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)
AI is propelling warfare into an era of intelligent warfare. The winning mechanism of traditional warfare is “the big eat the small,” a contest of troop size and firepower density; the winning mechanism of information warfare is “the fast eat the slow,” pursuing a strike effect of detection and destruction; while the winning mechanism of AI warfare is “the sophisticated eat the crude”—whoever can achieve more refined perception, more accurate judgment, and more precise strikes through algorithms will gain the initiative on the battlefield. In this context, clarifying the characteristics of warfare in the AI era can help us better grasp and utilize this winning mechanism, thereby gaining the upper hand and taking the initiative on the future battlefield.
Feature 1: Comprehensive Perception – From “A Fog of Darkness” to a “Transparent Battlefield”
AI is reshaping battlefield perception, achieving unprecedented battlefield transparency. Its core lies in breaking down barriers between military branches and operational domains, effectively integrating heterogeneous data streams from land, sea, air, space, cyber, and electronic domains. Through real-time fusion and processing, a unified, dynamic, and panoramic battlefield situation map is constructed. Ideally, commanders will no longer see fragmented local information, but a complete presentation of the entire battlefield situation, providing comprehensive information support for their decision-making. It is worth noting that this transparency highly depends on the purity and timeliness of the data. The party that possesses key, accurate, and real-time updated data holds the key to “see through” the battlefield; while the party that can effectively implement data pollution, inject false information, or conduct electromagnetic spectrum deception can plunge the adversary into a deeper “fog of war,” causing confusion or even blindness in their situational awareness. Therefore, we must clearly recognize that battlefield transparency brought about by AI is not equivalent to “omniscience”: while artificial intelligence can provide near-complete “battlefield pixels,” the authenticity, timeliness, and even the correlation of the information behind each “pixel” still rely on robust information verification and analysis mechanisms to ensure its accuracy.
To achieve this, a deep human-machine collaborative information analysis mechanism needs to be established. With the support of AI technology, “human + machine” becomes a new combat formation. AI acts as a high-speed, tireless “super advisor,” while humans are the ultimate decision-makers who gain a comprehensive understanding and grasp the overall direction. In this process, AI leverages its advantages of speed, accuracy, and the ability to operate at high intensity for extended periods, demonstrating its prowess in the initial screening of massive amounts of data, the automatic identification of key features, and the rapid early warning of potential threats. Humans, on the other hand, need to exercise their initiative, recognizing the “ethics of war” that AI might overlook, upholding the “political stance” that AI might ignore, and clarifying the “value judgments” that AI might overlook, ensuring that all decisions are human-led and always serve the overall strategic interests.
Feature Two: Rapid Closure of the Kill Chain – From “Hours” to “Milliseconds”
The deep integration of AI technology is driving a leapfrog upgrade in the speed of the kill chain closure in modern warfare: from the “hours” of the mechanized era and the “minutes” of information warfare to the “milliseconds” of the intelligent era. This change stems from the deep reconstruction of combat processes by algorithms, transforming the traditional linear kill chain into a dynamic response network. This enables AI to demonstrate strong battlefield autonomy, autonomously identifying high-value targets, autonomously planning optimal response plans, and autonomously allocating resources to the most suitable combat units for execution. This brings the “detect and destroy” combat objective closer to reality: once a target is captured by sensors, its coordinates, attributes, threat level determination, optimal strike plan generation, weapon platform allocation, and firepower release can be completed simultaneously in a short time, achieving an instantaneous closed loop from perception to action.
From this perspective, algorithms are weapons—code may be more lethal than missiles. Modern warfare has evolved from a contest of performance between single weapon platforms to an intelligent confrontation of entire combat systems. A smart kill chain system capable of millisecond-level closed-loop systems is powerful not only in the number of sophisticated weapons it can deploy, but also in its ability to autonomously complete the “decision-action” cycle. In this process, the autonomous decision-making logic built by code, the cross-domain collaborative network driven by data flow, and the real-time dynamic response supported by computing power constitute the core elements of generating new combat capabilities. At this point, soft-kill attacks on algorithmic systems can have strategic effects, such as disrupting enemy decision-making models, damaging enemy cloud computing nodes, and severing enemy battlefield data chains. The impact of such attacks may be even greater than destroying an enemy’s heavy arsenal with missiles. Therefore, in planning future warfare, algorithmic control must be placed on an equally important strategic position as information control and other emerging forms of control. Efforts must be made to build an intelligent combat system with millisecond-level autonomous decision-making capabilities and strong anti-interference resilience to ensure that the rhythm of combat is firmly controlled in complex adversarial environments.
