Currently, the deep penetration and integrated application of cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence in the military field are profoundly reshaping the form of warfare and driving the evolution of informationized and intelligent warfare to a higher and more complex level. This process brings new challenges, such as the full-dimensional expansion of the operational space, but also contains the enduring underlying logic of the essential laws of warfare. We must deeply analyze the evolutionary mechanism of informationized and intelligent warfare, understand and clarify the specific manifestations of the new challenges and underlying logic, and continuously explore the practical paths and winning principles for strategizing future warfare.
Recognizing the new challenges that information technology and intelligent technology bring to warfare
Technological iteration and upgrading have driven profound changes in combat styles, which in turn bring new challenges. Currently, with the accelerated development of information and intelligent technologies, the form of warfare is showing significant changes such as cross-domain integration, system confrontation, and intelligent dominance, thereby giving rise to new challenges such as mixed-domain nature, intelligence, and all-personnel involvement.
The Challenges of Multi-Domain Operations. In future warfare, the physical boundaries of traditional operational domains will be broken, with information and social domains deeply nested, forming a new type of battlefield characterized by multi-domain coordination. This multi-dimensional battlefield environment presents two challenges to current combat systems. First, system compatibility is difficult. In a multi-domain operational environment, combat operations “span” multiple physical and virtual spaces, while traditional combat systems are often built based on specific operational domains, making seamless compatibility of their technical standards and information interfaces difficult. Second, command and control are highly complex. In informationized and intelligent warfare, combat operations unfold simultaneously or alternately across multiple dimensions, with various demands exhibiting non-linear, explosive, and multi-domain characteristics. Traditional, hierarchical, tree-like command structures are ill-suited to handle this complex multi-domain coordination situation.
The Challenges of Intelligence. The deep integration of technologies such as artificial intelligence into the war decision-making and action chain presents new challenges to traditional decision-making models and action logic. On the one hand, defining the boundaries and dominance of human-machine collaboration is challenging. Intelligent systems demonstrate superior capabilities in information processing, decision support, and even autonomous action, but over-reliance on algorithms can lead to a “decision black box”; excessive restrictions on machine intelligence may result in the loss of the speed and efficiency advantages of intelligent algorithms. Therefore, how to construct a human-machine symbiotic, human-led, and intelligence-assisted decision-making model has become an unavoidable “test” in winning informationized and intelligent warfare. On the other hand, the complexity and vulnerability of algorithmic warfare are becoming increasingly prominent. The higher the level of intelligence in warfare, the stronger the dependence on core algorithms. Adversaries may launch attacks through data pollution, model deception, and network intrusion, inducing intelligent systems to misjudge and fail. This kind of “bottom-up” attack based on algorithmic vulnerabilities is far more covert and destructive than traditional methods, placing higher demands on the construction and maintenance of defense systems.
A challenge affecting all personnel. Informationized and intelligent warfare blurs the lines between wartime and peacetime, front lines and rear areas. Combat operations are no longer confined to professional soldiers and traditional battlefields; non-military sectors such as economics, finance, and technology, along with related personnel, may all be integrated into modern combat systems to varying degrees, bringing entirely new challenges. Specifically, non-military sectors may become new focal points of offense and defense. In an information society, critical infrastructure such as energy networks, transportation hubs, and information platforms are highly interconnected and interdependent, with broad social coverage and significant influence, making them prime targets for attack or disruption in hybrid warfare, thus significantly increasing the difficulty of protection. The national defense mobilization system faces transformation pressure. The traditional “peacetime-wartime conversion” model is ill-suited to the demands of high-intensity, fast-paced, and high-consumption informationized and intelligent warfare. There is an urgent need to build a modern mobilization mechanism that is “integrated in peacetime and wartime, military-civilian integrated, precise, and efficient,” ensuring the rapid response and efficient transformation of core resources such as technological potential, industrial capabilities, and professional talent.
Clarifying the underlying logic of information-based and intelligent warfare
Although the development of information and intelligent technologies has profoundly reshaped the mode of force application, the inherent attributes of war have not been fundamentally shaken. Ensuring that strategy follows policy, adhering to the principle that people are the decisive factor, and recognizing that the “fog of war” will persist for a long time are still key measures for us to understand, plan, and respond to future wars.
Strategic subordination with political strategy is paramount. Currently, the proliferation of new technologies and attack methods easily fosters “technocentrism”—when algorithms and computing power are seen as the key to victory, and when technological superiority in equipment is considered an absolute advantage, military operations risk deviating from the political and strategic trajectory. This necessitates that we always integrate military operations within the overall national political framework, ensuring that technological advantages serve strategic objectives. Under informationized and intelligent conditions, strategic subordination with political strategy transcends the purely military level, requiring precise alignment with core national political goals such as diplomatic maneuvering and domestic development and stability. Therefore, it is essential to clearly define the boundaries, intensity, and scope of information and intelligent means of application, avoid significant political and strategic risks arising from the misuse of technology, and strive for a dynamic unity between political objectives and military means.
The decisive factor remains human. While intelligent technology can indeed endow weapons with superior autonomous perception and decision-making capabilities, the ultimate control and winning formula in war always firmly rests in human hands. Marxist warfare theory reveals that regardless of how warfare evolves, humans are always the main actors and the ultimate decisive force. Weapons, as tools, ultimately rely on human creativity in their effective use. Therefore, facing the wave of informationized and intelligent warfare, we must achieve deep integration and synchronous development of human-machine intelligence, building upon a foundation of human dominance. Specifically, intelligentization must not only “transform” things—improving equipment performance—but also “transform” people—enhancing human cognitive abilities, decision-making levels, and human-machine collaborative efficiency, ensuring that no matter how high the “kites” of intelligent equipment fly, humanity always firmly grasps the “control chain” that guides their development.
Recognizing the persistent nature of the “fog of war,” while information technology has significantly improved battlefield transparency, technological means can only reduce the density of the “fog,” not completely dispel it. The fundamental reason is that war is a dynamic game; the deception generated by the continuous strategic feints and other maneuvers employed by opposing sides transcends the scope of mere technological deconstruction, possessing an inherent unpredictability. Therefore, we must acknowledge the perpetual nature of the “fog of war” and employ appropriate measures to achieve the goal of “reducing our own fog and increasing the enemy’s confusion.” Regarding the former, we must strengthen our own reconnaissance advantages by integrating multi-source intelligence, including satellite reconnaissance, drone surveillance, and ground sensors, to achieve a real-time dynamic map of the battlefield situation. Regarding the latter, we must deepen the enemy’s decision-making dilemma by using techniques such as false signals and electronic camouflage to mislead their intelligence gathering, forcing them to expend resources in a state of confusion between truth and falsehood, directly weakening their situational awareness.
Exploring the winning factors of information-based and intelligent warfare
To plan for future wars, we must recognize the new challenges they bring, follow the underlying logic they contain, further explore the winning principles of informationized and intelligent warfare, and work hard to strengthen military theory, make good strategic plans, and innovate tactics and methods.
Strengthening theoretical development is crucial. Scientific military theory is combat power, and maintaining the advancement of military theory is essential for winning informationized and intelligent warfare. On the one hand, we must deepen the integration and innovation of military theory. We must systematically integrate modern scientific theories such as cybernetics, game theory, and information theory, focusing on new combat styles such as human-machine collaborative operations and cross-domain joint operations, to construct an advanced military theoretical system that is forward-looking, adaptable, and operable. On the other hand, we must adhere to practical testing and iterative updates. We must insist on linking theory with practice, keenly observing problems, systematically summarizing experiences, and accurately extracting patterns from the front lines of military struggle preparation and training, forming a virtuous cycle of “practice—understanding—re-practice—re-understanding,” ensuring that theory remains vibrant and effectively guides future warfare.
Strategic planning is crucial. Future-oriented strategic planning is essentially a proactive shaping process driven by technology, driven by demand, and guaranteed by dynamic adaptation. It requires a broad technological vision and flexible strategic thinking, striving to achieve a leap from “responding to war” to “designing war.” First, we must anticipate technological changes. We must maintain a high degree of sensitivity to disruptive technologies that may reshape the rules of war and deeply understand the profound impact of the cross-integration of various technologies. Second, we must focus on key areas. Emerging “high frontiers” such as cyberspace, outer space, the deep sea, and the polar regions should be the focus of strategic planning, concentrating on shaping the rules of operation and seizing advantages to ensure dominance in the invisible battlefield and emerging spaces. Third, we must dynamically adjust and adapt. The future battlefield is constantly changing and full of uncertainty. Strategic planning cannot be a static, definitive text, but rather a resilient, dynamic framework. We must assess the applicability, maturity, and potential risks of various solutions in conjunction with reality to ensure that the direction of military development is always precisely aligned with the needs of future warfare.
Promoting Tactical Innovation. Specific tactics serve as a bridge connecting technological innovation and combat operations. Faced with the profound changes brought about by informationized and intelligent warfare, it is imperative to vigorously promote tactical innovation and explore “intelligent strategies” adapted to the future battlefield. On the one hand, it is necessary to deeply explore the combat potential of emerging technologies. We should actively explore new winning paths such as “algorithms as combat power,” “data as firepower,” “networks as the battlefield,” and “intelligence as advantage,” transforming technological advantages into battlefield victories. On the other hand, it is necessary to innovatively design future combat processes. Various combat forces can be dispersed and deployed across multiple intelligent and networked nodes, constructing a more flattened, agile, and adaptive “observation-judgment-decision-action” cycle. Simultaneously, we must strengthen multi-domain linkage, breaking down inherent barriers between different services and combat domains, striving to achieve cross-domain collaboration, system-wide synergy, autonomous adaptation, and dynamic reorganization, promoting the overall emergence of combat effectiveness.
Operational form refers to the manifestation and state of combat under certain conditions, and is usually adapted to a certain form of warfare and combat method. With the development and widespread use of intelligent weapon systems, future intelligent warfare will inevitably present a completely different form from mechanized and informationized warfare.
Cloud-based combat system
The combat system is the fundamental basis for the aggregation and release of combat energy. An informationized combat system is based on a network information system, while an intelligent combat system is supported by a combat cloud. The combat cloud can organically reorganize dispersed combat resources into a flexible and dynamic combat resource pool. It features virtualization, connectivity, distribution, easy scalability, and on-demand services, enabling each combat unit to acquire resources on demand. It is a crucial support for achieving cross-domain collaboration and represents a new organizational form for intelligent combat systems.
The cloud-supported combat system utilizes cloud technology to connect information, physical systems, and the ubiquitous Internet of Things. By configuring combat resource clouds at different levels and scales, it highly shares multi-dimensional combat data across land, sea, air, and space, achieving battlefield resource integration across combat domains such as land, sea, air, space, electronic, and cyber domains. This allows various combat elements to converge into the cloud, completing the network interaction of battlefield data.
The cloud-connected combat system enables joint operations to integrate battlefield intelligence information widely distributed across various domains—space, air, ground, sea, and underwater—with the support of big data and cloud computing technologies. This allows for seamless, real-time, and on-demand distribution of information across these domains, achieving cross-domain information fusion and efficient sharing. It also enables command structures at all levels to leverage intelligent command and control systems for multi-dimensional intelligence analysis, battlefield situation assessment, operational optimization, decision-making, operational planning, and troop movement control. Furthermore, it allows combat forces to rapidly and flexibly adjust, optimize configurations, and recombine online based on real-time operational needs, forming adaptive task forces and implementing distributed, focused operations, supported by highly integrated cross-domain information technology. At the same time, through the cross-domain fusion capability of battlefield information in the combat cloud, it is also possible to form an integrated combat force with intelligent combat forces, traditional combat forces, manned combat forces and unmanned combat forces, and intangible space combat forces and tangible space combat forces. In the cloud, different combat units and combat elements in land, sea, air, space, electronic, and cyberspace can be highly integrated, coordinated, and have their strengths maximized. This enables cross-domain and cross-generational collaborative operations, transforming the overall combat effectiveness from the past gradual release and linear superposition of combat effects to non-linear, emergent, adaptive effects fusion and precise energy release.
Decentralized and concentrated battlefield deployment
Concentrating superior forces is an age-old principle of warfare. With the continuous improvement of network information systems and the widespread use of intelligent weapon systems, various combat forces, combat units, and combat elements can dynamically integrate into and rely on joint operations systems, disperse forces, quickly switch tasks, and dynamically aggregate effectiveness to cope with complex and ever-changing battlefield situations. This has become a force organization form that distinguishes intelligent warfare from information warfare.
The battlefield deployment of dispersed and concentrated forces refers to the joint operations system supported by cloud computing, in which various participating forces rely on the high degree of information sharing and rapid flow. Through node-based deployment, networked mobility, and virtual centralization, it can combine various combat elements, weapon platforms, and combat support systems that are dispersed in a multi-dimensional and vast battlefield space in real time, dynamically and flexibly, so as to achieve the distributed deployment of combat forces, the on-demand reorganization of combat modules, and the cross-domain integration of combat effectiveness.
The dispersed and concentrated battlefield deployment enables commanders at all levels to deeply perceive and accurately predict the battlefield situation through big data analysis, battlefield situation collection, and multi-source intelligence verification by intelligent command information systems. This allows for rapid and efficient situation assessment and early warning. Furthermore, the wide-area deployment and flexible configuration of various combat forces and units enable timely responses based on predetermined operational plans or ad-hoc collaborative needs. This allows for flexible and autonomous cross-domain coordination, rapid convergence and dispersal, and dynamic concentration of combat effectiveness. At critical times and in critical spaces, focusing on key nodes of the enemy’s operational system and high-value targets crucial to the overall strategic situation, it rapidly forms a system-wide operational advantage. Through a highly resilient and networked kill chain, it precisely releases combat effectiveness, generating an overall advantage spillover effect, thus forming an overwhelming advantage of multiple domains over one domain and the overall situation over the local situation. Especially during the release of combat effectiveness, each combat group, driven by “intelligence + data”, and based on pre-planned combat plans, can autonomously replan combat missions online around combat objectives, and automatically allocate targets online according to the actual combat functions and strengths of each combat unit within the group. This allows each unit to make the most of its strengths and advantages, and flexibly mobilize the free aggregation and dispersal of “materials + energy” in combat operations. Ultimately, this enables rapid matching and integration in terms of targets, situation, missions, capabilities, and timing, thereby forming a focused energy flow that releases systemic energy against the enemy.
Human-machine integrated command and control
The history of operational command development shows that decision-making and control methods in operational command activities always adapt to the development of the times. With the maturity of artificial intelligence technology and the continuous development of the self-generation, self-organization, and self-evolution of military intelligent systems, various weapon systems will evolve from information-based “low intelligence” to brain-like “high intelligence.” The combat style will evolve from information-based system combat to human-machine collaborative combat supported by the system. The autonomy of the war actors will become stronger, and the intelligence level of command and control systems will become higher. Fully leveraging the comparative advantages of “human and machine” and implementing decision-making and control through the “human-machine integration” model is a brand-new command form for future intelligent warfare.
Human-machine integrated command and control, supported by a reasonable division of functions between humans and machines and efficient decision-making through human-machine interaction, fully leverages the complementary advantages of human brain and machine intelligence to achieve the integration of command art and technology. In the process of intelligent combat decision-making and action, it enables rapid, accurate, scientific, and efficient activities such as situation analysis and judgment, combat concept design, combat decision determination, combat plan formulation, and order issuance. It also adopts a “human-in-the-loop” monitoring mode that combines autonomous action by intelligent combat platforms with timely correction by operators to organize and implement combat operations.
Human-machine integrated command and control, during planning and decision-making, can construct a combat cloud under the commander’s guidance through ubiquitous battlefield networks, intelligent auxiliary decision-making systems, and distributed intelligent combat platforms. Based on a model- and algorithm-driven intelligent “cloud brain,” it performs intelligent auxiliary decision-making, command and control, and evaluation simulations, combining “human strategy” with “machine strategy.” This leverages the respective strengths of both human and machine, achieving a deep integration of command strategy and intelligent support technologies, significantly improving the speed and accuracy of command decisions. During operational control, staff personnel can, based on operational intentions and missions, utilize intelligent battlefield perception systems, mission planning systems, and command and control systems, following a “synchronous perception—” approach. The basic principle of “rapid response and flexible handling” is based on a unified spatiotemporal benchmark and relies on a multi-dimensional networked reconnaissance and surveillance system to perceive changes in the battlefield situation in real time. It comprehensively uses auxiliary analysis tools to compare and analyze the differences between the current situation and the expected objectives and their impact, and makes timely adjustments to actions and adjusts troop movements on the spot to maintain combat advantage at all times. During the execution of operations, the command and control of intelligent combat platforms by operators of various weapon systems at all levels will be timely and precise to intervene according to the development and changes in the battlefield situation. While giving full play to the high speed, high precision and high autonomous combat capabilities of intelligent combat platforms, it ensures that they always operate under human control and always follow the overall combat intent.
Autonomous and coordinated combat operations
Implementing autonomous operations is crucial for commanders at all levels to seize opportunities, adapt to changing circumstances, and act rapidly on the ever-changing battlefield, gaining an advantage and preventing the enemy from making a move. This is a vital operational principle and requirement. Previously, due to constraints such as intelligence gathering, command and control methods, and battlefield coordination capabilities, truly autonomous and coordinated operations were difficult to achieve. However, with the continuous development and widespread application of information technology, collaborative control technology, and especially artificial intelligence in the military field, autonomous and coordinated operations will become the most prevalent form of collaboration in future intelligent warfare.
Autonomous and coordinated combat operations refer to the rapid acquisition, processing, and sharing of battlefield situation information by various combat forces in a cloud environment supported by multi-dimensional coverage, seamless network links, on-demand extraction of information resources, and flexible and rapid organizational support. This is achieved by utilizing “edge response” intelligence processing systems and big data-based battlefield situation intelligent analysis systems. With little or no reliance on the control of higher command organizations, these forces can accurately and comprehensively grasp intelligence information related to their operations and actively and proactively organize combat and coordinated actions based on changes in the enemy situation and unified operational intentions.
