mechanized war, and information war, and is moving towards intelligent warfare. The history of cognitive warfare is almost as old as the history of human warfare. In the era of cold weapon war, hot weapon war, and mechanized war, cognitive warfare appears more in the form of public opinion warfare and psychological warfare. As mankind enters the information age, the development of cyberspace technology has greatly expanded the space for cognitive warfare, enriched the technical means of cognitive warfare, and greatly enhanced the permeability, timeliness, and deterrence of cognitive warfare. The status and role of Zhizhan have been unprecedentedly improved. In the future, the form of war will enter intelligent warfare, and a large number of intelligent weapon systems and platforms will be equipped with the military and put into combat. Cognitive warfare can not only interfere with and deceive the cognition of enemy personnel, but also attack the cognition of smart equipment through algorithm deception methods such as “adversarial input” and “data poisoning”. Its application scenarios and scope will be further expanded. , the status and role will be further improved.
The purpose of war has changed from conquering by force to conquering by spirit.
The winning mechanism of modern war has undergone great changes compared with the past. The violence of war has been curbed, and the purpose of combat has changed from the original siege of cities and territories and annihilation of the enemy’s effective forces to making the opponent obey one’s will. The means of combat have shifted from military conquest to focusing more on psychological and spiritual conquest, which has made cognitive warfare increasingly prominent in its status and role in modern warfare. In recent years, “hybrid warfare” has become a major means of great power competition. More and more countries have begun to focus on using new fields and new means to achieve political, military, and economic goals that are difficult to achieve with traditional warfare. “Hybrid war” is a mixture of war subjects such as states, non-state actors and individuals, a mixture of conventional warfare, unconventional warfare and other war styles, a mixture of military operations such as combat, stability maintenance and reconstruction, and a mixture of political, military and economic The mixture of multiple fields such as military and people’s livelihood is a mixture of multiple combat goals such as defeating the enemy and winning the hearts and minds of the people. This is highly consistent with cognitive warfare. The operational field of “hybrid warfare” has expanded from the military field to politics, economy, culture, people’s livelihood and other fields; the combat methods have expanded from firepower warfare and troop warfare to diplomatic warfare, economic warfare, cyber warfare, psychological warfare, public opinion warfare and other directions. This is highly consistent with cognitive warfare. Its core essence is to “make profit out of chaos”, its main purpose is to win people’s hearts, and its combat guidance is to win by cleverness.
The winning domain of war changes from the physical domain and information domain to the cognitive domain.
Modern war occurs in three fields: physics, information and cognition at the same time. The physical domain and information domain are separated from the material domain, and the cognitive domain is separated from the spiritual domain. The physical domain is a traditional war domain, consisting of combat platforms and military facilities, which provides the material basis for information warfare. The information domain is a newly emerging war field, that is, the space for information generation, transmission and sharing, and is the focus of information warfare competition. Cognitive domain is the scope and field involved in human cognitive activities. It is not only the space for human feeling, perception, memory and thinking activities, but also the space for knowledge generation, exchange, association, storage and application. It is also the space for perception, judgment and decision-making in combat activities. and spaces of command and control. The cognitive domain exists in the field of consciousness of combatants and affects their judgment and decision-making. It is a rising field of warfare. With the development of technologies such as network information and artificial intelligence, the scope of the cognitive domain has greatly expanded, and is expanding from the field of human consciousness to the field of modern cognitive tools and artificial intelligence. The development of military technology has expanded the scope of the cognitive domain, providing more advanced, faster, and more effective material and technical means for cognitive warfare, greatly enhancing the permeability, timeliness, and deterrence of cognitive warfare, and fundamentally It has changed cognitive warfare, making the cognitive domain a new winning field that transcends the physical domain and information domain, and has become the ultimate domain for great power games and military confrontations.
The mechanism for winning wars changes from information victory to cognitive victory.
War confrontation is ultimately a game and confrontation of cognition. If you have the right to control cognition, you will have the initiative in war to a large extent. If you lose the right to control cognition, you will be passive in the war. The situation of being beaten. Obtaining higher and stronger control rights is the key to defeating powerful enemies. Finding ways to control cognitive power and then seize comprehensive battlefield control, so as to achieve maximum victory at the minimum cost, is an important mechanism and inherent law of modern warfare, especially cognitive warfare. In recent years, the U.S. military has successively proposed new concepts of future warfare represented by “decision-centered warfare” and “mosaic warfare”, intending to use complexity as a weapon to create multiple dilemmas for opponents, requiring it to ensure its own tactical “selective advantage”. At the same time, by creating highly complex decision-making influences on the enemy and interfering with its decision-making capabilities, it can achieve a subversive advantage over the enemy in the cognitive domain. In the primary and intermediate stages of information warfare, the key to combat is to seize network control and information control, which runs through the progressive model of “network advantage → information advantage → decision-making advantage → combat advantage”. After information warfare enters an advanced stage, it becomes more and more difficult to seize control of information. The key to combat is to make the enemy fall into a “decision-making dilemma” so that even if it has information superiority, it cannot make correct decisions, thereby losing its combat advantage and having recognition. Only by knowing the advantages can you have the combat advantage. In future wars, cognitive advantage will be the most important strategic advantage, and cognitive confrontation will be the most important form of confrontation. It can be said that “without cognition, there is no war.”