Feature Three: The Boundary Between Reality and Virtuality Disappears—From the “Real Battlefield” to the “Global Battlefield”
In the era of information- and intelligent warfare, the clear-cut physical and virtual boundaries of the traditional battlefield are rapidly dissolving, gradually evolving into a “full-domain battlefield” where the physical, information, and social domains are highly integrated and interact with each other. The firepower clashes in physical space and the bit attacks and defenses in digital space are no longer two parallel lines, but rather a unified whole that is intertwined, mutually shaping, and deeply coupled.
This characteristic is first manifested in the coexistence of the virtual and real combat space. In the virtual space, a parallel space constructed by data streams, AI systems can not only map the situation of the physical world in real time, but also predict the enemy’s movement trajectory, evaluate the effectiveness of different combat plans, and even rehearse combat scenarios that have not yet occurred through deep learning and simulation. This precise mapping and advanced simulation of the physical world by the virtual space greatly expands the dimensions of battlefield perception and decision-making. Secondly, it is manifested in the cross-domain penetration of combat operations. A successful cyberattack may directly paralyze the enemy’s command and control system, turning its real-world tank formations into “steel graveyards”; similarly, the physical destruction of key power grids, communication nodes, etc., will also severely damage the opponent’s combat capabilities in the virtual space. Finally, it is manifested in the increasing blurring of combat subjects and means. With the support of AI technology, cyber hacker organizations and even individuals may become “asymmetric participants” with significant influence; attack methods are also becoming more generalized: a carefully designed piece of malicious code, a data poisoning attack targeting a key industrial control system, or a false intelligence inducement using AI can all trigger a chain reaction in the physical world. Attackers can remain hidden within networks, making them difficult for defenders to trace. This high degree of anonymity and unpredictability significantly increases the cost of defense. Faced with this complex situation, there is an urgent need to transform traditional defensive thinking and combat models, accelerate the construction of a unified confrontation system covering both physical and virtual spaces, develop intelligent combat methods that can penetrate physical and virtual barriers and implement cross-domain collaboration, and forge cross-dimensional suppression capabilities that allow physical destruction and digital suppression to take effect simultaneously.
Feature 4: Accelerated Iterative Evolution – From “No Progress, No Regression” to “Slow Progress, No Regression”
The development of military capabilities in the AI era is a continuous and accelerating process. This is not a linear development of equipment generational replacement in the traditional sense, but rather a self-upgrading of intelligent technology: when relevant intelligent systems undergo millions of self-training sessions in a short period, the speed of technological iteration and offensive-defensive transitions is unprecedentedly accelerated. Yesterday’s impregnable “steel walls” may become “rubble” in the data deluge tomorrow; today’s proud “intelligent advantages” may become “outdated symbols” on a training sandbox the day after tomorrow. From this perspective, the form and logic of warfare in the AI era are shifting from “if you don’t advance, you fall behind” to “if you advance slowly, you fall behind.” However, we must recognize that the more sophisticated the intelligent system, the more it relies on factors such as networks and algorithms. When satellite links are blinded, training databases are contaminated, and cloud computing nodes are destroyed, a highly intelligent war machine may instantly transform from “intelligent” to “incompetent.”
At the practical level, it is essential to construct an agile evolutionary mechanism of “anticipation and adaptation.” We must abandon the static mindset that “advanced equipment is the end goal” and view military capability development as a continuously iterating “living entity.” We must establish a keen network for sensing cutting-edge technologies and, through deep integration into the global innovation ecosystem, capture potential “technological singularities” that could disrupt the rules of warfare at the earliest possible moment. Simultaneously, we must establish a rapid feedback loop that seamlessly connects “research, testing, training, and combat,” ensuring that data from every exercise, simulated confrontation, and even virtual simulation becomes “nutrients” for the self-optimization of intelligent systems such as algorithms and models. This drives the dynamic adjustment of operational concepts, organizational structures, and tactics in near real-time, thereby generating a continuous and rapid endogenous driving force for evolution.