Autonomous and coordinated combat operations, while enhancing the autonomy of organizational operations at the local level, are further characterized by various intelligent weapon systems possessing the ability to understand combat intentions and highly adaptive and coordinated. They can automatically complete the “OODA” cycle with minimal or no human intervention, forming a complete closed-loop “adaptive” circuit. This enables them to efficiently execute complex and challenging combat missions. In rapidly changing battlefield environments, they can accurately and continuously conduct autonomous reconnaissance and detection of enemy situations, autonomously process battlefield situational information, autonomously identify friend or foe, autonomously track targets, and autonomously and flexibly select mission payloads, and autonomously launch attacks within the permissions granted by operators. Furthermore, during combat, intelligent weapon systems located in different spaces can, as the battlefield situation evolves and combat needs arise, form a combat power generation chain of “situational sharing—synchronous collaboration—optimal energy release” around a unified combat objective. Following the principle of “whoever is suitable, whoever leads; whoever has the advantage, whoever strikes,” they autonomously coordinate, precisely releasing dispersed firepower, information power, mobility, and protective power to the most appropriate targets at the most appropriate time and in the most appropriate manner, autonomously organizing combat operations. In addition, highly intelligent weapon systems can not only adapt to high-risk and complex combat environments and overcome human limitations in physiology and psychology, but also enter the extreme space of all domains and multiple dimensions to carry out missions. Moreover, they can conduct continuous combat with perception accuracy, computing speed and endurance far exceeding that of humans, autonomously carry out simultaneous cluster attacks and multi-wave continuous attacks, form a continuous high-intensity suppression posture against the enemy, and quickly achieve combat objectives.
The evolution of warfare and combat styles is inextricably linked to profound changes in combat systems. The “intelligence” of intelligent combat systems lies not merely in the accumulation of technologies, but more importantly in the reconstruction of the paths for generating and releasing combat power, enabling leaps in combat effectiveness and serving as a key fulcrum for achieving victory in future wars. A deep understanding and forward-looking construction of the “intelligent” advantages of intelligent combat systems has become an essential requirement for winning intelligent warfare.
Survival advantages of elastic redundancy
The survival of operational elements is fundamental to victory in combat. Intelligent combat systems, through distributed and flexible deployment, modular functional reconfiguration, and autonomous damage recovery, have formed a resilient survival mode to cope with high-intensity confrontation and uncertainty.
Heterogeneous and distributed global deployment. Heterogeneity reflects the degree of aggregation of different capabilities on the same platform, while distribution reflects the degree of distribution of the same capability on different platforms. Intelligent combat systems enhance the diversity of platform capabilities through heterogeneity. For example, new combat aircraft can serve as multi-functional integrated platforms with sensing, command and control, relay, and strike capabilities. By distributing combat functions to different platforms, large-scale, low-cost global deployment can be achieved. For instance, the same combat function can be assigned to multiple platforms and systems such as UAVs and loitering munitions. With the heterogeneous dispersion and matrix cross-linking of intelligent nodes, continuous pressure can be formed everywhere and in all directions in physical space, while rapid aggregation in key directions can be achieved. This unifies global elasticity and dynamic real-time optimization, maximizing functional distribution and effectiveness release to cope with the uncertainties of intelligent combat.
Functional restructuring through modular combination. The intelligent combat system, employing a flexible paradigm of software-defined, task-oriented invocation, and modular reconfiguration, deconstructs functions fixed to specific equipment into standardized, interoperable hardware and software modules. During combat, based on rapidly changing battlefield demands, these modules can be quickly and flexibly loaded and combined online through a unified interface and open architecture, achieving non-linear functional combinations and flexible capability reshaping. This plug-and-play, on-demand generation model unlocks unlimited functional potential within a limited physical scale, realizing a shift from “using whatever weapons are available to fight” to “generating the appropriate capabilities for the specific battle,” fundamentally enhancing the adaptability and mission flexibility of the combat system.
Self-healing resilience. The advantage of an intelligent combat system lies not in its absolute invulnerability, but in its self-healing resilience—the ability to detect damage and reconstruct immediately upon interruption. When some nodes fail due to combat damage or interference, the system autonomously and rapidly diagnoses the damage based on preset functions and path redundancy rules. It then mobilizes nearby healthy nodes to take over the mission or activates backup communication paths to rebuild connections, propelling the system to quickly transition to a new stable state. This inherent elastic redundancy allows the system to maintain core functions and reconstruct the combat network even after enduring continuous attacks, minimizing the impact of combat damage on overall combat effectiveness.
The cognitive advantage of agile penetration
Cognitive advantage is key to gaining the initiative in battlefield information and achieving decisive victory. Its essence lies in breaking through the barriers of “information fog” and the constraints of “decision anxiety” through the deep integration of intelligent algorithms and advanced sensors, and realizing a leap from passive perception to proactive cognition.
Resilient communication capable of adapting to changing circumstances. Resilient communication refers to the ability of communication systems to detect interference in real time and dynamically reconfigure links in highly contested and complex electromagnetic environments to maintain the continuity and stability of command and control. Intelligent combat systems, relying on technologies such as cognitive radio, achieve on-demand allocation of communication resources, intelligent optimization of transmission paths, and autonomous reconfiguration of network topology, enabling them to “penetrate gaps” in complex electromagnetic environments and flexibly acquire communication “windows.” This resilience—able to maintain communication even amidst interference and resume operations even after interruptions—ensures the continuity of command and control relationships in extremely harsh electromagnetic environments, providing a reliable communication line for system cognitive activities.
The organic integration of multi-modal information. Multi-modal integration refers to the process of extracting consistency from diverse and heterogeneous information to form a high-value battlefield situation. The intelligent combat system, based on intelligent algorithms, performs cross-modal alignment of data from different sources such as radar, optoelectronics, reconnaissance, and cyber warfare. It automatically extracts enemy deployment, action patterns, and tactical intentions from massive and fragmented intelligence, achieving heterogeneous complementarity and cross-verification. This drives a qualitative leap from data redundancy to accurate intelligence, thereby providing commanders with a comprehensive and reliable battlefield cognitive map, clearing away the “fog of war,” and reaching the core of the situation.
Human-machine interaction achieves seamless intent. Intent-based intent aims to bridge the semantic gap between human commanders and intelligent combat systems, enabling precise and lossless conversion from natural language commands to machine-executable tasks. Intelligent combat systems utilize technologies such as natural language processing and knowledge graphs to construct an intelligent interaction engine with natural language understanding and logical reasoning capabilities. This engine automatically decomposes the commander’s general operational intent into task lists, constraints, and evaluation criteria, generating machine-understandable and executable tactical instructions and action sequences, which are then precisely distributed to the corresponding combat units, directly driving their execution. This “what is thought is what is directed, what is directed is what is attacked” command model significantly reduces the understanding and communication cycle in the traditional command chain, enabling deep integration of human and machine intelligence at the decision-making level and achieving a leap in command effectiveness.
Synergistic advantages of autonomous adaptation
Synergistic advantages are a multiplier for unleashing the effectiveness of system-of-systems warfare. The synergy of intelligent combat systems transcends programmed pre-setup, manifesting as the self-organizing and adaptive synchronization and cooperation of cross-domain combat units under unified rules and common missions. Its essence is the embodiment of system intelligence at the operational level.
Spatiotemporal coordination constrained by rules. Spatiotemporal coordination refers to setting action boundaries and interaction rules for widely dispersed combat units within a unified spatiotemporal reference framework, ensuring their orderly cooperation in the physical domain. Under a unified operational rule framework, each unit of the intelligent combat system autonomously calculates its relative position and predicts its trajectory through intelligent algorithms, achieving time-domain calibration, spatial-domain integration, and frequency-domain nesting of different platforms. This ensures conflict-free path planning, interference-free spectrum use, and accident-free firepower application. This collaborative mechanism, which combines order and flexibility, avoids mutual interference while maintaining tactical flexibility, providing a spatiotemporal reference for combat operations in complex battlefield environments.
Task-driven logical coordination. Logical coordination refers to using combat missions as the underlying logic, autonomously decomposing tasks, allocating resources, and planning actions to achieve intelligent organization and scheduling. The intelligent combat system, based on task analysis, capability matching, and planning generation algorithms, automatically decomposes combat objectives into specific action sequences and intelligently schedules corresponding combat units to “dispatch orders.” Each intelligent node, based on its understanding of the overall mission, real-time situational awareness, and its own capabilities, autonomously decides on action plans through a multi-agent negotiation mechanism and dynamically negotiates and cooperates with relevant units to “accept orders.” This task-oriented command greatly liberates higher-level commanders, enabling the system to possess agility and flexibility in responding to emergencies and significantly improving its mission adaptability.
Target-aligned awareness collaboration. Awareness collaboration refers to the autonomous decision-making and actions of combat units based on a shared understanding of the target and environment, resulting in synergistic effects. Intelligent combat systems consist of systems or nodes with predictive and reasoning capabilities. Driven by operational objectives, they can anticipate the actions of friendly forces and the course of the battlefield, and through local perception and independent decision-making, conduct self-organized and self-inspired collaborative support. This efficiency-driven, unspoken consensus transcends communication constraints and pre-set procedures, enabling the system to demonstrate exceptional adaptability and creativity when facing powerful adversaries.
The evolutionary advantages of learning iteration
Evolutionary advantage is key to a combat system’s sustained competitiveness and ability to seize the initiative on the battlefield. Intelligent combat systems rely on real-time adversarial data to drive overall optimization, accelerate capability diffusion through cross-domain experience transfer, and foster disruptive tactics through virtual gaming environments, thereby achieving autonomous evolution and generational leaps in combat effectiveness during the adversarial process.
The evolution of a system built upon accumulated experience. Intelligent combat systems will gather perception, decision-making, and action data acquired from complex adversarial environments in real time to a knowledge hub. Leveraging advanced algorithms such as reinforcement learning, they will conduct in-depth analysis and mining, performing closed-loop evaluation and dynamic adjustment of system-level operational logic such as command processes, coordination rules, and resource allocation strategies. This will form reusable and verifiable structured knowledge units, enhancing the combat system’s understanding of its environment and its autonomous adaptability. This will enable the entire system to form a shared “collective memory,” achieving adaptive radiation from single-point intelligence to overall operational effectiveness, and ultimately achieving individual evolution that becomes “more refined with each battle.”
Cross-domain empowerment of knowledge transfer. The intelligent combat system, relying on a unified semantic space and feature alignment framework, can rapidly embed localized experiences extracted and summarized from a specific battlefield or domain into other combat domains or mission scenarios. This breaks down information barriers between combat units, enabling the lossless transformation and cross-domain application of combat experience. Essentially, it promotes the secure flow and synergistic effect of knowledge within the system, completing the sublimation and reconstruction from “concrete experience” to “abstract knowledge,” achieving “gains from one battle benefiting all domains,” and accelerating the synchronous evolution of combat capabilities across various domains. This not only significantly improves the overall learning efficiency of the combat system and avoids repeated trial and error, but also achieves the intensive enhancement and systematic inheritance of combat capabilities.
The disruptive potential of game theory and confrontation is emerging. Systemic intelligent game theory aims to break through the boundaries of human cognition, fostering disruptive combat capabilities that transcend traditional experience. Its essence lies in the proactive creation and self-transcendence of knowledge at the system level. By constructing a high-intensity, long-term, realistic “red-blue” adversarial environment in a digital twin battlefield, and utilizing generative adversarial networks and multi-agent reinforcement learning frameworks, intelligent combat systems can explore the unknown boundaries of the strategy space in continuous game development. Based on game theory and complex systems theory, the system can spontaneously form better strategies during adversarial evolution, leading to combat modes and organizational forms that transcend conventional cognition. This makes the intelligent combat system a “super think tank” capable of continuously producing disruptive tactics.
Original Title: A Look at Intelligent Warfare: Focusing on Counter-AI Operations in Intelligent Warfare
introduction
The widespread application of science and technology in the military field has brought about profound changes in the form of warfare and combat methods. Military competition among major powers is increasingly manifested as technological subversion and counter-subversion, surprise attacks and counter-surprise attacks, and offsetting and counter-offsetting. To win future intelligent warfare, it is necessary not only to continuously promote the deep transformation and application of artificial intelligence technology in the military field, but also to strengthen dialectical thinking, adhere to asymmetric thinking, innovate and develop anti-AI warfare theories and tactics, and proactively plan research on anti-AI technologies and the development of weapons and equipment to achieve victory through “breaking AI” and strive to seize the initiative in future warfare.
Fully recognize the inevitability of anti-artificial intelligence warfare
In his essay “On Contradiction,” Comrade Mao Zedong pointed out that “the law of contradiction in things, that is, the law of unity of opposites, is the most fundamental law of dialectical materialism.” Throughout the history of military technology development and its operational application, there has always been a dialectical relationship between offense and defense. The phenomenon of mutual competition and alternating suppression between the “spear” of technology and the “shield” of corresponding countermeasures is commonplace.
In the era of cold weapons, people not only invented eighteen kinds of weapons such as knives, spears, swords, and halberds, but also corresponding helmets, armor, and shields. In the era of firearms, the use of gunpowder greatly increased attack range and lethality, but it also spurred tactical and technical innovations, exemplified by defensive fortifications such as trenches and bastions. In the mechanized era, tanks shone brightly in World War II, and the development of tank armor and anti-tank weapons continues to this day. In the information age, “electronic attack” and “electronic protection,” centered on information dominance, have sparked a new wave of interest, giving rise to electronic warfare units. Furthermore, numerous opposing concepts in the military field, such as “missiles” versus “anti-missile,” and “unmanned combat” versus “counter-unmanned combat,” abound.
It should be recognized that “anti-AI warfare,” as the opposite concept of “intelligent warfare,” will inevitably emerge gradually with the widespread and in-depth application of intelligent technologies in the military field. Forward-looking research into the concepts, principles, and tactical implementation paths of anti-AI warfare is not only a necessity for a comprehensive and dialectical understanding of intelligent warfare, but also an inevitable step to seize the high ground in future military competition and implement asymmetric warfare.
Scientific Analysis of Counter-AI Combat Methods and Paths
Currently, artificial intelligence (AI) technology is undergoing a leapfrog development, moving from weak to strong and from specialized to general-purpose applications. From its underlying support perspective, data, algorithms, and computing power remain its three key elements. Data is the fundamental raw material for training and optimizing models, algorithms determine the strategies and mechanisms for data processing and problem-solving, and computing power provides the hardware support for complex calculations. Seeking ways to “break through” AI by addressing these three elements—data, algorithms, and computing power—is an important methodological approach for implementing counter-AI warfare.
Counter-data warfare. Data is the raw material for artificial intelligence to learn and reason, and its quality and diversity significantly impact the accuracy and generalization ability of models. Numerous examples in daily life demonstrate how minute changes in data can cause AI models to fail. For instance, facial recognition models on mobile phones may fail to accurately identify individuals due to factors such as wearing glasses, changing hairstyles, or changes in ambient light; autonomous driving models may also misjudge road conditions due to factors like road conditions, road signs, and weather. The basic principle of counter-data warfare is to mislead the training and judgment processes of military intelligent models by creating “contaminated” data or altering its distribution characteristics. This “inferiority” in the data leads to “errors” in the model, thereby reducing its effectiveness. Since AI models can comprehensively analyze and cross-verify multi-source data, counter-data warfare should focus more on multi-dimensional features, packaging false data information to enhance its “authenticity.” In recent years, foreign militaries have conducted relevant experimental verifications in this area. For example, by using special materials for coating and infrared emitter camouflage, the optical and infrared characteristics of real weapon platforms, and even the vibration effects of engines, can be simulated to deceive intelligent intelligence processing models; in cyberspace, traffic data camouflage can be implemented to improve the silent operation capability of network attacks and reduce the effectiveness of network attack detection models.
Anti-algorithm warfare. The essence of an algorithm is a strategy mechanism for solving problems described in computer language. Because the scope of application of such strategy mechanisms is limited, they may fail when faced with a wide variety of real-world problems. A typical example is Lee Sedol’s “divine move” in the 2016 human-machine Go match. Many professional Go players, after reviewing the game, stated that the “divine move” was actually invalid, yet it worked against AlphaGo. AlphaGo developer Silva explained this by saying that Lee Sedol exploited a previously unknown vulnerability in the computer; other analyses suggest that this move might have contradicted AlphaGo’s Go logic or been outside its strategic learning range, making it unable to respond. The basic principle of anti-algorithm warfare is to target the vulnerabilities in the algorithm’s strategy mechanism and weaknesses in its model architecture through logical attacks or deception to reduce the algorithm’s effectiveness. Anti-algorithm warfare should be combined with specific combat actions to achieve “misleading and deceiving” the algorithm. For example, drone swarm reconnaissance operations often use reinforcement learning algorithms to plan reconnaissance paths. In this case, irregular or abnormal actions can be created to reduce or disable the reward mechanism in the reinforcement learning algorithm model, thereby reducing its reconnaissance search efficiency.
Counter-computing power warfare. The strength of computing power represents the speed at which data processing can be converted into information and decision-making advantages. Unlike counter-data warfare and counter-algorithm warfare, which primarily rely on soft confrontation, counter-computing power warfare employs a combination of hard and soft tactics. Hard destruction mainly refers to attacks on enemy computing centers and computing network infrastructure, crippling their AI models by cutting off their computing power. Soft confrontation focuses on increasing the enemy’s computing costs, primarily by creating a “fog of war” and data noise. For example, during operations, large quantities of meaningless data of various types, such as images, audio, video, and electromagnetic data, can be generated to constrain and deplete the enemy’s computing resources, reducing their effective utilization rate. Furthermore, attacks can also be launched against weak points in the defenses of the computing power support environment and infrastructure. Computing centers consume enormous amounts of electricity; attacking and destroying their power support systems can also achieve the effect of counter-computing power warfare.
Forward-looking planning for the development of anti-artificial intelligence combat capabilities
In all warfare, one engages with conventional tactics and wins with unconventional ones. Faced with intelligent warfare, while continuously advancing and improving intelligent combat capabilities, it is also necessary to strengthen preparedness for counter-AI warfare, proactively planning for theoretical innovation, supporting technology development, and equipment platform construction related to counter-AI warfare, ensuring the establishment of an intelligent combat system that integrates offense and defense, and combines defense and counter-attack.
Strengthen theoretical innovation in counter-AI warfare. Scientific military theory is combat effectiveness. Whether it’s military strategic innovation, military technological innovation, or other aspects of military innovation, all are inseparable from theoretical guidance. We must adhere to liberating our minds, broadening our horizons, and strengthening dialectical thinking. We must use theoretical innovation in counter-AI warfare as a supplement and breakthrough to construct an intelligent warfare theoretical system that supports and serves the fight for victory. We must adhere to the principle of “you fight your way, I fight my way,” strengthening asymmetric thinking. Through in-depth research on the concepts, strategies, and tactics of counter-AI warfare, we must provide scientific theoretical support for seizing battlefield intelligence dominance and effectively leverage the leading role of military theory. We must adhere to the integration of theory and technology, enhancing our scientific and technological awareness, innovation, and application capabilities. We must establish a closed loop between counter-AI warfare theory and technology, allowing them to complement and support each other, achieving deep integration and positive interaction between theory and technology.