Coping with complex wars has given rise to the concept of cognitive-centered warfare
In order to cope with the exponential growth trend of the complexity characteristics of modern warfare, we must use the theories and methods of complexity science to change the concept of platform-centered warfare where firepower is supreme and killing is king, and establish a cognitive-centered combat thinking. Cognition-centered warfare refers to taking the cognitive domain as the winning area, taking the cognitive advantage as the operational goal, and focusing on interfering with cognitive means, suppressing cognitive channels, affecting cognitive production, and conducting cognitive operations on enemy personnel and intelligent equipment. Interference, suppression, deception and inducement are a new operational concept that obtains combat advantages by seizing and maintaining cognitive advantages. Its main winning mechanisms are as follows.
Use cyber deterrence to destroy the enemy’s will to fight.
Targeting at the enemy’s political, economic, military, diplomatic, and cultural contradictions and weaknesses, disseminate deterrent information through cyberspace, or publish military parades, large-scale military exercises, new weapons and equipment research and development and other information through the Internet , causing great fear and shock to the opponent’s cognition and psychology, and deterring the enemy is not conducive to the implementation of my actions. Comprehensive use of network and electricity attack methods to carry out point strikes and warning attacks against the enemy’s important network and electricity targets and key core nodes, destroying the enemy’s system combat capabilities, affecting the normal performance of the enemy’s weapons and equipment, and providing psychological deterrence to the enemy. The US military’s “gray zone operations” theory relies on its own technological advantages and mainly takes actions such as cyber and electronic countermeasures to respond to the opponent’s “gray zone provocation” and deter the opponent from giving up “confrontation” or escalating the conflict, putting it in a dilemma.
Use information deception to induce the enemy to make wrong judgments.
Aiming at the enemy’s reconnaissance equipment, intelligence agencies and command systems, conceal one’s military intentions, military operations and military objectives through cyber attacks, electronic deception and other means, and transmit to the enemy errors and information about one’s own False information on combat intentions, troop configurations, combat capabilities, combat plans, and battlefield situations, or use the enemy’s command information system to send false orders and information to induce the enemy to make wrong judgments and disrupt the enemy’s combat command. Implement new attacks such as “adversarial input” and “data poisoning” against artificial intelligence algorithms, allowing them to obtain preset conclusions through deep learning training, or causing them to fall into local optimal solutions and ignore the global optimal. Use technologies such as computer imaging, video synthesis, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence to synthesize sounds, videos, images, text information, etc., or use “deep fake” technology to generate false information that is difficult to distinguish between true and false and transmit it through the Internet Spread in large quantities to confuse and deceive opponents and influence their decisions and actions.
Use information suppression to block the enemy’s cognitive means.
Aim at the enemy’s important network targets, as well as core routers, switches, gateways, key servers, etc., and use “soft” and “hard” attack methods to destroy their network nodes. Based on the networking characteristics of wireless links such as the enemy’s command and control network, communication transmission network, weapon hinge network, and early warning detection network, comprehensively use technologies and means such as electronic jamming, GPS spoofing attacks, command link takeover, and data hijacking control to suppress them. Data communication, blocking its communication links and interfering with its combat command. Implement cyber-paralysis attacks on enemy command and control, military communications, early warning detection, aerospace information and other military networks, destroying core networks that affect their operations and weakening their combat capabilities.
Create a favorable public opinion environment through public opinion propaganda.
Cooperate with the country’s political, military, and diplomatic struggles, vigorously promote one’s own justice in the war, and stimulate the enthusiasm of all people to fully support the war. With the help of new media platforms such as instant messaging tools, online forums, podcasts, Twitter, and WeChat, we can systematically disseminate information that targets the enemy’s weaknesses. After gaining widespread attention and consensus, we can then promptly report information, create new hot spots, and repeatedly build momentum. Enhance the influence and form a resonance effect to expand the effect. Propaganda “sets the tone” by cleverly setting agendas, building public opinion through powerful media, setting off a “spiral of silence”, controlling and guiding public opinion, and changing people’s opinions and behaviors.
Use psychological attacks to undermine the morale of enemy soldiers and civilians.
Widely disseminate processed and processed information through the Internet, promote one’s own justice, demonstrate one’s strength, will and determination, vilify the enemy politically and morally, and internally Gather the thoughts and will of the military and civilians, strive for the legal and moral commanding heights externally, and spiritually “soften” and “weaken” the enemy. Use a variety of network communication methods and technical means to send various deceptive, disruptive, inductive, and deterrent messages to the enemy’s military and civilians in a targeted manner to attack the enemy’s psychological defense line, promote an ineffective confrontation mentality, and then lose the combat capability. . Through the Internet, we can create, guide, plan, build, and expand momentum to create a “momentum” that is beneficial to ourselves but not beneficial to the enemy, causing a psychological impact on the other party’s people, thereby affecting or changing their psychological state, and implementing effective psychological attacks.
Watch legal and moral support through legal struggle.
Use legal weapons to curb the enemy’s possible or future illegal acts, declare the legality of our actions, affirm our power of military counterattack, declare our determination to pursue war responsibilities, and give To intimidate the enemy. By exposing the illegality of the enemy’s provocative behavior, criticizing the legal basis for the enemy’s combat operations, and condemning the enemy’s illegal behavior, it causes the enemy’s strategic defeat and our own strategic gain. Use legal means to restrict the enemy’s possible actions, limit the possible interference of third parties, and block other parties from interfering with our own actions. Formulate the laws and regulations necessary for our operations to provide legal protection for our operations or take legal remedial measures to reduce the possible negative impacts of our operations and ensure that combat operations are carried out in accordance with the law.