Postscript
In the AI era, the nature of warfare has undergone profound changes—this leap towards intelligence presents both challenges and opportunities. We must embrace technology and accelerate the building of intelligent advantages, but we must also remain clear-headed, recognizing that human political, strategic, and value judgments are always the foundation for navigating future warfare and winning future battlefields. Only by closely integrating the sophistication of technological development with the depth of human wisdom can we consistently remain at the forefront of this wave of military transformation.
[Abstract] Modern warfare is rapidly evolving into information warfare, and the emergence of intelligent warfare is beginning. Intelligent combat systems are becoming the main force form in intelligent warfare, giving rise to new combat styles such as adaptive warfare, cluster attrition warfare, and simultaneous parallel warfare. “Intelligence control” has become a new high ground for control in warfare. In the future, intelligent warfare will exhibit a phased and accelerated evolution. The development of intelligent technology will determine the direction of intelligent warfare, profoundly transforming the contradictory laws of war, and continuously strengthening war ethics and legal regulations. To meet the challenges of intelligent warfare, we must proactively design intelligent warfare, accelerate the development of intelligent equipment, shape intelligent organizational forms, and strengthen intelligent strategic management.
[Keywords] Intelligent warfare, Information warfare, Evolution of form of warfare, Strategic measures
[Chinese Library Classification Number] E0 [Document Identification Code] A
【DOI】10.16619/j.cnki.rmltxsqy.2021.10.002
Guo Ming is the Vice President, Researcher, and Doctoral Supervisor of the Institute of War Studies at the Academy of Military Sciences of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. His research focuses on military command. His major works include *Tactics of War* (chief editor) and *A Course in Special Operations* (chief editor).
In recent years, driven by a new round of technological, industrial, and military revolutions, the form of warfare is rapidly evolving towards information warfare, and intelligent warfare is on the verge of emerging. As a new form of future warfare, intelligent warfare is not only revolutionizing people’s understanding of war and military affairs, but is also increasingly attracting the attention of countries around the world. Exploring and mastering the characteristics and laws of intelligent warfare and accelerating the development of military intelligence are contemporary challenges for safeguarding the overall strategic situation of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.
A deep understanding of the driving forces behind the evolution of intelligent warfare
The form of war is the historical stage of war, characterized by the technical attributes of the main weapons, and is the manifestation of human society’s mode of production and movement in the military field. [1] Historically, the form of war has undergone several evolutions from cold weapon war, hot weapon war, mechanized war to information warfare, and is currently evolving towards intelligent warfare. This is the result of the combined effects of multiple factors such as politics, economy, military, science and technology, and culture.
The new round of technological revolution is the fundamental driving force behind the evolution of intelligent warfare. Science and technology are the primary productive forces and the core combat power of modern warfare. Major breakthroughs in military technology and landmark developments in dominant weaponry have triggered entirely new changes in military organization, combat methods, and operational theories, leading to a holistic transformation of warfare and the emergence of new forms of conflict. Since the beginning of the 21st century, new technologies characterized by “intelligence, ubiquity, and greenness” have emerged in rapid succession. In particular, artificial intelligence, driven by new technologies and theories such as mobile internet, big data, supercomputing, and brain science, exhibits new characteristics such as deep learning, cross-disciplinary integration, human-machine collaboration, collective intelligence development, and autonomous control. This has triggered a chain of breakthroughs in the military field, significantly changing the way people, weapons, and the ways in which people and weapons, and weapons and weapons, are combined. Various intelligent equipment projects have emerged, including “multi-purpose unmanned tactical transport” ground vehicles, “loyal wingman” drones, “Stingray” shipborne unmanned refueling aircraft, “Sea Hunter” anti-submarine unmanned surface vessels, satellite robots, “cyberspace vehicles,” “adaptive radar countermeasures,” and the “Alpha” beyond-visual-range air combat system. Human-machine hybrid formations, unmanned swarm warfare, and system-based cognitive deception will become possible. Systemic major innovations have emerged in various fields such as combat methods, command and control, organizational structure, logistics support, and military training. Intelligent warfare, which “uses intelligence to control capabilities,” has begun to emerge.