Emphasis should be placed on accumulating military technologies for countering artificial intelligence. Science and technology are crucial foundations for generating and enhancing combat effectiveness. Breakthroughs in some technologies can have disruptive effects, potentially even fundamentally altering the traditional landscape of warfare. Currently, major world powers view artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology and have elevated the development of military intelligence to a national strategy. Simultaneously, some countries are actively conducting research on technologies related to countering artificial intelligence warfare, exploring methods to counter AI and aiming to reduce the effectiveness of adversaries’ military intelligent systems. Therefore, it is essential to both explore and follow up, strengthening research and tracking of cutting-edge technologies, actively discovering, promoting, and fostering the development of technologies with counter-disruptive capabilities, such as intelligent countermeasures, to seize the technological advantage at the outset of counter-AI warfare and prevent enemy technological surprise attacks; and to carefully select technologies, maintaining sufficient scientific rationality and accurate judgment to dispel the technological “fog” and avoid falling into the adversary’s technological traps.
Developing anti-AI warfare weapons and equipment. Designing weapons and equipment is designing future warfare; we develop weapons and equipment based on the types of warfare we will fight in the future. Anti-AI warfare is an important component of intelligent warfare, and anti-AI weapons and equipment will play a crucial role on the future battlefield. When developing anti-AI warfare weapons and equipment, we must first closely align with battlefield needs. We must closely integrate with the adversary, mission, and environment to strengthen anti-AI warfare research, accurately describe anti-AI warfare scenarios, and ensure that the requirements for anti-AI warfare weapons and equipment are scientifically sound, accurate, and reasonable. Secondly, we must adopt a cost-conscious approach. Recent local wars have shown that cost control is a crucial factor influencing the outcome of future wars. Anti-AI warfare focuses on interfering with and deceiving the enemy’s military intelligent systems. Increasing the development of decoy weapon platforms is an effective way to reduce costs and increase efficiency. By using low-cost simulated decoy targets to deceive the enemy’s intelligent reconnaissance systems, the “de-intelligence” effect can be extended and amplified, aiming to deplete their high-value precision-guided missiles and other high-value strike weapons. Finally, we must emphasize simultaneous development, use, and upgrading. Intelligent technologies are developing rapidly and iterating quickly. It is crucial to closely monitor the application of cutting-edge military intelligent technologies by adversaries, accurately understand their intelligent model algorithm architecture, and continuously promote the upgrading of the latest counter-artificial intelligence technologies in weapon platforms to ensure their high efficiency in battlefield application. (Kang Ruizhi, Li Shengjie)
Where should the intelligent transformation for combat readiness go?
Currently, the form of warfare is rapidly evolving towards intelligence, and the era of intelligent warfare is imminent. To adapt to the development of military intelligent technology, the changing mechanisms of war, and the high-quality development of the armed forces, it is imperative to accelerate the advancement of intelligent combat readiness. Modern combat readiness must, while advancing the transformation from mechanization and semi-mechanization to informatization, further proactively address the challenges of military intelligence, adhere to intelligence as the guiding principle, and accelerate the integrated development of mechanization, informatization, and intelligence. In short, vigorously promoting intelligent combat readiness is a practical necessity for driving the high-quality development of national defense and the armed forces; only by successfully transforming to intelligent combat readiness can we promote the leapfrog development of the military’s combat capabilities.
Construct an intelligent warfare theoretical system. Focusing on solving key and difficult issues in intelligent warfare theory, such as war prediction, war forms, war design, operational concepts, operational styles, operational systems, troop formation, and troop training, we will deepen research on the application of intelligent warfare, explore the winning mechanisms, characteristics, laws, tactics, action methods, and comprehensive support of intelligent warfare, enrich the theories of intelligent warfare, intelligent operations, and the construction of intelligent combat forces, and gradually construct an intelligent warfare theoretical system.
Establish an intelligent command and control paradigm. Strengthen the development of technologies such as adversarial and game-theoretic operational planning, digital twin parallel simulation, and efficient organization and precise scheduling of complex operational resources. Enhance capabilities such as automatic planning of operational plans under large-scale, high-intensity conditions and autonomous decomposition of cross-domain and cross-level tasks. Achieve deep integration of military knowledge and machine intelligence, reliable and explainable auxiliary decision-making, and self-learning and self-evolving adversarial strategies. Integrate technological achievements such as sensing, networking, cloud computing, and quantum computing to enhance intelligent auxiliary capabilities in situation generation, operational command, and staff operations. Accelerate the development of intelligent staff business systems and intelligently upgrade and transform operational command information systems. Achieve intelligent information Q&A, intelligent plan generation, and decision support suggestions for typical campaign/tactical command, greatly reducing the workload of staff personnel and significantly improving the timeliness of command operations.
Develop intelligent weapon and equipment systems. Strengthen the intelligent upgrading and transformation of traditional weapons, promote the practical application of intelligent technologies in backbone equipment, and deploy low-cost, expendable unmanned combat platforms on a large scale. Develop intelligent individual soldier integrated systems, air-to-ground unmanned swarm collaborative attack systems, and underground space swarm warfare systems, etc., research and develop intelligent flexible wearable technologies and mobile intelligent terminal technologies, develop intelligent wearable equipment, brain-computer interface helmets, and human implant devices, etc., and accelerate the application of intelligent new weapon platforms, using the pioneering development of key equipment to drive overall breakthroughs.
Increase the proportion of intelligent combat forces. Focusing on optimizing structure and function, implement intelligent design for the existing organizational structure of the armed forces, and gradually increase the proportion of intelligent combat forces. Formulate talent development plans, cultivate the intelligent literacy of combat personnel, and explore a talent cultivation path that integrates military and civilian sectors, services, and enterprises. Build a new generation of combat forces that are intelligently led, cross-domain collaborative, all-domain mobile, and precise and multi-functional; focus on research on intelligent air defense and anti-missile systems, passive detection and intelligent identification of aerial targets, and build intelligent air combat forces such as anti-aircraft unmanned combat aircraft and “swarm” aircraft; emphasize research on intelligent missiles and develop long-range missile deterrence and strike capabilities; deepen research on the architecture design of intelligent attack and defense systems in cyberspace and the intelligent generation of attack strategies, upgrade the new generation of cyberspace reconnaissance, attack, and defense forces, and comprehensively enhance intelligent combat capabilities.
Optimize intelligent autonomous collaboration methods. Focusing on the human-machine “interaction-understanding-co-progress” framework, break through human-machine hybrid perception enhancement and human-machine adaptive multi-task collaboration to improve human-machine hybrid perception capabilities, cognitive abilities, and overall combat effectiveness in complex battlefield environments, achieving complementarity and intelligent enhancement between human wisdom and machine intelligence. Accelerate the development of applied research in areas such as intelligent swarm distributed elastic architecture, self-organizing anti-jamming communication and interaction, distributed autonomous collaboration in complex confrontation scenarios, and swarm intelligent command and control adapted to complex environments and tasks. Enhance the autonomous elastic planning and swarm intelligence confrontation learning capabilities of unmanned swarms in complex scenarios, promoting an overall leap in the combat effectiveness of multi-domain/cross-domain heterogeneous swarms.
Innovate an intelligent, all-dimensional support model. Facing the overall requirements of comprehensive support for future battlefields, including all-time intelligent perception, precise control of supplies and ammunition, and accurate delivery of combat supplies, enhance the intelligent combat logistics equipment support capabilities. Develop capabilities such as comprehensive multi-dimensional support demand mining across all domains, online networked dynamic monitoring of equipment status, autonomous early warning of support risks, and on-demand allocation of support resources. Promote research and verification of intelligent network information systems, intelligent military logistics systems, intelligent support for battlefield facilities and environment information, smart individual soldier support, intelligent rapid medical treatment for future battlefields, and intelligent energy support and transportation delivery, achieving the organic integration of combat, technology, and logistics support elements with combat command and troop movements.
Breakthroughs in artificial intelligence technology, marked by deep learning, and their applications across various fields have propelled intelligentization to new heights globally, becoming a focal point of attention. In the military field, where technological innovation and application are never lagging behind, a new revolution is also actively brewing. We must accurately grasp the pulse of intelligent warfare’s evolution and analyze its intrinsic nature in order to embrace and master intelligent warfare with a fresh perspective.
How far away is intelligent warfare from us?
Intelligent warfare is warfare primarily supported by artificial intelligence technology. Imbuing weapon platforms with human-like intelligence and replacing human combatants on the battlefield has been a dream for humanity for millennia. With the powerful impact of AI systems like AlphaGo and Atlas, and the emerging concepts and platforms of new warfare such as swarm warfare and flying aircraft carriers, the door to intelligent warfare seems to be quietly opening.
The laws of historical development foreshadow the inevitable rise of intelligent warfare on the battlefield. Advances in science and technology drive the evolution of weaponry, triggering fundamental changes in military organization, combat methods, and military theory, ultimately forcibly propelling a historical transformation in the form of warfare. The arrival of intelligent warfare aligns with this inevitable historical trend. Looking back at the evolution of human warfare, every major advancement in science and technology has driven significant military transformations. The invention of gunpowder ushered in the era of firearms, wiping out infantry and cavalry formations under the linear warfare tactics of firearms. The application of the steam engine in the military led to the mechanized era, giving rise to large-scale mechanized warfare led by armored ships, tanks, and aircraft. The emergence and application of intelligent technology will profoundly change human cognition, war thinking, and combat methods, once again triggering a major military revolution, and intelligent warfare will inevitably take center stage.
The development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology determines the pace of intelligent warfare. The continuous development and widespread application of AI technology are propelling intelligent warfare from its initial stages of uncertainty to reality, gradually emerging and growing, step by step approaching us. To truly enter the era of intelligent warfare, AI technology needs to advance through four stages. The first stage is computational intelligence, which means breaking through the limitations of computing power and storage space to achieve near real-time computing and storage capabilities—capabilities far beyond the reach of large computers and massive servers. The widespread application of cloud computing has already firmly placed humanity on this first stage. The second stage is perceptual intelligence, where machines can understand, see, distinguish, and recognize, enabling direct communication and dialogue with humans. Natural language understanding, image and graphics recognition, and biometric identification technologies based on big data have allowed humanity to reach this second stage. The third stage is cognitive intelligence, where machines can understand human thought, reason and make judgments and decisions like humans. Knowledge mining, knowledge graphs, artificial neural networks, and decision tree technologies driven by deep learning algorithms are propelling humanity towards this third stage. The fourth stage is human-machine integrated augmented intelligence, which involves complementary and two-way closed-loop interaction between humans’ strengths in perception, reasoning, induction, and learning, and machines’ strengths in search, computation, storage, and optimization. Virtual reality augmentation technology, brain-like cognitive technology, and brain-like neural network technology are exploring how humanity can reach this fourth stage. When humanity reached the second stage, the intelligent warfare began to approach; when we step onto the fourth stage, the era of intelligent warfare will fully begin.
Self-learning and growth are accelerating the sudden arrival of the intelligent warfare revolution. “Learning” ability is the core capability of artificial intelligence; once machines can learn on their own, their learning speed will be astonishing. Once machines possess self-learning capabilities, they will enter a rapid growth trajectory of continuous “intelligence enhancement and accelerated evolution.” All the technical difficulties in moving towards intelligent warfare will be readily resolved as “learning” deepens. The era of intelligent warfare may very well arrive suddenly in ways no one could have imagined!
What exactly will intelligent warfare change?
Intelligent warfare will break through the limits of traditional spatiotemporal cognition . In intelligent warfare, artificial intelligence technology can collect, calculate, and push information on the actions of all forces in combat in real time and across all domains. This will enable humans to break through the logical limits of thought, the physiological limits of senses, and the physical limits of existence, greatly improving the scope of cognition of time and space. It will allow for real-time and precise control over all actions of all forces, and enable the rapid transfer, aggregation, and attack of superior combat resources in multidimensional space and domains. Any time and any space may become a point in time and space where victory can be achieved.
Intelligent warfare will reshape the relationship between humans and weaponry . With the rapid advancement of intelligent technologies and the continuous improvement of their intelligence levels, weapon platforms and combat systems can not only passively and mechanically execute human commands, but also, based on deep understanding and prediction, leverage the computational, storage, and retrieval capabilities that machines excel at, thereby autonomously and proactively executing specific tasks to a certain extent. It can be said that weapon platforms and combat systems can also, to some extent, proactively exert human consciousness, even exceeding the scope of human understanding, autonomously and even creatively completing combat missions according to specific programs. The traditional distinction between humans and weaponry becomes blurred, even making it difficult to differentiate whether it is humans or machines at work. People are exclaiming that “humans and weaponry will become partners.” Therefore, in intelligent warfare, while humans remain the most important factor in combat effectiveness, the changing way humans and weaponry are integrated enriches the connotation of combat effectiveness, and the traditional relationship between humans and weaponry will be restructured on this basis.
Intelligent warfare will spur the emergence of new combat methods . Revolutionary advancements in science and technology inevitably lead to revolutionary changes in combat methods; significant progress in intelligent technologies will inevitably bring about a period of rapid transformation in combat methods. On the one hand, emerging technologies in fields such as deep cognition, deep learning, and deep neural networks, driven by computing, data, algorithms, and biology, along with their cross-integration with achievements in information, biology, medicine, engineering, and manufacturing, will inevitably drive an explosive emergence of new combat methods. On the other hand, the intense confrontation between intelligent weapon platforms and combat systems will inevitably become the target and driving force for innovative combat methods. The higher the level of intelligent technology in a war, the more it will become the focus of confrontation. Disadvantages in areas such as the limits of spatiotemporal cognition, massive information storage and computing capabilities, and neural network organization and generation capabilities will lead to new types of “blinding,” “deafening,” and “paralyzing” combat methods in new domains.
Intelligent warfare will incubate entirely new command and control methods. The advantages of command and control are a focal point in warfare, and intelligent warfare calls for entirely new command and control approaches. First, human-machine collaborative decision-making will become the primary command and decision-making method in intelligent warfare. In previous wars, command and decision-making was primarily driven by commanders, with technology playing a supporting role. In intelligent warfare, intelligent auxiliary decision-making systems will proactively urge or prompt commanders to make decisions based on changes in the battlefield situation. This is because the human brain can no longer quickly absorb and efficiently process the massive and rapidly changing battlefield situational information, and human senses can no longer withstand the extraordinary speed of change. Under such circumstances, decisions made solely by commanders are likely to be delayed and useless. Only human-machine collaborative decision-making driven by intelligent auxiliary decision-making systems can compensate for time and space differences and the gap between machine and brain, ensuring the advantage of command and decision-making. Second, brain-computer interface control will become the primary command and control method in intelligent warfare. In previous wars, commanders issued commands to control troops level by level through documents, radio, and telephone, in written or voice form. In intelligent warfare, commanders use intelligent, brain-like neurons to issue commands to troops through a neural network combat system platform. This reduces the conversion process of command presentation formats and shortens the time for commands to be converted across media, resulting in a faster pace and higher efficiency. When the combat system platform is attacked and partially damaged, this command and control method can autonomously repair or reconstruct the neural network, quickly restoring its main functions or even all functions, making it more resistant to attack.
How should we prepare for intelligent warfare?
In the research and exploration of intelligent warfare, we must not be content with lagging behind and following others. We must aim to win future wars and meet the challenges of intelligent warfare with a more proactive attitude, advanced concepts, and positive actions.
Breakthroughs in intelligent technologies will drive a leap in the effectiveness of intelligent combat systems. While significant progress has been made in areas such as neural network algorithms, intelligent sensing and networking technologies, data mining, and knowledge graph technologies, intelligent technologies are still largely in the weak intelligence stage, far from reaching the advanced stage of strong intelligence, and there is still vast potential for future development. It is essential to strengthen basic research in artificial intelligence, follow the laws of scientific and technological development, scientifically plan the development direction of intelligent technologies, select appropriate technological breakthroughs, and strengthen key core technologies in artificial intelligence, especially fundamental research that plays a supporting role. Emphasis should be placed on research into key military technologies. Driven by military needs, and focusing on key military technologies such as intelligent perception, intelligent decision-making, intelligent control, intelligent strike, and intelligent support, intelligent reconnaissance and perception systems, command and control systems, weapon systems, and combat support systems should be developed. Collaborative innovation between military and civilian technologies should be promoted, fully leveraging the advantages of civilian intelligent technology development, relying on the advantages of military and civilian resources, strengthening strategic cooperation between the military and civilian sectors, and building a service platform for the joint research and sharing of artificial intelligence scientific and technological achievements, the joint construction and sharing of conditions and facilities, and the integration of general standards between the military and civilian sectors, thus forming a new landscape of open, integrated, and innovative development of intelligent combat technologies.
Leading the innovation of combat methods with the concept of intelligent warfare. A shift in mindset is a prerequisite for welcoming the arrival of intelligent warfare. Mindset precedes action; if our mindset remains at the traditional level, it will be difficult to adapt to the needs of intelligent warfare. Intelligent warfare has brought about profound changes in technological support, combat forces, and winning mechanisms, requiring us to first establish the concept of intelligent warfare and use it to guide the innovation of our military’s future combat methods. First, we must strengthen the struggle for “intelligent control.” Artificial intelligence is the foundation of intelligent warfare. Depriving and weakening the opponent’s ability to utilize intelligence, while maintaining our own freedom to utilize intelligence, is fundamental to ensuring the smooth implementation of intelligent warfare. The militaries of developed Western countries are exploring various means, such as electromagnetic interference, electronic suppression, high-power microwave penetration, and takeover control, to block the opponent’s ability to utilize intelligence, seize “intelligent control,” and thus gain battlefield advantage. Second, we must innovate intelligent combat methods. We must focus on fully leveraging the overall effectiveness of the intelligent combat system, strengthening research on new intelligent combat methods such as human-machine collaborative intelligent warfare, intelligent robot warfare, and intelligent unmanned swarm warfare, as well as the processes and methods of intelligent combat command and intelligent combat support. With a view to effectively counter the threat of intelligent warfare from the enemy, we should study strategies to defeat the enemy, such as intelligent disruption warfare and intelligent interdiction warfare.
Intelligent training innovation is driving a transformation in combat capability generation. Intelligent warfare will be a war jointly waged by humans and machines, with intelligent unmanned combat systems playing an increasingly important role. It is imperative to adapt to the new characteristics of intelligent warfare force systems, innovate and develop intelligent training concepts, and explore new models for generating combat capability in intelligent warfare. On the one hand, it is necessary to strengthen training for humans in operating intelligent systems. By leveraging big data, cloud computing, VR technology, and other technologies to create new training environments, we can continuously improve human intelligence literacy, enhance human-machine cognition, understanding, and interaction quality, and improve the ability of humans to operate intelligent combat systems. On the other hand, it is necessary to explore new training models with machines as the primary focus. Previous training has primarily focused on humans, emphasizing the ability of humans to master and use weapons and equipment in specific environments to improve combat effectiveness. To adapt to the new characteristics of the force structure in intelligent warfare, the training organization concept and model of traditional training, which is centered on people, should be changed. Instead, the focus should be on improving the self-command, self-control, and self-combat capabilities of intelligent combat systems. By making full use of the characteristics of intelligent systems that can engage in self-competition and self-growth, a training system, training environment, and training mechanism specifically for intelligent combat systems should be formed. This will enable intelligent combat systems to achieve a geometric leap in combat capability after a short period of autonomous intensive training.