Strategic competition among major powers is the driving force behind the evolution of intelligent warfare. Military affairs are subordinate to politics, and strategy is subordinate to political strategy. Comrade Mao Zedong pointed out that war is “the highest form of struggle used to resolve contradictions between classes, nations, states, and political groups at a certain stage of development.” [2] Strategic competition among major powers and the resulting military demands are key factors driving the evolution of warfare. During World War II, although the armies of Britain, France, Germany, the United States, and the Soviet Union all possessed tanks, aircraft, and radio communication equipment, only Germany successfully implemented “blitzkrieg.” One very important reason was that Germany attempted to use this to break the strategic dilemma of fighting on two fronts. Currently, the world is undergoing profound changes unseen in a century, and the international balance of power is undergoing the most revolutionary changes since modern times, with profound adjustments taking place in the international political and economic landscape. Out of strategic considerations to maintain its world hegemony, the United States proposed the “Third Offset Strategy,” which clearly prioritizes artificial intelligence and autonomy as the technological pillars for development. It accelerates the development of military intelligence from aspects such as war design, operational concept development, technology research and development, and military spending, actively seizing the initiative in the military intelligence revolution and seeking to gain strategic initiative with new technological advantages. Russia insists on investing its limited scientific and technological resources in areas with high strategic value, cutting-edge technology, and great practicality, and regards intelligence as the key to the modernization of weapons and equipment. It has clearly proposed to increase the proportion of unmanned combat systems to 30% by 2025. [3] Other major powers such as Britain, France, India, and Japan are not to be outdone and have increased their investment and deployment in military intelligence. The fierce international strategic competition not only affects the strategic focus of military intelligence development in various countries, but also promotes the evolution and development of intelligent warfare.
Military theoretical innovation is the ideological precursor driving the evolution of intelligent warfare. It plays a significant guiding role in the development of military technology and the evolution of warfare. Human warfare history shows that for cutting-edge technologies and their materialized weaponry to truly achieve combat capability, they must be guided by advanced military theory. There are numerous examples of clinging to existing military theories and missing opportunities to build and utilize new combat capabilities. The US military has always emphasized designing warfare from a technological perspective, using the development of new operational concepts to drive innovation and leaps in defense technology, weaponry, and combat capabilities. The new operational concepts proposed by the US military in recent years all revolve around the top-level operational concept of “cross-domain collaboration.” For example, the US Air Force’s “distributed operations” decouples capabilities through “distribution” and then aggregates them through “collaboration,” thereby constructing a complete operational system. Reflected in force allocation and application, this means a small number of manned aircraft collaborating with a large number of intelligent unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with decomposed functions to form an operational system. In August 2020, the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) organized the third human-machine air combat concept demonstration. In the final virtual duel, the artificial intelligence team decisively defeated the human pilot team. Russia has clearly identified military robots as a key direction for the development of military intelligence. In April of this year, Russian media disclosed that its Aerospace Forces’ “Lightning” multi-functional unmanned system has completed group deployment tests and is capable of achieving the Russian military’s “swarm” combat concept attack mission. [4] The core of these combat concepts that already have certain intelligent characteristics is to explore how intelligent warfare can coordinate the use of various military forces through the improvement of “intelligence” to defeat the opponent and achieve a complete victory with cross-domain asymmetric advantages. The formation of intelligent warfare depends on a deep understanding of intelligent technology, keen insight into its military application potential, and a high degree of integration of the art of war with intelligent technology innovation and development of intelligent military theory.