Technology and war have always been intertwined. While technological innovation constantly changes the face of war, it hasn’t altered its violent nature and coercive objectives. In recent years, with the rapid development and application of artificial intelligence (AI) technology, the debate about its impact on war has never ceased. Compared to artificial intelligence (AI), artificial general intelligence (AGI) is considered to be a higher level of intelligence, comparable to human intelligence. How will the emergence of AGI affect war? Will it change the violent and coercive nature of war? This article will explore this question with a series of reflections.
Is AGI just an enabling technology?
Many believe that while large-scale models and generative artificial intelligence (AGI) demonstrate great potential for future military applications, they are ultimately just enabling technologies. They can only enhance and optimize weapons and equipment, making existing equipment smarter and improving combat efficiency, but they are unlikely to bring about a true military revolution. Just like “cyber warfare weapons,” which were once highly anticipated by many countries when they first appeared, now seem somewhat exaggerated.
The disruptive nature of AGI is entirely different. It brings tremendous changes to the battlefield with reaction speeds and knowledge far exceeding those of humans. More importantly, it produces enormous disruptive results by accelerating technological progress. On the future battlefield, autonomous weapons will be endowed with advanced intelligence by AGI, their performance will be universally enhanced, and they will become “strong in offense and difficult in defense” due to their speed and swarm advantages. At that time, the highly intelligent autonomous weapons predicted by some scientists will become a reality, and AGI will play a key role in this. Currently, the military applications of artificial intelligence include autonomous weapons, intelligence analysis, intelligent decision-making, intelligent training, and intelligent support, which are difficult to summarize simply as “empowerment.” Moreover, AGI develops rapidly, has a short iteration cycle, and is in a state of continuous evolution. In future operations, AGI needs to be prioritized, and special attention should be paid to the potential changes it brings.
Will AGI make wars disappear?
Historian Jeffrey Breeny argues that “wars always occur due to misjudgments of each other’s strength or will,” and that with the application of AGI in the military field, misjudgments will become increasingly rare. Therefore, some scholars speculate that wars will decrease or even disappear. Indeed, relying on AGI can significantly reduce misjudgments, but even so, it’s impossible to eliminate all uncertainty, as uncertainty is a defining characteristic of war. Moreover, not all wars arise from misjudgments, and the inherent unpredictability and inexplicability of AGI, along with people’s lack of experience using AGI, will bring new uncertainties, plunging people into an even deeper “artificial intelligence fog.”
AGI algorithms also present rational challenges. Some scholars believe that AGI’s ability to mine and accurately predict critical intelligence has a dual impact. In practical operation, AGI does indeed make fewer mistakes than humans, improving intelligence accuracy and reducing misjudgments; however, it can sometimes lead to overconfidence and reckless actions. The offensive advantage brought by AGI results in the best defensive strategy being “preemptive strike,” disrupting the balance between offense and defense, creating a new security dilemma, and ultimately increasing the risk of war.
AGI (Automatic Genomics) is highly versatile and easily integrated with weaponry. Unlike nuclear, biological, and chemical technologies, it has a low barrier to entry and is particularly prone to proliferation. Due to technological gaps between countries, immature AGI weapons could potentially be deployed on the battlefield, posing significant risks. For example, the application of drones in recent local conflicts has spurred many small and medium-sized countries to begin large-scale drone procurement. The low-cost equipment and technology offered by AGI could very well stimulate a new arms race.
Will AGI be the ultimate deterrent?
Deterrence is the maintenance of a capability to intimidate an adversary into refraining from actions that exceed one’s own interests. Ultimate deterrence occurs when it becomes so powerful as to be unusable, such as nuclear deterrence that ensures mutual destruction. But ultimately, the deciding factor is “human nature,” a crucial element that will never be absent from war.
Without the considerations of “humanity,” would AGI become a formidable deterrent? AGI is fast but lacks empathy; its resolute execution severely compresses the strategic space. AGI is a key factor on the future battlefield, but due to a lack of practical experience, accurate assessment is difficult, easily leading to overestimation of the adversary’s capabilities. Furthermore, regarding autonomous weapon control, whether to have humans within the system for full-time supervision or to leave it entirely to the outside world requires careful consideration. Should the firing control of intelligent weapons be handed over to AGI? If not, the deterrent effect will be greatly diminished; if so, can the life and death of humanity truly be decided by machines unrelated to them? Research at Cornell University shows that large-scale wargaming models frequently escalate wars with “sudden nuclear attacks,” even when in a neutral state.
Perhaps one day in the future, AGI will surpass human capabilities. Will we then be unable to regulate and control it? Jeffrey Hinton, who proposed the concept of deep learning, said he has never seen a case where something with a higher level of intelligence was controlled by something with a lower level of intelligence. Some research teams believe that humans may not be able to supervise super artificial intelligence. Faced with powerful AGI in the future, will we really be able to control them? This is a question worth pondering.
Will AGI change the nature of war?
With the widespread use of AGI, will battlefields filled with violence and bloodshed disappear? Some argue that AI warfare far exceeds human capabilities and may even push humanity off the battlefield. When AI transforms warfare into a conflict entirely between autonomous robots, will it still be a “violent and bloody war”? When unequal adversaries clash, the weaker party may have no chance to act. Can wars be ended before they even begin through war games? Will AGI change the nature of warfare as a result? Is a “war” without humans still a war?
Yuval Noah Harari, author of Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, states that all human behavior is mediated by language and influences our history. The Large Language Model (AGI) is a typical example of AGI, differing from other inventions in its ability to create entirely new ideas and cultures; “storytelling AI will change the course of human history.” When AGI gains control over language, the entire system of human civilization could be overturned, without even requiring its own consciousness. Like Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, will humanity worship AGI as a new “god”?
AGI establishes a close relationship with humans through human language and alters their perceptions, making them difficult to distinguish and discern, thus posing a risk that the will to fight could be controlled by those with ulterior motives. Harari stated that computers don’t need to send out killer robots; if necessary, they will allow humans to pull the trigger themselves. AGI precisely manufactures and refines situational information, controlling battlefield perception through deep deception. This can be achieved through drones to fabricate battlefield situations and through pre-war public opinion manipulation, as already evident in recent local conflicts. The cost of war would thus decrease significantly, leading to the emergence of new forms of warfare. Would small and weak nations still have a chance? Can the will to fight be changed without bloodshed? Is “force” no longer a necessary condition for defining war?
The form of war may change, but its essence remains. Regardless of how “bloody” war is, it will still force the enemy to submit to its will and inflict significant “collateral damage,” only the methods of resistance may be entirely different. The essence of war lies in the deep-seated “human nature,” which is determined by culture, history, behavior, and values. It is difficult to completely replicate using any artificial intelligence technology, so we cannot outsource all ethical, political, and decision-making issues to AI, nor can we expect AI to automatically generate “human nature.” AI technology may be abused due to impulsive passions, so it must be under human control. Since AI is trained by humans, it will not always be without bias, therefore it cannot be completely free from human oversight. In the future, artificial intelligence can become a creative tool or partner, enhancing “tactical imagination,” but it must be “aligned” with human values. These issues need to be continuously considered and understood in practice.
Will AGI subvert war theory?
Most academic knowledge is expressed in natural language. A comprehensive language model, which integrates the best of human writing, can connect seemingly incompatible linguistic works with scientific research. For example, some have input classical works, and even works from philosophy, history, political science, and economics, into a comprehensive language model for analysis and reconstruction. They have found that it can comprehensively analyze all scholars’ viewpoints and also offer its own “insights,” without sacrificing originality. Therefore, some have asked whether it is possible to re-analyze and interpret war theory through AGI, stimulating human innovation and driving a major evolution and reconstruction of war theory and its systems. Perhaps there would indeed be some theoretical improvements and developments, but war science is not only theoretical but also practical, and AGI simply cannot achieve this practicality and realism. Can classical war theory really be reinterpreted? If so, what is the significance of the theory?
In short, AGI’s disruption of the concept of warfare will far exceed that of “mechanization” and “informatization.” We must embrace AGI boldly, yet remain cautious. Understanding the concept prevents ignorance; in-depth research prevents falling behind; and strengthened oversight prevents oversight. How to cooperate with AGI and guard against adversaries’ AGI technological surprise attacks is our primary concern for the future.
After editing
Look to the future with an open mind
■Ye Chaoyang
Futurist Roy Amalra famously asserted that people tend to overestimate the short-term benefits of a technology while underestimating its long-term impact, a principle known as “Amalra’s Law.” This law emphasizes the non-linear nature of technological development, meaning that the actual impact of technology often only becomes fully apparent over a longer timescale. It reflects the pulse and trends of technological development, and embodies humanity’s acceptance and aspirations towards technology.
Currently, in the development of artificial intelligence from weak AI to strong AI, and from specialized AI to general AI, each time people think they have completed 90% of the process, looking back, they may only have completed less than 10%. The driving role of technological revolution in military revolution is becoming increasingly prominent, especially as high-tech technologies, represented by artificial intelligence, penetrate the military field in multiple ways, causing profound changes in the mechanisms, factors, and methods of winning wars.
In the foreseeable future, intelligent technologies such as AGI will continue to iterate, and the cross-evolution of intelligent technologies and their empowering applications in the military field will become increasingly diversified, perhaps even transcending the boundaries of humanity’s current understanding of warfare. The development of technology is unstoppable and unstoppable. Whoever can use keen insight and a clear mind to see the trends and future of technology, to see its potential and power, and to penetrate the “fog of war,” will be more likely to seize the initiative.
This serves as a reminder that we should adopt a broader perspective and mindset in exploring the future forms of warfare in order to get closer to the underestimated reality. Where is AGI headed? Where is intelligent warfare headed? This tests human wisdom.
The reason why outstanding professional athletes can maximize their physical capabilities compared to ordinary people lies in the fact that long-term scientific training strengthens their bones, removes excess fat and bulges their muscles, and achieves a perfect proportion and coordination of the body’s functional elements. Similarly, those armies that can dominate the battlefield and fully exert their combat effectiveness are all powerful forces that have achieved an optimized combination of military force systems in their respective eras.
“Military tactics are ever-changing, just as water has no fixed shape.” Since its inception, the People’s Liberation Army has continuously innovated its force structure in response to changes in the situation and tasks and the needs of actual military struggles. In particular, the several major streamlining and reorganizations since the reform and opening up have promoted the continuous optimization of the PLA’s size, structure, and force composition, effectively liberating and developing its combat capabilities.
“Standard systems cannot meet the demands of change, and one approach cannot address all situations.” Faced with the rapidly evolving nature of warfare in the world today and the new requirements for the expansion of the PLA’s missions and tasks, the shortcomings and weaknesses in the PLA’s force structure have once again become prominent. Problems such as excessive size and scale, imbalance in major proportions, insufficient proportion of new combat capabilities, and low degree of modularization and integration of troops have become bottlenecks affecting and restricting the improvement of the PLA’s combat capabilities and its ability to win future battlefields.
In matters of the world, “what must be seized is the momentum, and what must not be missed is the opportunity.” Only by assessing the situation and seizing the moment can one “easily gain advantage.” The world today faces unprecedented changes. The rapid development of global technological and military revolutions has historically converged with the deepening of my country’s efforts to strengthen its military. Changes in warfare, technology, and the overall landscape of struggle are profoundly impacting national security and military strategy. The historical responsibility of reshaping and rebuilding the PLA’s force structure, and constructing a modern military force system with Chinese characteristics capable of winning informationized wars and effectively fulfilling its missions, has been placed before the People’s Liberation Army.
The system determines the structure and function. The composition of the military’s force system determines the size of the military’s energy and the form, scale, and effect of releasing that energy in the appropriate time and space. The Party Central Committee, the Central Military Commission, and President Xi Jinping, after careful consideration and decisive decision-making, comprehensively launched reforms to the size, structure, and force composition of the military, undertaking a holistic and revolutionary reshaping of the PLA’s force system. This strategic deployment is a crucial step in rationally allocating and optimizing the PLA’s force system, gaining the initiative in future fierce military competition by “strengthening its muscles and bones.”
“One part planning, nine parts implementation”—the restructuring of the PLA’s force system has been rapidly and steadily unfolding. The total number of officers has decreased, with a batch of civilian personnel or soldiers in brand-new uniforms filling the original officer positions, thus optimizing the officer-to-soldier ratio. The number of active-duty personnel in regimental-level and above organs has been significantly reduced, resulting in a marked optimization of the ratio between organs and troops, and between combat and non-combat units. Despite the reduction in the overall size of the military, the number of personnel in combat units has increased rather than decreased, making the “muscle” stronger. The size of the army has been reduced, with traditional branches and outdated equipment units being repurposed for new combat forces, optimizing the structure of the services and increasing the proportion of new combat capabilities, making the “skeleton” stronger. With a more streamlined size, more scientific organization, and more optimized layout, the PLA is continuously transforming from a quantity-oriented to a quality- and efficiency-oriented force, and from a labor-intensive to a technology-intensive force. The organization of troops is developing towards being more robust, integrated, multi-functional, and flexible, and a joint combat force system with elite combat forces as its main body has been basically formed.
The reshaping of the force structure has unlocked the full potential for combat effectiveness, enabling the PLA to take solid steps toward achieving the Party’s goal of building a strong military under the new circumstances. This provides a stronger guarantee for effectively safeguarding my country’s sovereignty, security, and development interests, and for making greater contributions to maintaining world peace and stability.
With sails hoisted high, the People’s Liberation Army embarks on a journey across vast oceans. Reborn and transformed, the People’s Liberation Army will surely achieve new leaps forward on the path to building a strong military with Chinese characteristics and stride towards an even more glorious future!
Since the beginning of the new century, the rapid development of intelligent technologies, with artificial intelligence (AI) at its core, has accelerated the process of a new round of military revolution, and competition in the military field is rapidly moving towards an era of intellectual dominance. Combat elements represented by “AI, cloud, network, cluster, and terminal,” combined in diverse ways, constitute a new battlefield ecosystem, completely altering the mechanisms of victory in warfare. AI systems based on models and algorithms will be the core combat capability, permeating all aspects and stages, playing a multiplicative, transcendent, and proactive role. Platforms are controlled by AI, clusters are guided by AI, and systems are made to decision by AI. Traditional human-centric tactics are being replaced by AI models and algorithms, making intellectual dominance the core control in future warfare. The stronger the intelligent combat capability, the greater the hope of subduing the enemy without fighting.
[Author Biography] Wu Mingxi is the Chief Scientist and Researcher of China Ordnance Industry Group, Deputy Secretary-General of the Science and Technology Committee of China Ordnance Industry Group, and Deputy Director of the Science and Technology Committee of China Ordnance Science Research Institute. His research focuses on national defense science and technology and weaponry development strategies and planning, policies and theories, management and reform research. His major works include “Intelligent Warfare – AI Military Vision,” etc.
Competition in the Age of Intellectual Property
The history of human civilization is a history of understanding and transforming nature, and also a history of understanding and liberating oneself. Through the development of science and technology and the creation and application of tools, humanity has continuously enhanced its capabilities, reduced its burdens, freed itself from constraints, and liberated itself. The control of war has also constantly changed, enriched, and evolved with technological progress, the expansion of human activity space, and the development of the times. Since the 19th century, humanity has successively experienced the control and struggle for land power, sea power, air power, space power, and information power. With the rapid development of intelligent technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), big data, cloud computing, bio-interdisciplinary technologies, unmanned systems, and parallel simulation, and their deep integration with traditional technologies, humanity’s ability to understand and transform nature has been transformed in terms of epistemology, methodology, and operational mechanisms. This is accelerating the major technological revolutions in machine intelligence, bionic intelligence, swarm intelligence, human-machine integrated intelligence, and intelligent perception, intelligent decision-making, intelligent action, intelligent support, as well as intelligent design, research and development, testing, and manufacturing, thus accelerating the evolution of warfare towards the control and struggle for intellectual power.
The rapid development of intelligent technology has garnered significant attention from major countries worldwide, becoming a powerful driving force for the leapfrog development of military capabilities. The United States and Russia have placed intelligent technology at the core of maintaining their strategic status as global military powers, and significant changes have occurred in their development concepts, models, organizational methods, and innovative applications. They have also carried out substantive applications and practices of military intelligence (see Figure 1).
In August 2017, the U.S. Department of Defense stated that future AI warfare was inevitable and that the U.S. needed to “take immediate action” to accelerate the development of AI warfare technologies. The U.S. military’s “Third Offset Strategy” posits that a military revolution, characterized by intelligent armies, autonomous equipment, and unmanned warfare, is underway; therefore, they have identified intelligent technologies such as autonomous systems, big data analytics, and automation as key development directions. In June 2018, the U.S. Department of Defense announced the establishment of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, which, guided by the national AI development strategy, coordinates the planning and construction of the U.S. military’s intelligent military system. In February 2019, then-President Trump signed the “American Artificial Intelligence Initiative” executive order, emphasizing that maintaining U.S. leadership in AI is crucial for safeguarding U.S. economic and national security, and requiring the federal government to invest all resources in promoting innovation in the U.S. AI field. In March 2021, the U.S. National Security Council on Artificial Intelligence released a research report stating that, “For the first time since World War II, the technological advantage that has been the backbone of U.S. economic and military power is under threat. If current trends do not change, China possesses the power, talent, and ambition to surpass the United States as the global leader in artificial intelligence within the next decade.” The report argues that the United States must use artificial intelligence swiftly and responsibly to prepare for these threats in order to safeguard national security and enhance defense capabilities. The report concludes that artificial intelligence will transform the world, and the United States must take a leading role.
Russia also attaches great importance to the technological development and military application of artificial intelligence. The Russian military generally believes that artificial intelligence will trigger the third revolution in the military field, following gunpowder and nuclear weapons. In September 2017, Russian President Vladimir Putin publicly stated that artificial intelligence is the future of Russia, and whoever becomes the leader in this field will dominate the world. In October 2019, Putin approved the “Russian National Strategy for the Development of Artificial Intelligence until 2030,” aiming to accelerate the development and application of artificial intelligence in Russia and seek a world-leading position in the field.
In July 2017, the State Council of China issued the “New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan,” which put forward the guiding ideology, strategic goals, key tasks and safeguard measures for the development of new generation artificial intelligence towards 2030, and deployed efforts to build a first-mover advantage in the development of artificial intelligence and accelerate the construction of an innovative country and a world-class science and technology power.
Other major countries and military powers around the world have also launched their own artificial intelligence development plans, indicating that the global struggle for “intellectual power” has fully unfolded. Land power, sea power, air power, space power, information power, and intellectual power are all results of technological progress and products of their time, each with its own advantages and disadvantages, and some theories are constantly expanding with the changing times. From the development trend of control over warfare since modern times, it can be seen that information power and intellectual power involve the overall situation, carrying greater weight and influence. In the future, with the accelerated pace of intelligent development, intellectual power will become a rapidly growing new type of battlefield control with greater strategic influence on the overall combat situation.
The essence of military intelligence lies in leveraging intelligent technologies to establish diverse identification, decision-making, and control models for the war system. These models constitute artificial intelligence (AI), the core of the new era’s intellectual power struggle. The war system encompasses: equipment systems such as individual units, clusters, manned/unmanned collaborative operations, and multi-domain and cross-domain warfare; combat forces such as individual soldiers, squads, detachments, combined arms units, and theater command; operational links such as networked perception, mission planning and command, force coordination, and comprehensive support; specialized systems such as network attack and defense, electronic warfare, public opinion control, and infrastructure management; and military industrial capabilities such as intelligent design, research and development, production, mobilization, and support. AI, in the form of chips, algorithms, and software, is embedded in every system, level, and link of the war system, forming a systematic brain. Although AI is only a part of the war system, its increasingly powerful “brain-like” functions and capabilities “surpassing human limits” will inevitably dominate the overall situation of future warfare.
Battlefield Ecosystem Reconstruction
Traditional warfare involves relatively independent and separate combat elements, resulting in a relatively simple battlefield ecosystem, primarily consisting of personnel, equipment, and tactics. In the intelligent era, warfare is characterized by significant integration, correlation, and interaction among various combat elements. This will lead to substantial changes in the battlefield ecosystem, forming a combat system, cluster system, and human-machine system comprised of an AI brain, distributed cloud, communication networks, collaborative groups, and various virtual and physical terminals—collectively known as the “AI, Cloud, Network, Cluster, Terminal” intelligent ecosystem (see Figure 2). Among these, AI plays a dominant role.
AI Brain System. The AI brain system of the intelligent battlefield is a networked and distributed system that is inseparable from and interdependent with combat platforms and missions. It can be classified in several ways. Based on function and computing power, it mainly includes cerebellum, swarm brain, midbrain, hybrid brain, and cerebrum; based on combat missions and stages, it mainly includes sensor AI, combat mission planning and decision-making AI, precision strike and controllable destruction AI, network attack and defense AI, electronic warfare AI, intelligent defense AI, and integrated support AI; based on form, it mainly includes embedded AI, cloud AI, and parallel system AI.
The cerebellum mainly refers to the embedded AI in sensor platforms, combat platforms, and support platforms, which mainly performs tasks such as battlefield environment detection, target recognition, rapid maneuver, precision strike, controlled destruction, equipment support, maintenance support, and logistical support.
“Swarm brain” mainly refers to the AI that enables intelligent control of unmanned swarm platforms on the ground, in the air, at sea, in the water, and in space. It mainly performs tasks such as collaborative perception of the battlefield environment, swarm maneuver, swarm attack, and swarm defense. The key components include algorithms for homogeneous swarm systems and algorithms for heterogeneous systems such as manned-unmanned collaboration.
The midbrain mainly refers to the AI system of the command center, data center, and edge computing of the front-line units on the battlefield. It mainly performs dynamic planning, autonomous decision-making, and auxiliary decision-making for tactical unit combat missions under online and offline conditions.
Hybrid brain mainly refers to a hybrid decision-making system in which commanders and machine AI collaborate in combat operations of organized units. Before the battle, it mainly performs human-based combat mission planning; during the battle, it mainly performs adaptive dynamic mission planning and adjustment based on machine AI; and after the battle, it mainly performs hybrid decision-making tasks oriented towards counter-terrorism and defense.
The “brain” primarily refers to the model, algorithm, and tactical libraries of the theater command center and data center, playing a key supporting role in campaign and strategic decision-making. Due to the abundant data, various battlefield AI systems can be trained and modeled here, and then loaded into different mission systems once mature.
In future battlefields, there will be other AIs of different functions, types, and sizes, such as sensor AI, which mainly includes image recognition, electromagnetic spectrum recognition, sound recognition, speech recognition, and human activity behavior recognition. With the rapid development and widespread application of intelligence, AIs of all sizes will exist throughout society, serving the public and society in peacetime, and potentially serving the military in wartime.
Distributed cloud. Military cloud differs from civilian cloud. Generally speaking, a military cloud platform is a distributed resource management system that uses communication networks to search, collect, aggregate, analyze, calculate, store, and distribute operational information and data. By constructing a distributed system and a multi-point fault-tolerant backup mechanism, a military cloud platform possesses powerful intelligence sharing capabilities, data processing capabilities, resilience, and self-healing capabilities. It can provide fixed and mobile, public and private cloud services, achieving “one-point collection, everyone sharing,” greatly reducing information flow links, making command processes flatter and faster, and avoiding redundant and decentralized construction at all levels.
From the perspective of future intelligent warfare needs, military cloud needs to construct at least a four-tiered system: tactical front-end cloud, troop cloud, theater cloud, and strategic cloud. Based on operational elements, it can also be divided into specialized cloud systems such as intelligence cloud, situational awareness cloud, firepower cloud, information warfare cloud, support cloud, and nebula.
1. Front-end cloud primarily refers to computing services provided by units, squads, and platforms, including information perception, target identification, battlefield environment analysis, autonomous and assisted decision-making, and operational process and effect evaluation. The role of front-end cloud is mainly reflected in two aspects. First, it facilitates the sharing and collaboration of computing and storage resources among platforms, and the interactive integration of intelligent combat information. For example, if a platform or terminal is attacked, relevant perception information, damage status, and historical data will be automatically backed up, replaced, and updated through a networked cloud platform, and the relevant information will be uploaded to the higher command post. Second, it provides online information services and intelligent software upgrades for offline terminals.
2. Military cloud primarily refers to the cloud systems built at the battalion and brigade level for operations. Its focus is on providing computing services such as intelligent perception, intelligent decision-making, autonomous action, and intelligent support in response to different threats and environments. The goal of military cloud construction is to establish a networked, automatically backed-up, distributed cloud system connected to multiple links with higher-level units. This system should meet the computing needs of different forces, including reconnaissance and perception, mobile assault, command and control, firepower strikes, and logistical support, as well as the computing needs of various combat missions such as tactical joint operations, manned/unmanned collaboration, and swarm offense and defense.
3. Theater Cloud primarily provides battlefield weather, geographical, electromagnetic, human, and social environmental factors and information data for the entire operational area. It offers comprehensive information on troop deployments, weaponry, movement changes, and combat losses for both sides, as well as relevant information from higher command, friendly forces, and civilian support. Theater Cloud should possess networked, customized, and intelligent information service capabilities. It should interconnect with various operational units through military communication networks (space-based, airborne, ground-based, maritime, and underwater) and civilian communication networks (under secure measures) to ensure efficient, timely, and accurate information services.
4. Strategic cloud is mainly established by a country’s defense system and military command organs. It is primarily based on military information and covers comprehensive information and data related to defense technology, defense industry, mobilization support, economic and social support capabilities, as well as politics, diplomacy, and public opinion. It provides core information, assessments, analyses, and suggestions such as war preparation, operational planning, operational schemes, operational progress, battlefield situation, and battle situation analysis; and provides supporting data such as strategic intelligence, the military strength of adversaries, and war mobilization potential.
The various clouds mentioned above are interconnected, exhibiting both hierarchical and horizontal relationships of collaboration, mutual support, and mutual service. The core tasks of the military cloud platform are twofold: first, to provide data and computing support for building an AI-powered intelligent warfare system; and second, to provide operational information, computing, and data support for various combat personnel and weapon platforms. Furthermore, considering the needs of terminals and group operations, it is necessary to pre-process some cloud computing results, models, and algorithms into intelligent chips and embed them into weapon platforms and group terminals, enabling online upgrades or offline updates.
Communication networks. Military communication and network information constitute a complex super-network system. Since military forces primarily operate in land, sea, air, space, field maneuver, and urban environments, their communication networks encompass strategic and tactical communications, wired and wireless communications, secure communications, and civilian communications. Among these, wireless, mobile, and free-space communication networks are the most crucial components of the military network system, and related integrated electronic information systems are gradually established based on these communication networks.
Military communications in the mechanized era primarily followed the platform, terminal, and user, satisfying specific needs but resulting in numerous silos and extremely poor interconnectivity. In the information age, this situation is beginning to change. Currently, military communication networks are adopting new technological systems and development models, characterized by two main features: first, “network-data separation,” where information transmission does not depend on any specific network transmission method—”network access is all that matters”—any information can be delivered as long as the network link is unobstructed; second, internet-based architecture, utilizing IP addresses, routers, and servers to achieve “all roads lead to Beijing,” i.e., military networking or grid-based systems. Of course, military communication networks differ from civilian networks. Strategic and specialized communication needs exist at all times, such as nuclear button communications for nuclear weapons and command and control of strategic weapons, information transmission for satellite reconnaissance, remote sensing, and strategic early warning, and even specialized communications in individual soldier rooms and special operations conditions. These may still adopt a mission-driven communication model. Even so, standardization and internet connectivity are undoubtedly the future trends in military communication network development. Otherwise, not only will the number of battlefield communication frequency bands, radios, and information exchange methods increase, leading to self-interference, mutual interference, and electromagnetic compatibility difficulties, but radio spectrum management will also become increasingly complex. More importantly, it will be difficult for platform users to achieve automatic communication based on IP addresses and routing structures, unlike email on the internet where a single command can be sent to multiple users. Future combat platforms will certainly be both communication user terminals and also function as routers and servers.
Military communication network systems mainly include space-based communication networks, military mobile communication networks, data links, new communication networks, and civilian communication networks.
1. Space-Based Information Networks. The United States leads in the construction and utilization of space-based information networks. This is because more than half of the thousands of orbiting platforms and payloads in space are American-owned. Following the Gulf War, and especially during the Iraq War, the US military accelerated the application and advancement of space-based information networks through wartime experience. After the Iraq War, through the utilization of space-based information and the establishment of IP-based interconnection, nearly 140 vertical “chimneys” from the Gulf War period were completely interconnected horizontally, significantly shortening the “Out-of-Target-Action” (OODA) loop time. The time from space-based sensors to the shooter has been reduced from tens of hours during the Gulf War to approximately 20 seconds currently using artificial intelligence for identification.
With the rapid development of small satellite technology, low-cost, multi-functional small satellites are becoming increasingly common. As competition intensifies in commercial launches, costs are dropping dramatically, and a single launch can carry several, a dozen, or even dozens of small satellites. If miniaturized electronic reconnaissance, visible light and infrared imaging, and even quantum dot micro-spectroscopy instruments are integrated onto these satellites, achieving integrated reconnaissance, communication, navigation, meteorological, and mapping functions, the future world and battlefield will become much more transparent.
2. Military Mobile Communication Networks. Military mobile communication networks have three main uses. First, command and control between various branches of the armed forces and combat units in joint operations; this type of communication requires a high level of confidentiality, reliability, and security. Second, communication between platforms and clusters, requiring anti-jamming capabilities and high reliability. Third, command and control of weapon systems, mostly handled through data links.
Traditional military mobile communication networks are mostly “centralized, vertically focused, and tree-like structures.” With the acceleration of informatization, the trend towards “decentralized, self-organizing networks, and internet-based” is becoming increasingly apparent. As cognitive radio technology matures and is widely adopted (see Figure 3), future network communication systems will be able to automatically identify electromagnetic interference and communication obstacles on the battlefield, quickly locate available spectrum resources, and conduct real-time communication through frequency hopping and other methods. Simultaneously, software and cognitive radio technology can be compatible with different communication frequency bands and waveforms, facilitating seamless transitions from older to newer systems.
3. Data Links. A data link is a specialized communication technology that uses time division, frequency division, and code division to transmit pre-agreed, periodic, or irregular, regular or irregular critical information between various combat platforms. Unless fully understood or deciphered by the enemy, it is very difficult to interfere with. Data links are mainly divided into two categories: dedicated and general-purpose. Joint operations, formation coordination, and swarm operations primarily utilize general-purpose data links. Satellite data links, UAV data links, missile-borne data links, and weapon fire control data links are currently mostly dedicated. In the future, generalization will be a trend, and specialization will decrease. Furthermore, from the perspective of the relationship between platforms and communication, the information transmission and reception of platform sensors and internal information processing generally follow the mission system, exhibiting strong specialization characteristics, while communication and data transmission between platforms are becoming increasingly general-purpose.
4. New Communication Technologies. Traditional military communication primarily relies on microwave communication. Due to its large divergence angle and numerous application platforms, corresponding electronic jamming and microwave attack methods have developed rapidly, making it easy to carry out long-range interference and damage. Therefore, new communication technologies such as millimeter waves, terahertz waves, laser communication, and free-space optical communication have become important choices that are both anti-jamming and easy to implement high-speed, high-capacity, and high-bandwidth communication. Although high-frequency electromagnetic waves have good anti-jamming performance due to their smaller divergence angle, achieving precise point-to-point aiming and omnidirectional communication still presents certain challenges, especially under conditions of high-speed maneuvering and rapid trajectory changes of combat platforms. How to achieve alignment and omnidirectional communication is still under technological exploration.
5. Civilian Communication Resources. The effective utilization of civilian communication resources is a strategic issue that must be considered and cannot be avoided in the era of intelligentization. In the future, leveraging civilian communication networks, especially 5G/6G mobile communications, for open-source information mining and data correlation analysis to provide battlefield environment, target, and situational information will be crucial for both combat and non-combat military operations. In non-combat military operations, especially overseas peacekeeping, rescue, counter-terrorism, and disaster relief, the military’s dedicated communication networks can only be used within limited areas and regions, raising the question of how to communicate and connect with the outside world. There are two main ways to utilize civilian communication resources: one is to utilize civilian satellite communication resources, especially small satellite communication resources; the other is to utilize civilian mobile communication and internet resources.
The core issue in the interactive utilization of military and civilian communication resources is addressing security and confidentiality. One approach is to employ firewalls and encryption, directly utilizing civilian satellite communications and global mobile communication infrastructure for command and communication; however, the risks of hacking and cyberattacks remain. Another approach is to utilize emerging technologies such as virtualization, intranets, semi-physical isolation, one-way transmission, mimicry defense, and blockchain to address these challenges.
Collaborative swarms. By simulating the behavior of bee colonies, ant colonies, flocks of birds, and schools of fish in nature, this research studies the autonomous collaborative mechanisms of swarm systems such as drones and smart munitions to accomplish combat missions such as attacking or defending against enemy targets. This can achieve strike effects that are difficult to achieve with traditional combat methods and approaches. Collaborative swarms are an inevitable trend in intelligent development and a major direction and key area of intelligent construction. No matter how advanced the combat performance or how powerful the functions of a single combat platform, it cannot form a collective or scalable advantage. Simply accumulating quantity and expanding scale, without autonomous, collaborative, and orderly intelligent elements, is just a disorganized mess.
Collaborative swarms mainly comprise three aspects: first, manned/unmanned collaborative swarms formed by the intelligent transformation of existing platforms, primarily constructed from large and medium-sized combat platforms; second, low-cost, homogeneous, single-function, and diverse combat swarms, primarily constructed from small unmanned combat platforms and munitions; and third, biomimetic swarms integrating human and machine intelligence, possessing both biological and machine intelligence, primarily constructed from highly autonomous humanoid, reptile-like, avian-like, and marine-like organisms. Utilizing collaborative swarm systems for cluster warfare, especially swarm warfare, offers numerous advantages and characteristics.
1. Scale Advantage. A large unmanned system can disperse combat forces, increasing the number of targets the enemy can attack and forcing them to expend more weapons and ammunition. The survivability of a swarm, due to its sheer number, is highly resilient and resilient; the survivability of a single platform becomes less important, while the overall advantage becomes more pronounced. The sheer scale prevents drastic fluctuations in combat effectiveness, because unlike high-value manned combat platforms and complex weapon systems such as the B-2 strategic bomber and advanced F-22 and F-35 fighter jets, the loss of a low-cost unmanned platform, once attacked or destroyed, results in a sharp decline in combat effectiveness. Swarm operations can launch simultaneous attacks, overwhelming enemy defenses. Most defensive systems have limited capabilities, able to handle only a limited number of threats at a time. Even with dense artillery defenses, a single salvo can only hit a limited number of targets, leaving some to escape. Therefore, swarm systems possess extremely strong penetration capabilities.
2. Cost Advantage. Swarm warfare, especially bee warfare, primarily utilizes small and medium-sized UAVs, unmanned platforms, and munitions. These have simple product lines, are produced in large quantities, and have consistent quality and performance requirements, facilitating low-cost mass production. While the pace of upgrades and replacements for modern weapons and combat platforms has accelerated significantly, the cost increases have also been staggering. Since World War II, weapons development and procurement prices have shown that equipment costs and prices have risen much faster than performance improvements. Main battle tanks during the Gulf War cost 40 times more than those during World War II, while combat aircraft and aircraft carriers cost as much as 500 times more. From the Gulf War to 2020, the prices of various main battle weapons and equipment increased several times, tens of times, or even hundreds of times. In comparison, small and medium-sized UAVs, unmanned platforms, and munitions with simple product lines have a clear cost advantage.
3. Autonomous Advantage. Under a unified spatiotemporal reference platform, through networked active and passive communication and intelligent perception of battlefield targets, individual platforms in the group can accurately perceive the distance, speed, and positional relationships between each other. They can also quickly identify the nature, size, priority, and distance of target threats, as well as their own distance from neighboring platforms. With pre-defined operational rules, one or more platforms can conduct simultaneous or wave-based attacks according to the priority of target threats, or they can attack in groups simultaneously or in multiple waves (see Figure 4). Furthermore, the priority order for subsequent platforms to replace a damaged platform can be clearly defined, ultimately achieving autonomous decision-making and action according to pre-agreed operational rules. This intelligent combat operation, depending on the level of human involvement and the difficulty of controlling key nodes, can be either completely autonomous, or semi-autonomous, with human intervention.