Exploring practical warfare is the primary means of driving the evolution of intelligent warfare. The evolution of warfare is a dynamic process; each form of warfare undergoes a process of quantitative change leading to qualitative change, and gradual change leading to sudden change. Compared to the rise of information warfare, intelligent warfare currently lacks a complete and typical practical example like the Gulf War. However, experiments and practices in intelligent warfare are propelling intelligent warfare from its inception to its nascent stage, and from its early stages to its advanced levels. In 2015, Russia, in the Syrian war, for the first time deployed four tracked Platform-M combat robots and two wheeled Argo combat robots in a structured manner, along with unmanned reconnaissance aircraft and the Andromeda-D automated command system, pioneering ground combat operations primarily based on combat robots. In January 2018, the Russian military, for the first time in the Syrian theater, used anti-intelligent equipment to destroy, jam, and capture 13 incoming drones. In September 2019, more than a dozen drones attacked two Saudi oil facilities, halving their oil production. In the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, during the Azerbaijani army’s attack on the Armenian army, unmanned combat platforms exceeded manned platforms for the first time, reaching more than 75%. The number, frequency, and intensity of drone use were all the highest in the history of human warfare. [5] These practical explorations in intelligent warfare will not only promote the application of intelligent equipment on the battlefield to a wider range, a larger number of deployments, and more complex combat scenarios, but will also promote the gradual upgrading of intelligent warfare methods and anti-intelligent warfare methods in the confrontation, thereby accelerating the profound evolution of intelligent warfare.
Accurately grasp the essential characteristics of intelligent warfare
The mechanized era, represented by steam engines and internal combustion engines, greatly expanded human physical capabilities; the information age, represented by the internet and precision-guided systems, achieved an unprecedented leap in human perception; and the rapid development of intelligent technologies, represented by deep learning and autonomous decision-making, is accumulating the material and capability foundation for the intelligent era of “intelligent control of energy.” From a military perspective, the new combat forces composed of intelligent payloads, intelligent platforms, and intelligent systems will give rise to new combat styles such as unmanned swarm warfare, cognitive control warfare, and intelligent algorithm warfare. Seizing “intellectual control” will become a new commanding height in warfare.
Intelligent combat systems have become the primary form of force. The core essence of intelligent combat systems lies in “human command, machine autonomy, and network support,” a key difference from the mechanized and information-based eras. Intelligence is not unmanned; intelligent combat systems are “unmanned platforms, manned systems”—weapons in the foreground, personnel in the background. Intelligence is not about weapons becoming human, but rather the transplantation of human intelligence into weapons, achieving a high degree of integration between humans and weapons. While current artificial intelligence technology is developing rapidly, it is still human-led and human-mediated, essentially reflecting progress in human understanding of intelligence. Regardless of breakthroughs in intelligent technology, humans will remain the initiators, designers, and ultimate decision-makers of warfare. Human operational thinking is materialized into intelligent weapons in the form of rules, algorithms, software, and data. In war, intelligent weapons implement human operational intentions and achieve predetermined operational objectives. Behind the autonomous operation of intelligent weapons remains a contest of human operational methods, command styles, and willpower. Autonomy is the core attribute of military intelligence and the essential characteristic of intelligent combat forces. In other words, weaponry possesses some of the intellectual attributes of humans, enabling it to adapt to the battlefield environment, self-coordinate complex actions, and self-organize force formations under human decision-making and control. Therefore, all the advantages of intelligent combat forces derive from this characteristic of autonomy. Intelligent combat forces also possess speed; as combat operations are increasingly autonomous, the cycle time of “observation-judgment-decision-strike” will be shortened to near-instantaneous response, thus achieving a generational leap in action speed and combat rhythm. Network technology has spurred the iterative development of the Internet, the Internet of Things, and the Internet of Intelligence, forming the foundation for improving mechanization, achieving informatization, and supporting intelligence. The rapid development of new network technologies such as the Internet of Everything and human-machine interaction is leading combat formations towards a hybrid “manned/unmanned” approach, supporting intelligent combat forces through efficient collaborative networks, enabling mission customization, autonomous formation, and flexible collaboration. Once the network environment on which intelligent combat systems heavily rely is disrupted or the links are broken, their combat functions will suffer significant damage or even paralysis. This has prompted countries worldwide to pay close attention to the resilience of intelligent combat systems against interference and attacks.
Autonomous warfare has become the primary mode of combat. With the widespread application of intelligent combat systems to the armed forces and their gradual emergence as the main combat force on the battlefield, autonomous warfare has risen to become the primary mode of combat, profoundly changing combat styles in terms of autonomy, scale, flexibility, and cognition. Based on the current development trend of military intelligence, it can be predicted that the following combat styles will emerge in the future. First, adaptive warfare. This relies on the autonomous learning capabilities of intelligent weapons to react quickly to complex battlefield environments, achieving autonomous judgment, decision-making, and execution of combat actions, maximizing combat effectiveness. Specific applications include “rapid pinpoint warfare,” “intelligent network paralysis warfare,” and “bionic special operations warfare.” The main advantage of this combat style is that it can greatly overcome inherent weaknesses such as human psychological limitations, combat time limitations, and combat mobility limitations, making it particularly suitable for carrying out combat missions deep into enemy-occupied areas, nuclear radiation zones, and other high-risk areas. Simultaneously, leveraging the agility of intelligent weapons, the rapid pace of attack prevents the enemy from organizing an effective response, thus elevating the use of speed to a new level. Second, cluster attrition warfare. This refers to a combat style that primarily utilizes intelligent unmanned swarms, supplemented by a small number of manned combat systems. It mimics the “collective intelligence” exhibited by animal groups in nature, executing combat missions through a group-based autonomous and collaborative model. Specific applications include “swarm” warfare, “fish school” warfare, and “wolf pack” warfare. The main advantage of this style is the use of low-cost, small intelligent weapons to destroy high-value enemy targets through saturation or suicide attacks, transforming numerical superiority into an asymmetric system advantage over traditional large main battle platforms. Thirdly, there is synchronous parallel warfare. This involves decomposing combat functions into multiple heterogeneous small manned and unmanned combat platforms deployed across the entire domain. By establishing a distributed communication network among these platforms, synchronization is achieved in combat time, space, and hierarchy, enabling a systematic approach to completing combat missions. The main advantage of this style is the use of intelligent networks extending to widely distributed intelligent sensors, combat platforms, and individual soldier systems to conduct synchronous and parallel strikes, seizing combat superiority.
“Intelligence dominance” has become the core of warfare. The development of warfare dominance aligns with the evolution of warfare itself. Firepower and mobility are the dominant factors for victory in mechanized warfare, with land, sea, and air dominance becoming the core of the struggle for dominance. Information power is the dominant factor for victory in informationized warfare, with space and information dominance becoming the core of the struggle for dominance. Intelligent superiority is the dominant factor for victory in intelligent warfare, with “intelligence dominance” becoming the core of the struggle for dominance. Intelligent dominance, autonomous energy control, and winning through intelligence will become the fundamental principles of intelligent warfare. The struggle for “intelligence dominance” is essentially a comprehensive contest of “algorithms + data + cognition.” Algorithms are the core of intelligent technology; “algorithms as tactics, software-defined warfare” have become distinctive features of intelligent warfare. The core of algorithm construction is creating abstract models based on problems and selecting different methods to complete the algorithm design according to the target problem. The side with algorithmic advantage can accurately simulate combat scenarios, precisely estimate combat results, and maximize the deduction of optimal combat plans, providing a powerful means to achieve victory before the battle even begins. “Whoever has the most advanced algorithm will gain the upper hand” has become a new law of warfare. Data is a core resource for many disruptive technologies in the era of intelligence. Mastering, analyzing, and competing for data, and applying it to warfare, has become crucial to victory in intelligent warfare. Intelligent weapons possess some human intellectual characteristics, making the cognitive domain a focal point of conflict. Targeting cognitive loops, relying on intelligent technology to limit the enemy’s acquisition of effective information, force them to use incorrect information, delay cognitive speed, induce cognitive patterns, and block cognitive output, can disrupt enemy command and decision-making, undermine their morale, and achieve customizable and controllable application of the ancient war rule of “winning hearts and minds.” In information warfare, the side that loses information control, although its personnel and platforms may not be destroyed, loses smooth communication and cannot form an organic whole. In intelligent warfare, without intelligent advantage, even with information and energy superiority, the loss of human-machine coordination and autonomous decision-making failures will lead to a significant reduction in overall combat effectiveness.