4. Decision-making advantage. The future battlefield environment is becoming increasingly complex, with combatants vying for dominance in intense strategic maneuvering and confrontation. Therefore, relying on humans to make decisions in a high-intensity confrontation environment is neither timely nor reliable. Thus, only by entrusting automated environmental adaptation, automatic target and threat identification, autonomous decision-making, and coordinated action to collaborative groups can adversaries be rapidly attacked or effective defenses implemented, thereby gaining battlefield advantage and initiative.
The coordination group brings new challenges to command and control. How to implement command and control of the cluster is a new strategic issue. Control can be implemented in a hierarchical and task-based manner, which can be roughly divided into centralized control mode, hierarchical control mode, consistent coordination mode, and spontaneous coordination mode. [1] Various forms can be adopted to achieve human control and participation. Generally speaking, the smaller the tactical unit, the more autonomous action and unmanned intervention should be adopted; at the level of organized unit operations, since the control of multiple combat groups is involved, centralized planning and hierarchical control are required, and human participation should be limited; at the higher strategic and operational levels, the cluster is only used as a platform weapon and combat style, which requires unified planning and layout, and the degree of human participation will be higher. From the perspective of mission nature, the operation and use of strategic weapons, such as nuclear counterattacks, requires human operation and is not suitable for autonomous handling by weapon systems. When conducting offensive and defensive operations against important or high-value targets, such as decapitation strikes, full human participation and control are necessary, while simultaneously leveraging the autonomous functions of the weapon systems. For offensive operations against tactical targets, if the mission requires lethal strikes and destruction, limited human participation is permissible, or, after human confirmation, the coordinated group can execute the operation automatically. When performing non-strike missions such as reconnaissance, surveillance, target identification, and clearance, or short-duration missions such as air defense and missile defense where human involvement is difficult, the coordinated group should primarily execute these tasks automatically, without human involvement. Furthermore, countermeasures for swarm operations must be carefully studied. Key research should focus on countermeasures against electronic deception, electromagnetic interference, cyberattacks, and high-power microwave weapons, electromagnetic pulse bombs, and artillery-missile systems, as their effects are relatively significant. Simultaneously, research should be conducted on countermeasures such as laser weapons and swarm-to-swarm tactics, gradually establishing a “firewall” that humans can effectively control against coordinated groups.
Virtual and physical terminals. Virtual and physical terminals mainly refer to various terminals linked to the cloud and network, including sensors with pre-embedded intelligent modules, command and control platforms, weapon platforms, support platforms, related equipment and facilities, and combat personnel. Future equipment and platforms will be cyber-physical systems (CPS) and human-computer interaction systems with diverse front-end functions, cloud-based back-end support, virtual-physical interaction, and online-offline integration. Simple environmental perception, path planning, platform maneuverability, and weapon operation will primarily rely on front-end intelligence such as bionic intelligence and machine intelligence. Complex battlefield target identification, combat mission planning, networked collaborative strikes, combat situation analysis, and advanced human-computer interaction will require information, data, and algorithm support from back-end cloud platforms and cloud-based AI. The front-end intelligence and back-end cloud intelligence of each equipment platform should be combined for unified planning and design, forming a comprehensive advantage of integrated front-end and back-end intelligence. Simultaneously, virtual soldiers, virtual staff officers, virtual commanders, and their intelligent and efficient interaction with humans are also key areas and challenges for future research and development.
Qualitative change in the form of warfare
Since modern times, human society has mainly experienced large-scale mechanized warfare and smaller-scale informationized local wars. The two world wars that occurred in the first half of the 20th century were typical examples of mechanized warfare. The Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War, and the Syrian War since the 1990s fully demonstrate the form and characteristics of informationized warfare. In the new century and new stage, with the rapid development and widespread application of intelligent technologies, the era of intelligent warfare, characterized by data and computing, models and algorithms, is about to arrive (see Figure 5).
Mechanization is a product of the industrial age, focusing on mechanical power and electrical technology. Its weaponry primarily manifests as tanks, armored vehicles, artillery, aircraft, and ships, corresponding to mechanized warfare. Mechanized warfare is mainly based on classical physics, represented by Newton’s laws, and large-scale socialized production. It is characterized by large-scale, linear, and contact warfare. Tactically, it typically involves on-site reconnaissance, terrain surveys, understanding the opponent’s forward and rear deployments, making decisions based on one’s own capabilities, implementing offensive or defensive maneuvers, and assigning tasks, coordinating operations, and ensuring logistical support. It exhibits clear characteristics such as hierarchical command and control and sequential temporal and spatial operations.
Information technology, a product of the information age, focuses on information technologies such as computers and network communications. Its equipment primarily manifests as radar, radios, satellites, missiles, computers, military software, command and control systems, cyber and electronic warfare systems, and integrated electronic information systems, corresponding to the form of information warfare. Information warfare is mainly based on the three laws of computers and networks (Moore’s Law, Gilder’s Law, and Metcalfe’s Law), emphasizing integrated, precise, and three-dimensional operations. It establishes a seamless and rapid information link from sensor to shooter, seizing information dominance and achieving preemptive detection and strike. Tactically, it requires detailed identification and cataloging of the battlefield and targets, highlighting the role of networked perception and command and control systems, and placing new demands on the interconnectivity and other information functions of platforms. Due to the development of global information systems and diversified network communications, information warfare blurs the lines between front and rear lines, emphasizing horizontal integration of reconnaissance, control, strike, assessment, and support, as well as the integration and flattening of strategy, campaign, and tactics.
Intelligentization is a product of the knowledge economy era. Technologically, it focuses on intelligent technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data, cloud computing, cognitive communication, the Internet of Things, biological cross-disciplinary, hybrid enhancement, swarm intelligence, autonomous navigation and collaboration. In terms of equipment, it mainly manifests as unmanned platforms, intelligent munitions, swarm systems, intelligent sensing and database systems, adaptive mission planning and decision-making systems, combat simulation and parallel training systems, military cloud platforms and service systems, public opinion early warning and guidance systems, and intelligent wearable systems, which correspond to the form of intelligent warfare.
Intelligent warfare, primarily based on biomimetic, brain-like principles, and AI-driven battlefield ecosystems, is a new combat form characterized by “energy mobility and information interconnection,” supported by “network communication and distributed cloud,” centered on “data computing and model algorithms,” and focused on “cognitive confrontation.” It features multi-domain integration, cross-domain offense and defense, unmanned operation, cluster confrontation, and integrated interaction between virtual and physical spaces.
Intelligent warfare aims to meet the needs of nuclear and conventional deterrence, joint operations, all-domain operations, and non-war military operations. It focuses on multi-domain integrated operations encompassing cognitive, informational, physical, social, and biological domains, exhibiting characteristics such as distributed deployment, networked links, flattened structures, modular combinations, adaptive reconfiguration, parallel interaction, focused energy release, and nonlinear effects. Its winning mechanisms overturn traditions, its organizational forms undergo qualitative changes, its operational efficiency is unprecedentedly improved, and its combat power generation mechanisms are transformed. These substantial changes are mainly reflected in the following ten aspects.
The Winning Mechanism Dominated by AI. Under intelligent conditions, new combat elements represented by “AI, cloud, network, cluster, and terminal” will reshape the battlefield ecosystem, completely changing the winning mechanism of war. Among them, AI systems based on models and algorithms are the core combat capability, permeating all aspects and links, playing a multiplicative, transcendent, and proactive role. Platforms are controlled by AI, clusters are guided by AI, and systems are made by AI. The traditional human-based combat methods are being replaced by AI models and algorithms. Algorithmic warfare will play a decisive role in war, and the combat system and process will ultimately be dominated by AI. The right to intelligence will become the core control in future warfare.
Different eras and different forms of warfare result in different battlefield ecosystems, with entirely different compositions of combat elements and winning mechanisms. Mechanized warfare is platform-centric warfare, with “movement” as its core and firepower and mobility as its dominant forces, pursuing energy delivery and release through equipment. Combat elements mainly include: personnel + mechanized equipment + tactics. The winning mechanism is based on human-led decision-making in the operational use of mechanized equipment, achieving victory with superior numbers, overwhelming smaller forces, and controlling slower forces, with comprehensive, efficient, and sustainable mobilization capabilities playing decisive or important roles. Informationized warfare is network-centric warfare, with “connectivity” as its core and information power as its dominant force, pursuing energy aggregation and release through networks. Combat elements and their interrelationships mainly consist of “personnel + informationized equipment + tactics” based on network information. Information permeates personnel, equipment, and tactics, establishing seamless information connections “from sensor to shooter,” achieving system-wide and networked combat capabilities, using systems against localized forces, networks against discrete forces, and speed against slow forces, becoming a crucial mechanism for achieving victory in war. Information plays a multiplier role in equipment and combat systems, but the platform remains human-centric. Information assists in decision-making, but most decisions are still made by humans. Intelligent warfare is cognitive-centric warfare, with “computation” at its core and intelligence as the dominant force. Intelligence will carry more weight than firepower, mobility, and information power, pursuing the use of intelligence to control and dominate capabilities, using the virtual to overcome the real, and achieving victory through superiority. The side with more AI and whose AI is smarter will have greater initiative on the battlefield. The main combat elements and their interrelationships are: AI × (cloud + network + swarm + human + equipment + tactics), which can be simplified to an interconnected and integrated battlefield ecosystem composed of “AI, cloud, network, swarm, and terminal” elements. In the future, AI’s role in warfare will become increasingly significant and powerful, ultimately playing a decisive and dominant role.
Emphasizing the leading role of AI does not deny the role of humans in warfare. On the one hand, human intelligence has been pre-emptively utilized and endowed into AI; on the other hand, at the pre-war, post-war, and strategic levels, for a considerable period of time and in the foreseeable future, AI cannot replace humans.
Modern warfare is becoming increasingly complex, with combat operations moving at ever faster paces. The ability to quickly identify and process massive amounts of information, respond rapidly to battlefield situations, and formulate decisive strategies is far beyond human capability and exceeds the limits of current technology (see Tables 1 and 2). As AI becomes more widely applied and plays a more significant role in warfare, operational processes will be reshaped, and the military kill chain will be accelerated and made more efficient. Rapid perception, decision-making, action, and support will become crucial factors for victory in future intelligent warfare.
In the future, intelligent recognition and pattern recognition of images, videos, electromagnetic spectrum, and voice will enable rapid and accurate target identification from complex battlefield information gathered by air, land, and sea sensor networks. Utilizing big data technology, through multi-source, multi-dimensional directional search and intelligent correlation analysis, not only can various targets be accurately located, but also human behavior, social activities, military operations, and public opinion trends can be precisely modeled, gradually improving the accuracy of early warning and prediction. Based on precise battlefield information, each theater and battlefield can adaptively implement mission planning, autonomous decision-making, and operational process control through extensive parallel modeling and simulation training in virtual space. AI on various combat platforms and cluster systems can autonomously and collaboratively execute tasks around operational objectives according to mission planning, and proactively adjust to changes that may occur at any time. By establishing a distributed, networked, intelligent, and multi-modal support system and pre-positioned deployment, rapid and precise logistics distribution, material supply, and intelligent maintenance can be implemented. In summary, through the widespread application of intelligent technologies and the proactive and evolving capabilities of various AI systems, the entire operational process—including planning, prediction, perception, decision-making, implementation, control, and support—can be re-engineered to achieve a “simple, fast, efficient, and controllable” operational workflow. This will gradually free humanity from the burdens of arduous combat tasks. Operational workflow re-engineering will accelerate the pace, compress time, and shorten processes on the future battlefield.
The winning mechanism dominated by AI is mainly manifested in combat capabilities, methods, strategies, and measures. It fully integrates human intelligence, approaches human intelligence, surpasses human limits, leverages the advantages of machines, and embodies advancement, disruption, and innovation. This advancement and innovation is not a simple extension or increase in quantity in previous wars, but a qualitative change and leap, a higher-level characteristic. This higher-level characteristic is reflected in intelligent warfare possessing “brain-like” functions and many “capabilities that surpass human limits” that traditional warfare lacks. As AI continues to optimize and iterate, it will one day surpass ordinary soldiers, staff officers, commanders, and even elite and expert groups, becoming a “super brain” and a “super brain group.” This is the core and key of intelligent warfare, a technological revolution in the fields of epistemology and methodology, and a high-level combat capability that humanity can currently foresee, achieve, and evolve.
The role of cyberspace is rising. With the progress of the times and the development of technology, the operational space has gradually expanded from physical space to virtual space. The role and importance of virtual space in the operational system are gradually rising and becoming increasingly important, and it is increasingly deeply integrated with physical space and other fields. Virtual space is an information space based on network electromagnetics constructed by humans. It can reflect human society and the material world from multiple perspectives, and can be utilized by transcending many limitations of the objective world. It is constructed by the information domain, connected by the physical domain, reflected by the social domain, and utilized by the cognitive domain. In a narrow sense, virtual space mainly refers to the civilian Internet; in a broad sense, virtual space mainly refers to cyberspace, including various Internet of Things, military networks, and dedicated networks. Cyberspace is characterized by being easy to attack but difficult to defend, using software to fight hard, integrating peacetime and wartime, and blurring the lines between military and civilian sectors. It has become an important battlefield for conducting military operations, strategic deterrence, and cognitive confrontation.
The importance of cyberspace is mainly reflected in three aspects: First, through network information systems, it connects dispersed combat forces and elements into a whole, forming a systematic and networked combat capability, which becomes the foundation of information warfare; second, it becomes the main battlefield and basic support for cognitive confrontation such as cyberspace, intelligence, public opinion, psychology, and consciousness; and third, it establishes virtual battlefields, conducts combat experiments, realizes virtual-real interaction, and forms the core and key to parallel operations and the ability to use the virtual to defeat the real.
In the future, with the accelerated upgrading of global interconnection and the Internet of Things, and with the establishment, improvement and widespread application of systems such as space-based networked reconnaissance, communication, navigation, mobile internet, Wi-Fi, high-precision global spatiotemporal reference platforms, digital maps, and industry big data, human society and global military activities will become increasingly “transparent,” increasingly networked, perceived, analyzed, correlated, and controlled (see Figure 6). This will have a profound, all-round, and ubiquitous impact on military construction and operations. The combat system in the intelligent era will gradually expand from closed to open, and from military-led to a “source-open and ubiquitous” direction that integrates military and civilian sectors.
In the era of intelligentization, information and data from the physical, informational, cognitive, social, and biological fields will gradually flow freely. Combat elements will achieve deep interconnection and the Internet of Things. Various combat systems will evolve from basic “capability combinations” to advanced “information fusion, data linking, and integrated behavioral interaction,” possessing powerful all-domain perception, multi-domain fusion, and cross-domain combat capabilities, and the ability to effectively control important targets, sensitive groups, and critical infrastructure anytime, anywhere. A report from the U.S. Army Joint Arms Center argues that the world is entering an era of “ubiquitous global surveillance.” Even if the world cannot track all activities, the proliferation of technology will undoubtedly cause the potential sources of information to grow exponentially.
Currently, network-based software attacks have acquired the capability to cause physical damage, and cyberattacks by militarily advanced countries possess operational capabilities such as intrusion, deception, interference, and sabotage. Cyberspace has become another important battlefield for military operations and strategic deterrence. The United States has already used cyberattacks in actual combat. Ben Ali of Tunisia, Gaddafi of Libya, and Saddam Hussein of Iraq were all influenced by US cyberattacks and WikiLeaks, causing shifts in public opinion, psychological breakdowns, and social unrest, leading to the rapid collapse of their regimes and having a disruptive impact on traditional warfare. Through the Snowden revelations, a list of 49 cyber reconnaissance projects across 11 categories used by the United States was gradually exposed. Incidents such as the Stuxnet virus’s sabotage of Iranian nuclear facilities, the Gauss virus’s mass intrusion into Middle Eastern countries, and the Cuban Twitter account’s control of public opinion demonstrate that the United States possesses powerful monitoring capabilities, as well as soft and hard attack and psychological warfare capabilities over the internet, closed networks, and mobile wireless networks.
The war began with virtual space experiments. The US military began exploring combat simulation, operational experiments, and simulation training in the 1980s. Later, the US military pioneered the use of virtual reality, wargaming, and digital twin technologies in virtual battlefields and combat experiments. Analysis shows that the US military conducted combat simulations in military operations such as the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the Afghanistan War, and the Iraq War, striving to find the optimal operational and action plans. It has been reported that before Russia intervened militarily in Syria, it conducted pre-war exercises in its war labs. Based on the experimental simulations, it formulated the “Center-2015” strategic exercise plan, practicing “mobility and accessibility in unfamiliar areas” for combat in Syria. After the exercise, Russian Chief of the General Staff Gerasimov emphasized that the primary means would be political, economic, and psychological warfare, supplemented by long-range precision air strikes and special operations, ultimately achieving political and strategic objectives. Practice shows that the process of Russia’s intervention in Syria was largely consistent with these experiments and exercises.
In the future, with the application and development of virtual simulation, mixed reality, big data, and intelligent software, a parallel military artificial system can be established, allowing physical forces in the physical space to map and iterate with virtual forces in the virtual space. This will enable rapid, high-intensity adversarial training and supercomputing that are difficult to achieve in the physical space. It can also engage in combat and games against highly realistic “blue force systems,” continuously accumulating data, building models and algorithms, and ultimately using the optimal solutions to guide the construction and combat of physical forces, achieving the goal of virtual-real interaction, using the virtual to control the real, and winning with the virtual. On January 25, 2019, DeepMind, Google’s AI team, and Blizzard Entertainment, the developer of StarCraft, announced the results of the December 2018 match between AlphaSTAR and professional players TLO and MANA. In the best-of-five series, AlphaSTAR won both matches 5-0. AlphaSTAR completed the training workload that would take human players 200 years in just two weeks, demonstrating the enormous advantages and bright prospects of simulated adversarial training in virtual space.
The combat style is dominated by unmanned operations. In the era of intelligentization, unmanned warfare will become the basic form, and the integration and development of artificial intelligence and related technologies will gradually push this form to an advanced stage. Unmanned systems represent the full pre-positioning of human intelligence in the combat system and are a concentrated manifestation of the integrated development of intelligence, informatization, and mechanization. Unmanned equipment first appeared in the field of drones. In 1917, Britain built the world’s first drone, but it was not used in actual combat. With the development of technology, drones were gradually used in target drones, reconnaissance, and reconnaissance-strike integrated operations. Since the beginning of the 21st century, unmanned technologies and equipment have achieved tremendous leaps and major breakthroughs in exploration and application due to their advantages such as mission-centric design, no need to consider crew requirements, and high cost-effectiveness. They have shown a rapid and comprehensive development trend, and their application scope has expanded rapidly, covering various fields such as air, surface, underwater, ground, and space.