Intelligentization has not changed the essential nature of war. Marshal Ye Jianying pointed out that “war is fought in two ways: first, politics, and second, technology. Politics determines the nature of war, and technology determines the style of war”[6]. Intelligent warfare has not overturned the basic principles of Marxist war theory, but many new developments and changes will occur in its basic scope. On the one hand, the political determinism of intelligent warfare has not changed, and it is still a tool of politics. Politics determines the motivation, purpose and nature of war. Without the purpose of war determined by politics, war becomes blind killing, and war has no soul. In the present era, hegemonism and power politics are still the main sources of war. Ethnic and religious contradictions, energy resource competition, territorial sovereignty and maritime rights disputes will still be the direct causes of war. The widespread use of unmanned autonomous systems has blurred the boundary between war and non-war. The reduction of strategic and military risks may lead to a reduction in the threshold of future wars. In particular, the dual-use nature of intelligent technologies and the widespread adoption of “open source sharing” models such as crowdsourcing, crowdfunding, and maker initiatives have made the acquisition of equipment and technologies increasingly commercialized. This will profoundly change the main actors in warfare in the intelligent era, leading to a more diversified landscape of war actors, primarily non-state actors. On the other hand, the political factors determining victory in intelligent warfare remain unchanged, still determined by the nature of war itself. Wars that promote historical progress and reflect the political goals of the majority of society are just wars; conversely, those that do not are unjust wars. The principle that just wars will inevitably win, and that the people are the foundation of victory, will remain the ironclad rule for victory in the era of intelligent warfare. However, as intelligent technologies give rise to intelligent societies, the role and status of the public in intelligent warfare will be redefined, significantly expanding the breadth and depth of public participation. The public will increasingly become the direct targets of attack, the main body of defense, and a strong support in intelligent warfare. Therefore, it is essential to examine intelligent warfare dialectically and comprehensively, avoiding purely military or technological perspectives, recognizing the “changes” and “unchanging aspects” of intelligent warfare, and thus exploring the path to victory in intelligent warfare.
Scientific prediction of the development trend of intelligent warfare
At present, intelligent warfare is still in its infancy. Predicting the development trend of intelligent warfare is both necessary and challenging. Some scholars have pointed out that although we can roughly judge the future development trends of technologies such as machine learning, industrial robots, and materials science, we cannot accurately predict how these technologies will be combined and what specific impact they will have on future warfare. [7] This requires us to break away from the mindset of starting from individual technologies and focus on understanding the possible development trends of intelligent warfare as a whole.
Intelligent warfare will evolve in stages. With the exponential, combined, and data-driven progress of modern science and technology, as well as the accelerated transformation and application in the military field, the process of weapon and equipment transformation is constantly shortening. In addition, the world is currently in a period of great development, great change, and great adjustment. Regional turmoil and local wars will become the norm, and the exploration of intelligent combat practices will become more frequent. All of these will promote the accelerated development of intelligent warfare. At the same time, due to the limitations of subjective and objective conditions such as the development of intelligent technology, the integration of intelligent forces into the combat system, and the updating of military viewpoints, the evolution of intelligent warfare will show obvious stages. Some scholars have proposed that in order to truly enter intelligent warfare, artificial intelligence technology needs to reach four levels, namely computational intelligence, perceptual intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and human-machine integrated enhanced intelligence. When artificial intelligence technology reaches the second level, intelligent warfare will begin. When it reaches the fourth level, the era of intelligent warfare will be fully opened. [8] Based on this, it can be preliminarily judged that a relatively typical intelligent warfare will appear in the next 15 years or so, and intelligent warfare may become the basic form of warfare in the next 30 years. Practice shows that every change in the military field and every evolution of the form of warfare originates from the rise of new-type combat forces. New-type combat forces, due to their unique and advanced military technologies, possess a “trump card” nature, often disrupting the balance of power on the battlefield and becoming key forces for victory. Once these new-type combat forces are integrated into the combat system and deployed on a large scale in actual warfare, it signifies a fundamental change in the nature of warfare. The true emergence of intelligent warfare will inevitably be the result of the development and expansion of new combat forces such as intelligent unmanned combat platforms and intelligent unmanned combat swarms, integrating them into the existing combat system. This is a gradual and deepening long-term process, and achieving deep integration from initial integration will not be accomplished overnight.