In recent years, technologies such as artificial intelligence, bionic intelligence, human-machine integrated intelligence, and swarm intelligence have developed rapidly. With the help of satellite communication and navigation, and autonomous navigation, unmanned combat platforms can effectively achieve remote control, formation flight, and swarm collaboration. Currently, unmanned combat aerial vehicles, underwater unmanned platforms, and space-based unmanned autonomous robots have emerged one after another. Bipedal, quadrupedal, multi-legged, and cloud-based intelligent robots are developing rapidly and have entered the fast lane of engineering and practical application, with military applications not far off.
Overall, unmanned warfare in the era of intelligentization will enter three stages of development. The first stage is the initial stage, characterized by manned dominance and unmanned support, where “unmanned warfare under manned leadership” means that combat behavior is completely controlled and dominated by humans before, during, and after the operation. The second stage is the intermediate stage, characterized by manned support and unmanned dominance, where “unmanned warfare under limited control” means that human control is limited, auxiliary, but crucial throughout the entire combat process, and in most cases, the autonomous action capabilities of the platform can be relied upon. The third stage is the advanced stage, characterized by manned rules and unmanned action, where “unmanned warfare with manned design and minimal control” means that humans conduct overall design in advance, clarifying autonomous behavior and rules of the game under various combat environments, and the execution phase is mainly entrusted to unmanned platforms and unmanned forces for autonomous execution.
Autonomous behavior or autonomy is the essence of unmanned warfare and a common and prominent feature of intelligent warfare, manifested in many aspects.
First, the autonomy of combat platforms, mainly including the autonomous capabilities and intelligence level of unmanned aerial vehicles, ground unmanned platforms, precision-guided weapons, underwater and space robots.
Second, the detection system is autonomous, which mainly includes automatic search, tracking, association, aiming, and intelligent recognition of information such as images, voice, video, and electronic signals.
Thirdly, there is autonomous decision-making, the core of which is AI-based autonomous decision-making within the combat system. This mainly includes automatic analysis of the battlefield situation, automatic planning of combat missions, automated command and control, and intelligent human-machine interaction.
Fourthly, autonomous coordination in combat operations, which initially includes autonomous coordination between manned and unmanned systems, and later includes autonomous unmanned swarms, such as various combat formations, bee swarms, ant swarms, fish swarms, and other combat behaviors.
Fifth, autonomous network attack and defense behaviors, including automatic identification, automatic tracing, automatic protection, and autonomous counterattack against various viruses and network attacks.
Sixth, cognitive electronic warfare, which automatically identifies the power, frequency band, and direction of electronic interference, automatically hops frequencies and autonomously forms networks, and engages in active and automatic electronic interference against adversaries.
Seventh, other autonomous behaviors, including intelligent diagnosis, automatic repair, and self-protection.
In the future, with the continuous upgrading of the integration and development of artificial intelligence and related technologies, unmanned operations will rapidly develop towards autonomy, biomimicry, swarming, and distributed collaboration, gradually pushing unmanned warfare to an advanced stage and significantly reducing direct confrontation between human forces on the battlefield. Although manned platforms will continue to exist in the future, biomimetic robots, humanoid robots, swarm weapons, robot armies, and unmanned system warfare will become the norm in the intelligent era. Since unmanned systems can replace human beings in many combat domains and can accomplish tasks autonomously, unmanned combat systems will always be there to protect humans before they suffer physical attacks or injuries. Therefore, unmanned combat systems in the intelligent era are humanity’s main protective barrier, its shield and shield.
All-domain operations and cross-domain offense and defense. In the era of intelligent warfare, all-domain operations and cross-domain offense and defense are also a fundamental style of combat, manifested in many combat scenarios and aspects. From land, sea, air, and space to multiple domains including physical, information, cognitive, social, and biological domains, as well as the integration and interaction of virtual and physical elements, from peacetime strategic deterrence to wartime high-confrontation, high-dynamic, and high-response operations, the time and space span is enormous. It involves not only physical space operations and cyberspace cyber offense and defense, information warfare, public opinion guidance, and psychological warfare, but also tasks such as global security governance, regional security cooperation, counter-terrorism, and rescue, and the control of critical infrastructure such as networks, communications, power, transportation, finance, and logistics.
Since 2010, supported by advancements in information and intelligent technologies, the U.S. military has proposed concepts such as operational cloud, distributed lethality, multi-domain warfare, algorithmic warfare, mosaic warfare, and joint all-domain operations. The aim is to maintain battlefield and military superiority by using system-wide systems against localized ones, multi-functional systems against simpler ones, multi-domain systems against single-domain ones, integrated systems against discrete ones, and intelligent systems against non-intelligent ones. The U.S. military proposed the concept of multi-domain warfare in 2016 and joint all-domain operations in 2020, aiming to develop cross-service and cross-domain joint operational capabilities, ensuring that each service’s operations are supported by all three services, and possessing all-domain capabilities against multi-domain and single-domain ones.
In the future, with breakthroughs in key technologies for the cross-disciplinary integration of artificial intelligence and multidisciplinary collaboration, multi-domain integration and cross-domain offense and defense based on AI and human-machine hybrid intelligence will become a distinctive feature of intelligent warfare. This will be achieved across functional domains such as physics, information, cognition, society, and biology, as well as geographical domains such as land, sea, air, and space.
In the intelligent era, multi-domain and cross-domain operations will expand from mission planning, physical collaboration, and loose coordination to heterogeneous integration, data linking, tactical interoperability, and cross-domain offensive and defensive integration.
First, multi-domain integration. Based on different battlefields and adversaries in a multi-domain environment, different combat styles, combat procedures and missions are planned in accordance with the requirements of joint operations, and unified as much as possible. This achieves the overall planning and integration of information, firepower, defense, support and command and control, and the integration of combat capabilities at the strategic, operational and tactical levels, forming the capability of one-domain operations and multi-domain joint rapid support.
Second, cross-domain offense and defense. Supported by a unified network information system, and through a unified battlefield situation and data information exchange based on unified standards, the information links for cross-domain joint operations reconnaissance, control, strike, and assessment are completely opened up, enabling seamless integration of operational elements and capabilities at the tactical and fire control levels, as well as collaborative actions between services, cross-domain command and interoperability.
Third, the entire process is interconnected. Multi-domain integration and cross-domain offense and defense are treated as a whole, with coordinated design and interconnectedness throughout. Before the war, intelligence gathering and analysis are conducted, along with public opinion warfare, psychological warfare, propaganda warfare, and necessary cyber and electronic warfare attacks. During the war, special operations and cross-domain actions are used to carry out decapitation strikes, key point raids, and precise and controllable strikes (see Figure 7). After the war, defense against cyberattacks on information systems, elimination of negative public opinion’s impact on the public, and prevention of enemy damage to infrastructure are addressed through post-war governance, public opinion control, and the restoration of social order across multiple areas.
Fourth, AI support. Through combat experiments, simulation training, and necessary test verification and real-world testing, we continuously accumulate data, optimize models, and establish AI combat models and algorithms for different combat styles and adversaries, forming an intelligent brain system to better support joint operations, multi-domain operations, and cross-domain offense and defense.
Human-AI hybrid decision-making. The continuous improvement, optimization, upgrading, and perfection of the AI brain system in intelligent battlefields will enable it to surpass humans in many aspects. The human-dominated command, control, and decision-making model of human warfare for thousands of years will be completely transformed. Humans commanding AI, AI commanding humans, and AI commanding AI are all possible scenarios in warfare.
Distributed, networked, flattened, and parallel structures are key characteristics of intelligent combat systems. The centralized, human-centric single-decision-making model is gradually being replaced by decentralized or weakly centralized models based on AI, such as unmanned systems, autonomous swarms, and manned-unmanned collaboration. Hybrid compatibility among these models is becoming a development trend. The lower the operational level and the simpler the mission, the more prominent the role of unmanned and decentralized systems; the higher the level and the more complex the mission, the more important human decision-making and centralized systems become. Pre-war decision-making is primarily human, supplemented by AI; during war, AI is primarily AI, supplemented by human; post-war, both are used, with hybrid decision-making becoming the dominant approach (see Table 3).
In the future battlefield, combat situations will be highly complex, rapidly changing, and exceptionally intense. The convergence of various information sources will generate massive amounts of data, which cannot be processed quickly and accurately by the human brain alone. Only by achieving a collaborative operation mode of “human brain + AI,” based on technologies such as combat cloud, databases, network communication, and the Internet of Things, can “commanders” cope with the ever-changing battlefield and complete command and control tasks. With the increasing autonomy of unmanned systems and the enhancement of swarm and system-wide AI functions, autonomous decision-making is gradually emerging. Once command and control achieve different levels of intelligence, the Out-of-Loop (OODA) loop time will be significantly reduced, and efficiency will be significantly improved. In particular, pattern recognition for network sensor image processing, “optimization” algorithms for combat decision-making, and particle swarm optimization and bee swarm optimization algorithms for autonomous swarms will endow command and control systems with more advanced and comprehensive decision-making capabilities, gradually realizing a combat cycle where “humans are outside the loop.”
Nonlinear amplification and rapid convergence. Future intelligent warfare will no longer be a gradual release of energy and a linear superposition of combat effects, but rather a rapid amplification of multiple effects such as nonlinearity, emergence, self-growth, and self-focusing, and a rapid convergence of results.
Emergence primarily refers to the process by which each individual within a complex system, following local rules and continuously interacting, generates a qualitative change in the overall system through self-organization. In the future, while battlefield information will be complex and ever-changing, intelligent recognition of images, voice, and video, along with processing by military cloud systems, will enable “one-point collection, multi-user sharing.” Through big data technology, it will be rapidly linked with relevant information and integrated with various weapon fire control systems to implement distributed strikes, swarm strikes, and cyber psychological warfare. This will allow for “detection and destruction,” “aggressive attacks at the first sign of trouble,” and “numerical superiority generating psychological panic”—these phenomena constitute the emergence effect.
The emergent effects of intelligent warfare are mainly reflected in three aspects: first, the acceleration of the kill chain caused by the speed of AI decision-making chain; second, the combat effect caused by the numerical advantage of manned and unmanned collaborative systems, especially swarm systems; and third, the rapid swarm emergence behavior based on network interconnection.
As military intelligence develops to a certain stage, the combined effects of advanced AI, quantum computing, IPv6, and hypersonic technologies will result in combat systems exhibiting nonlinear, asymmetric, self-growing, rapid-response, and uncontrollable amplification and operational effects. This is particularly evident in unmanned, swarm, cyber warfare, and cognitive confrontation. The emergence of intelligence from collective ignorance, increased efficiency through sheer numbers, nonlinear amplification, and other emergent effects will become increasingly prominent. AI-driven cognitive, informational, and energy confrontations will intertwine and rapidly converge around a target, with time becoming increasingly compressed and the speed of confrontation accelerating. This will manifest as a dramatic amplification of multiple effects and a rapid convergence of outcomes. Energy shockwaves, rapid-fire combat, AI terminators, public opinion reversals, social unrest, psychological breakdowns, and the chain reaction of the Internet of Things will become prominent characteristics of intelligent warfare.
In unmanned swarm attacks, assuming roughly the same platform performance, the Lanchester equation applies: combat effectiveness is proportional to the square of the number of units; quantity advantage translates to quality advantage. Network attack and defense, and psychological and public opinion effects, follow Metcalfe’s Law, being proportional to the square of the number of interconnected users, with nonlinear and emergent effects becoming more pronounced. The quantity and intelligence of battlefield AI determine the overall level of intelligence in the combat system, impacting battlefield intelligence control and influencing the outcome of war. In the era of intelligent warfare, how to manage the interrelationships between energy, information, cognition, quantity, quality, virtuality, and physicality, and how to skillfully design, control, utilize, and evaluate nonlinear effects, are major new challenges and requirements for future warfare.
In the future, whether it is a reversal of public opinion, psychological panic, swarm attacks, mass operations, or autonomous combat by humans outside the ring, their emergence effects and strike effects will become relatively common phenomena and easy-to-implement actions, forming a capability that is compatible with deterrence and actual combat. It is also a form of warfare that human society must strictly manage and control.
An organically symbiotic relationship between humans and equipment. In the era of intelligence, the relationship between humans and weapons will undergo fundamental changes, becoming increasingly distant physically but increasingly closer in thought. The form of equipment and its development and management models will be completely transformed. Human thought and wisdom will be deeply integrated with weaponry through AI, fully integrated in the early stages of equipment development, optimized and iterated during the use and training phase, and further upgraded and improved after combat verification, in a continuous cycle of progress.
First, with the rapid development of technologies such as network communication, mobile internet, cloud computing, big data, machine learning, and bionics, and their widespread application in the military field, the structure and form of traditional weapons and equipment will be completely changed, exhibiting diverse functions such as front-end and back-end division of labor and cooperation, efficient interaction, and adaptive adjustment. They will be complex entities integrating mechanics, information, networks, data, and cognition.
Secondly, while humans and weapons are gradually becoming physically detached, they are also becoming increasingly integrated into an organic symbiotic entity in terms of mindset. The gradual maturation of drones and robots is shifting their focus from assisting humans in combat to replacing them, with humans taking a more backseat. The integration of humans and weapons will take on entirely new forms. Human thought and wisdom will participate in the entire lifecycle of design, research and development, production, training, use, and support. Unmanned combat systems will perfectly combine human creativity and intellect with the precision, speed, reliability, and fatigue resistance of machines.
Third, profound changes are taking place in equipment development and management models. Mechanized equipment becomes increasingly outdated with use, while information technology software becomes increasingly new, and intelligent algorithms become increasingly sophisticated with use. Traditional mechanized equipment is delivered to the troops using a “pre-research—development—finalization” model, resulting in a decline in combat performance over time and vehicle hours. Information technology equipment is a product of the combined development of mechanization and informatization; the platform remains the same, but the information system is constantly iterated and updated with the development of computer CPUs and storage devices, exhibiting a step-by-step development characteristic of “information-led, software-driven hardware, rapid replacement, and spiral ascent.” Intelligent equipment, based on mechanization and informatization, continuously optimizes and improves training models and algorithms with the accumulation of data and experience, showing an upward curve of becoming stronger and better with use over time and frequency. Therefore, the development, construction, use, training, and support models for intelligent equipment will undergo fundamental changes.
Evolving through learning and confrontation. Evolution will undoubtedly be a defining characteristic of future intelligent warfare and combat systems, and a commanding height in future strategic competition. Combat systems in the intelligent era will gradually acquire adaptive, self-learning, self-confrontational, self-repairing, and self-evolving capabilities, becoming an evolvable ecosystem and game-theoretic system.
The most distinctive and unique feature of intelligent combat systems lies in the combination of human-like and human-like intelligence with the advantages of machines, achieving “superhuman” combat capabilities. The core of this capability is that numerous models and algorithms improve and refine with use, possessing an evolutionary function. If future combat systems resemble the human body, with the brain as the command and control center, the nervous system as the network, and the limbs as weapons and equipment controlled by the brain, like a living organism, possessing self-adaptive, self-learning, self-defense, self-repair, and self-evolutionary capabilities, then we believe it possesses the ability and function of evolution. Because intelligent combat systems are not entirely the same as living organisms, while a single intelligent system is similar to a living organism, a multi-system combat system is more like an “ecosystem + adversarial game system,” more complex than a single living organism, and more adversarial, social, collective, and emergent.
Preliminary analysis suggests that with the development and application of technologies such as combat simulation, virtual reality, digital twins, parallel training, intelligent software, brain-inspired chips, brain-like systems, bionic systems, natural energy harvesting, and novel machine learning, future combat systems can gradually evolve from single-function, partial-system evolution to multi-functional, multi-element, multi-domain, and multi-system evolution. Each system will be able to rapidly formulate response strategies and take action based on changes in the battlefield environment, different threats, different adversaries, and its own strengths and capabilities, drawing upon accumulated experience, extensive simulated adversarial training, and models and algorithms built through reinforcement learning. These strategies will then be continuously revised, optimized, and self-improved through practical warfare. Single-mission systems will possess characteristics and functions similar to living organisms, while multi-mission systems, like species in a forest, will have a cyclical function and evolutionary mechanism of mutual restraint and survival of the fittest, possessing the ability to engage in game-theoretic confrontation and competition under complex environmental conditions, forming an evolvable ecological and game-theoretic system.
The evolution of combat systems mainly manifests in four aspects: First, the evolution of AI. With the accumulation of data and experience, it will inevitably be continuously optimized, upgraded, and improved. This is relatively easy to understand. Second, the evolution of combat platforms and cluster systems, mainly moving from manned control to semi-autonomous and autonomous control. Because it involves not only the evolution of platform and cluster control AI, but also the optimization and improvement of related mechanical and information systems, it is relatively more complex. Third, the evolution of mission systems, such as detection systems, strike systems, defense systems, and support systems. Because it involves multiple platforms and multiple missions, the factors and elements involved in the evolution are much more complex, and some may evolve quickly, while others may evolve slowly. Fourth, the evolution of the combat system itself. Because it involves all elements, multiple missions, cross-domain operations, and confrontations at various levels, its evolutionary process is extremely complex. Whether a combat system can evolve cannot rely entirely on its own growth; it requires the proactive design of certain environments and conditions, and must follow the principles of biomimicry, survival of the fittest, mutual restraint, and full-system lifecycle management to possess the function and capability for continuous evolution.
Intelligent design and manufacturing. In the era of intelligentization, the defense industry will shift from a relatively closed, physical-based, and time-consuming research and manufacturing model to an open-source, intelligent design and manufacturing model that can rapidly meet military needs.
The defense industry is a strategic industry of the nation, a powerful pillar of national security and defense construction. In peacetime, it primarily provides the military with advanced, high-quality, and reasonably priced weaponry and equipment. In wartime, it is a crucial force for operational support and a core pillar for ensuring victory. The defense industry is a high-tech intensive sector. The research and development and manufacturing of modern weaponry and equipment are technology-intensive, knowledge-intensive, systemically complex, and highly integrated. The development of weapons and equipment such as large aircraft carriers, fighter jets, ballistic missiles, satellite systems, and main battle tanks typically takes ten, twenty, or even more years before finalization and delivery to the armed forces, involving large investments, long cycles, and high costs. From the post-World War II period to the end of the last century, the defense industrial system and capability structure were products of the mechanized era and warfare. Its research, testing, manufacturing, and support were primarily geared towards the needs of the military branches and industry systems, mainly including weaponry, shipbuilding, aviation, aerospace, nuclear, and electronics industries, as well as civilian supporting and basic industries. After the Cold War, the US defense industry underwent strategic adjustments and mergers and reorganizations, generally forming a defense industrial structure and layout adapted to the requirements of informationized warfare. The top six defense contractors in the United States can provide specialized combat platforms and systems for relevant branches of the armed forces, as well as overall solutions for joint operations, making them cross-service and cross-domain system integrators. Since the beginning of the 21st century, with the changing demands of system-of-systems and information-based warfare and the development of digital, networked, and intelligent manufacturing technologies, the traditional development model and research and production capabilities of weapons and equipment have begun to gradually change, urgently requiring reshaping and adjustment in accordance with the requirements of informationized warfare, especially intelligent warfare.
In the future, the defense science and technology industry will, in accordance with the requirements of joint operations, all-domain operations, and the integrated development of mechanization, informatization, and intelligence, shift from the traditional focus on service branches and platform construction to cross-service and cross-domain system integration. It will also shift from relatively closed, self-contained, independent, fragmented, physical-based, and long-cycle research, design, and manufacturing to open-source, democratic crowdsourcing, virtual design and integration verification, adaptive manufacturing, and rapid fulfillment of military needs (see Figure 8). This will gradually form a new innovation system and intelligent manufacturing system that combines hardware and software, virtual and real interaction, intelligent human-machine-object-environment interaction, effective vertical industrial chain connection, horizontal distributed collaboration, and military-civilian integration. Joint design and demonstration by multiple military and civilian parties, joint research and development by supply and demand sides for construction and use, iterative optimization based on parallel military systems in both virtual and real environments, and improvement through combat training and real-world verification—a model of simultaneous research, testing, use, and construction—is the basic mode for the development and construction of intelligent combat systems and the generation of combat power.
Wu Mingxi 8
The risk of spiraling out of control. Since intelligent warfare systems theoretically possess the ability to self-evolve and reach “superhuman” levels, if humans do not pre-design control programs, control nodes, and a “stop button,” the result could very well be destruction and disaster. A critical concern is that numerous hackers and malicious warmongers may exploit intelligent technology to design uncontrollable warfare programs and combat methods, allowing numerous machine brains (AIs) and swarms of robots to fight adaptively and self-evolving according to pre-set combat rules, becoming invincible and relentlessly advancing, ultimately leading to an uncontrollable situation and irreparable damage. This is a major challenge facing humanity in the process of intelligent warfare and a crucial issue requiring research and resolution. This problem needs to be recognized and prioritized from the perspective of a shared future for all humanity and the sustainable development of human civilization. It requires designing rules of war, formulating international conventions, and regulating these systems technically, procedurally, ethically, and legally, implementing mandatory constraints, checks, and management.
The above ten transformations and leaps constitute the main content of the new form of intelligent warfare. Of course, the development and maturity of intelligent warfare is not a castle in the air or a tree without roots, but is built upon mechanization and informatization. Without mechanization and informatization, there is no intelligence. Mechanization, informatization, and intelligence form an organic whole, interconnected and mutually reinforcing, iteratively optimizing and leapfrog developing. Currently, mechanization is the foundation, informatization is the guiding principle, and intelligence is the direction. Looking to the future, mechanization will remain the foundation, informatization will provide support, and intelligence will be the guiding principle.
A Bright Future
In the time tunnel of the new century, we see the train of intelligent warfare speeding along. Will humanity’s greed and technological might lead us into a more brutal darkness, or will it propel us towards a more civilized and enlightened future? This is a major philosophical question that humanity needs to ponder. Intelligentization is the future, but it is not everything. Intelligentization can handle diverse military tasks, but it is not omnipotent. Faced with sharp contradictions between civilizations, religions, nations, and social classes, and with extreme events such as thugs wielding knives, suicide bombings, and mass riots, the role of intelligentization remains limited. Without resolving global political imbalances, unequal rights, unfair trade, and social contradictions, war and conflict will be inevitable. Ultimately, the world is determined by strength, and technological, economic, and military strength are extremely important. While military strength cannot determine politics, it can influence it; it cannot determine the economy, but it can bring security for economic development. The stronger the intelligent warfare capabilities, the stronger its deterrent and war-preventing function, and the greater the hope for peace. Like nuclear deterrence, it plays a crucial role in preventing large-scale wars to avoid terrible consequences and uncontrolled disasters.
The level of intelligence in warfare, in a sense, reflects the progress of civilization in warfare. The history of human warfare, initially a struggle between groups for food and habitation, has evolved into land occupation, resource plunder, expansion of political power, and domination of the spiritual world—all fraught with bloodshed, violence, and repression. As the ultimate solution to irreconcilable contradictions in human society, war’s ideal goal is civilization: subjugation without fighting, minimal resource input, minimal casualties, and minimal damage to society… However, past wars have often failed to achieve this due to political struggles, ethnic conflicts, competition for economic interests, and the brutality of technological destructive methods, frequently resulting in the utter destruction of nations, cities, and homes. Past wars have failed to achieve these ideals, but future intelligent warfare, due to technological breakthroughs, increased transparency, and deeper mutual sharing of economic benefits, especially as the confrontation of human forces gradually gives way to confrontation between robots and AI, will see decreasing casualties, material consumption, and collateral damage. This presents a significant possibility of achieving civilization, offering humanity hope. We envision future warfare gradually transitioning from the mutual slaughter of human societies and the immense destruction of the material world to wars between unmanned systems and robots. This will evolve into deterrence and checks and balances limited to combat capabilities and overall strength, AI confrontations in the virtual world, and highly realistic war games… The energy expenditure of human warfare will be limited to a certain scale of unmanned systems, simulated confrontations and experiments, or even merely the energy needed to wage a war game. Humanity will transform from the planners, designers, participants, leaders, and victims of war into rational thinkers, organizers, controllers, observers, and adjudicators. Human bodies will no longer suffer trauma, minds will no longer be frightened, wealth will no longer be destroyed, and homes will no longer be devastated. Although this beautiful ideal and aspiration may always fall short of harsh reality, we sincerely hope that this day will arrive, and arrive as soon as possible. This is the highest stage of intelligent warfare development, the author’s greatest wish, and humanity’s beautiful vision!
(Thanks to my colleague, Researcher Zhou Xumang, for his support and assistance in writing this paper. He has unique thoughts and insights into the development and construction of intelligent systems.)
Notes
[1] Robert O. Walker et al., 20YY: War in the Age of Robots, translated by Zou Hui et al., Beijing: National Defense Industry Press, 2016, p. 148.
The Era of Intelligent War Is Coming Rapidly
Wu Mingxi
Abstract: Since the entry into the new century, the rapid development of intelligent technology with artificial intelligence (AI) at the core has accelerated the process of a new round of military revolution. The competition in the military field is going rapidly to the era of intelligent power. The operational elements represented by “AI, cloud, network, group and end” and their diverse combinations constitute a new battlefield ecosystem, and the winning mechanism of war has changed completely. multiplier, transcendence and active role. The platform has AI control, the cluster has AI guidance, and the system has AI decision-making. The traditional human-based combat method is replaced by AI models and algorithms, and intelligent dominance becomes the core of future war. The stronger the intelligent combat capability, the more hopeful the soldiers may win the war without firing a shot.
Abstract: Since the entry into the new century, the rapid development of intelligent technology with artificial intelligence (AI) at the core has accelerated the process of a new round of military revolution. The competition in the military field is going rapidly to the era of intelligent power. The operational elements represented by “AI, cloud, network, group and end” and their diverse combinations constitute a new battlefield ecosystem, and the winning mechanism of war has changed completely. The AI system based on models and algorithms will be the core combat capability, running through all aspects and links and playing a multiplier, transcendence and active role. The platform has AI control, the cluster has AI guidance, and the system has AI decision-making. The traditional human-based combat method is replaced by AI models and algorithms, and intelligent dominance becomes the core of future war. The stronger the intelligent combat capability, the more hopeful the soldiers may win the war without firing a shot.
An Analysis of the New Changes in the Ways to Win in Intelligent Warfare
■Wang Ronghui
President Xi Jinping pointed out that the core of studying warfare is to understand the characteristics, laws, and winning mechanisms of modern warfare. From the clash of bronze swords to the roar of tank engines and the saturation attacks of unmanned “swarms,” each leap in the form of warfare has profoundly changed the way wars are won. In the long era of cold weapons, firearms, and mechanized warfare, attrition warfare used the offsetting of national wealth and resources to exhaust the opponent’s will to resist. However, the new military revolution, led by the information technology revolution and accelerating towards the intelligent era, is pushing the way wars are won to a completely new dimension—dissipation warfare, which transforms the traditional method of war, which is mainly based on the consumption of materials and energy, into a comprehensive method of war that integrates the offsetting of materials, the offsetting of energy, and the confrontation of information.
The war of attrition is an iron law of traditional warfare.
In the long years before and during the Industrial Age, wars were primarily based on the struggle for material and energy resources, and the balance of power often tipped in favor of the side that could withstand greater material and energy losses.
The war of attrition is a major winning tactic in traditional warfare. In cold weapon warfare, the focus of confrontation lies in the number of soldiers, their physical endurance, and the competition of metal weapons and food reserves. The outcome of the war often depends on the size of the army and the strength of the logistical chain. For example, the siege warfare that was common in ancient times was essentially a war of attrition between the defender’s supplies and the attacker’s manpower and equipment. In firearms warfare, the use of gunpowder did not reduce the attrition of war; on the contrary, it pushed it to a new level. The dense charges of line infantry in the Napoleonic Wars, and the brutal trench warfare of Verdun and the Somme in World War I, all exemplified the nature of attrition warfare—trading space for steel and flesh. Mechanized warfare, with the advent of tanks, airplanes, and aircraft carriers, pushed the scale of material and energy consumption to its peak. In World War II, the Battle of Kursk on the Soviet-German front and the brutal Battle of Iwo Jima in the Pacific were the ultimate clashes between a nation’s industrial capacity and its military’s ability to withstand casualties.
The war of attrition is essentially a contest of material and energy resources. It’s a contest of size and reserves—static or slowly accumulating factors such as population size, resource reserves, industrial capacity, and troop strength. Its primary objective is to destroy the enemy’s manpower, war materials, and seize their territory and resources; essentially, it’s a contest of material and energy resources between the opposing sides. Klausewitz’s assertion that “war is a violent act that forces the enemy to submit to our will” is fundamentally based on the logic of violent attrition. The winning mechanism of a war of attrition is that victory belongs to the side that can more sustainably convert material resources into battlefield lethality and can withstand greater losses.
The war of attrition has revealed significant historical limitations in practice. From the long-term experience of traditional warfare, the fundamental limitations of the war of attrition manifest in the enormous loss of life and material wealth, the unbearable high costs to society, and the waste of vast amounts of energy and resources on non-critical targets, indiscriminate bombardment, and large-scale but inefficient charges. When both sides are evenly matched in strength and determined, the outcome is difficult to predict, leading to repeated back-and-forth battles and easily resulting in a protracted quagmire of attrition, as seen on the Western Front of World War I. Faced with increasingly networked and information-based modern warfare systems, the attrition model relying on large-scale firepower coverage is insufficient for accurately targeting the opponent’s key nodes and functional connections, resulting in diminishing returns.
The information technology revolution gave rise to the prototype of dissipative warfare
The information technology revolution in the second half of the 20th century injected a disruptive variable into the form of warfare. Information began to surpass matter and energy, becoming the core element of victory, and information warfare took center stage in history.
The focus of information warfare has shifted. The Gulf War is considered a milestone in information warfare, where multinational forces, relying on reconnaissance aircraft, early warning aircraft, electronic warfare systems, precision-guided weapons, and C4ISR systems, achieved overwhelming information superiority, realizing “one-way transparency” on the battlefield. The focus of this war was no longer on the complete annihilation of the opponent’s massive ground forces, but rather on the systematic destruction of its command and control systems, air defense systems, communication hubs, and logistical supply lines, leading to the rapid collapse of the opponent’s overall combat capability and plunging them into a chaotic state of fragmented operations and command failure. This marks a shift in the focus of warfare from “hard destruction” in the physical domain to “system disruption” and functional paralysis in the information domain.
The methods of winning in informationized warfare have changed. Informationized warfare alters the way and objectives of material and energy utilization through information superiority. The winning strategy is no longer simply about “consuming” the opponent’s materials and energy, but rather about guiding the flow of materials and energy through efficient information flow, precisely targeting the “key links” of the enemy’s operational system. This aims to achieve maximum chaos, disorder, functional collapse, and overall effectiveness reduction in the enemy system with minimal material and energy input. Therefore, informationized warfare is beginning to pursue “entropy increase,” or increased disorder, in the enemy’s operational system, causing it to move from order to disorder. This indicates that dissipative warfare, reflecting the complex system confrontation of intelligent warfare, is beginning to emerge.
Dissipation warfare is a typical form of intelligent warfare.
With the rapid development of intelligent technology and its widespread application in the military, intelligent warfare is becoming a new form of warfare after information warfare, and dissipation warfare is becoming a typical mode of intelligent warfare.
Dissipation warfare has adapted to the demands of the modern world security landscape. In the era of intelligence, the rapid development and application of intelligent technologies such as broadband networks, big data, cloud computing, brain-computer interfaces, intelligent chips, and deep learning have broadened connections between countries and nations. Non-traditional security threats have emerged and intertwined with traditional security threats, leading to a continuous expansion of the subject and scope of intelligent warfare. The time and space of warfare are constantly extending, and the warfare system is shifting from relatively closed to more open, forming a higher-level and broader-ranging confrontation. Dissipation warfare, as a winning strategy in the intelligent era, is becoming increasingly prominent.
Dissipation warfare reflects the historical development of methods for winning wars. Dissipation warfare has always existed, but before the advent of intelligent warfare, due to technological constraints, it remained in a relatively rudimentary and simple form, where the confrontation could only be manifested as a confrontation between one of the elements of matter, energy, or information. Cold weapon warfare was primarily a confrontation centered on the human body and dominated by material elements; firearms and mechanized warfare was primarily a confrontation centered on platforms and dominated by energy elements; and information warfare is primarily a confrontation centered on network information systems and dominated by information elements. Entering the intelligent era, intelligent technology highly unifies the cognitive, decision-making, and action advantages in the confrontation between enemies and ourselves. In essence, it highly unifies matter, energy, and information. By empowering, gathering, driving, and releasing energy with intelligence, it forms an intelligent warfare form dominated by intelligent elements and centered on intelligent algorithms. Its typical form is dissipation warfare, which reflects the complex system confrontation of intelligent warfare.
Dissipation warfare embodies the resilience of complex warfare systems. From the perspective of the winning mechanism, to gain a competitive advantage, it is necessary to construct a closed loop of dissipation warfare that enables rapid “perception, decision-making, action, and evaluation” based on the fundamental principles of “negative entropy infusion, threshold determination, phase transition triggering, and victory control.” This continuously increases the enemy’s entropy value in a dynamic hybrid game, causing the enemy to lose its overall combat capability. From the perspective of the path to victory, dissipation warfare emphasizes the comprehensive use of material attrition, energy confrontation, and information confrontation. Internally, it “establishes order” to achieve logical concentration, immediate accumulation, complementary advantages, and integrated strengths to form comprehensive combat power. Externally, it “increases entropy” by continuously exerting its effects through military, political, economic, technological, cultural, and diplomatic components until the effectiveness accumulates to a certain level, resulting in “rise and fall” and achieving a sudden change in combat power and the emergence of systemic effectiveness. In terms of its basic characteristics, dissipative warfare is characterized by comprehensive confrontation and competition, multiple subjects across domains, complex and diverse forms, integrated and concentrated forces, and the emergence of accumulated effectiveness. The core of the confrontation has evolved from the destruction of the physical domain and the control of the information domain to a game of disrupting and maintaining the “orderliness” inherent in the complex system of intelligent warfare.
Dissipation warfare encompasses various forms of intelligent warfare. Beyond the traditional attrition warfare across land, sea, air, space, cyberspace, and electronic domains, dissipation warfare also includes various forms of conflict employed by one or more countries against their adversaries in multiple social spheres. These include political isolation and encirclement, economic and financial blockades, disruption of technological supply chains, cultural strategic export, authoritative media campaigns to seize the initiative in discourse, manipulation of public opinion through trending events, AI-assisted social media information warfare, and the use of proxies to establish multilateral battlefields. The diverse forms of dissipation warfare allow it to be conducted in both war and peacetime. Sun Tzu’s Art of War principle, “Victorious armies first secure victory and then seek battle,” takes on new meaning in the context of war preparation in the intelligent age.
The shift in winning strategies from war of attrition to war of dissipation
Dissipative warfare manifests itself in the comprehensive confrontation across multiple domains, including the physical and information domains, in the intelligent era. It embodies a high degree of unity among political contests, economic competition, military offense and defense, cultural conflicts, and diplomatic checks and balances, reflecting the openness, complexity, and emergence of intelligent warfare systems.
The evolution from a war of attrition to a war of dissipation represents a comprehensive and profound transformation. The basis for victory has shifted from relying on the stock of resources such as population, mineral deposits, and industrial base to relying on information superiority, intelligent algorithm superiority, network structure superiority, and the ability to dynamically control the flow of energy and information. The target of action has shifted from focusing on destroying physical entities such as soldiers, tanks, and factories to focusing on dismantling the “function” and “order” of the war system. The pursuit of effectiveness has shifted from the absolute destruction and annihilation of manpower to the pursuit of highly efficient “asymmetric paralysis,” that is, inducing the greatest chaos and incompetence of the enemy’s combat system at the lowest cost on one’s own side, pursuing “paralysis” rather than “destruction.” The focus of war has shifted from confrontation mainly in the physical domains such as land, sea, and air to a comprehensive game in multiple domains such as the physical domain and the information domain. While the physical domain still exists, it is often determined by the advantages of higher-dimensional domains.
The evolution from war of attrition to war of dissipation reflects a change in the decisive advantage. In the era of intelligent warfare, victory will no longer simply belong to the side with the largest steel torrent, but will inevitably belong to the side that can more efficiently “establish order” and “induce entropy”—that is, the side that can maintain a highly ordered and efficient operation of its own war system, while precisely and intelligently dismantling the order of the enemy’s system, forcing it into irreversible “entropy increase” and chaos. To gain a decisive advantage in war, we must adapt to the openness, complexity, and emergence of intelligent warfare systems, shifting from the extensive consumption and utilization of single materials, energy, and information to a war system where intelligent advantages dominate dissipation, and striving to gain the initiative and advantage in comprehensive multi-domain games.
The evolution from war of attrition to war of dissipation is an inevitable trend driven by the tide of technological revolution. Technology is the core combat capability and the most active and revolutionary factor in military development. Currently, intelligent technology is developing rapidly. Only by proactively embracing the wave of intelligence and firmly grasping the key to victory in the accurate understanding, intelligent control, and efficient dissipation of the complex system of warfare can we remain invincible in the ever-changing landscape of future global competition and the profound transformation of warfare.