The development of intelligent technology will determine the direction of intelligent warfare. Intelligent technology is a science and technology that comprehensively develops and utilizes cutting-edge technologies such as brain and cognition, biological intersection, advanced computing, big data, and micro-nano technology to study the mechanisms of intelligent behavior and its realization. As the fundamental driving force and material basis for the evolution of intelligent warfare, the development trend, industrial foundation, technological maturity, and depth and breadth of its application in the military field directly determine the future direction of intelligent warfare. In its more than 60 years of development, artificial intelligence technology has experienced three rises and two falls. Currently, the development of artificial intelligence is still in the early stages of statistical learning and may remain in the stage of weak artificial intelligence for a long time. Strong artificial intelligence, which can evolve independently of humans, is difficult to achieve in the short term. The development and breakthroughs of intelligent technology directly determine whether intelligentization is a higher stage of informatization or a stage even higher than informatization. Currently, the driving force of intelligent technology development on intelligent warfare is concentrated in the following aspects: First, intelligent technology empowers existing weapons and equipment. Although current development primarily focuses on dedicated intelligent systems for specific application scenarios, it has already continuously improved the combat effectiveness of traditional main combat platforms such as aircraft carriers and aircraft, gradually evolving from direct human control to the ability to autonomously complete specific combat missions. Secondly, intelligent technology is transforming future combat command models. The integration and transformation of command and control systems by intelligent technology will promote the hybridization of command entities, the flexibility of command structures, and the agility of command models. Competition for adaptive, self-organizing, and self-coordinating command advantages at the operational level will intensify. Thirdly, intelligent technology is updating future combat processes. Intelligent technology will converge and integrate multiple kill chains across land, sea, air, and space combat domains into a cross-domain kill network, fundamentally changing the traditional single-process combat “from sensor to shooter.”
The laws of contradiction in intelligent warfare will undergo profound changes. Applying the laws of contradiction in warfare is a primary means of understanding its laws, and the confrontation between opposing sides is the fundamental contradiction in war. For intelligent warfare, these fundamental contradictions will manifest as competitive relationships such as concealment versus detection, cognition versus deception, network resilience versus network incapacity, attack versus interception, speed of action versus speed of decision-making, winning popular support versus undermining morale, attrition versus effectiveness, and delivery versus denial. With the accelerated development of intelligent technology, these core combat confrontations will become increasingly intense, and the exchange of advantages will become more frequent, thus driving intelligent warfare towards maturity. The confrontation between concealment and detection on the future battlefield will evolve towards greater intelligence, faster response, smaller size, and lower cost. Intelligent technology, as a strategic high ground technology for wielding the “double-edged sword” of information explosion, will intensify the confrontation of enhancing one’s own battlefield situational awareness and misleading, deceiving, and confusing the enemy. Intelligent network information system design and dynamic target defense technologies provide new ideas for network construction in future warfare, while cognitive electromagnetic manipulation and electromagnetic spectrum warfare, and intelligent cyberspace confrontation technologies provide new ways to attack enemy networks. The development of autonomous unmanned systems and smart munitions is expected to optimize attack methods and enhance offensive power in future warfare. The development of autonomous homing weapons and ultra-short-range interception and active protection capabilities will significantly improve the ability to defend against new threats. Autonomous unmanned systems and swarm collaboration technologies will significantly improve operational speed, while intelligent decision-making assistance and swarm intelligence operating systems can greatly improve decision-making speed. The ubiquitous network, social media, and smart terminals are deeply integrated into human life, unprecedentedly increasing the speed, scope, and accuracy of information dissemination. With the emergence of low-cost swarm drones and missiles, future warfare may well overwhelm enemy defenses with low-cost combat platforms, forcing the enemy into a war they cannot defend against or afford.
The ethical and legal regulations governing intelligent warfare will continue to strengthen. Intelligent technology is a double-edged sword; while driving the evolution of warfare towards intelligent warfare, it also brings a series of new ethical issues and legal dilemmas. For example, is it ethical to entrust machines with the power to decide human life and death? When machines possess the power to control human life and death, humanity may not be facing a brighter future, but rather a bottomless abyss of darkness. Another example is who should be held accountable for war crimes committed by intelligent weapons? This may involve the weapons themselves, users, designers, and manufacturers, and a series of resulting dilemmas regarding responsibility and rights. In recent years, the international community has increasingly emphasized the legal regulation of intelligent weapons, conducting international dialogues through international conferences, establishing relevant institutions to study legal regulatory principles, and issuing ethical guidelines for artificial intelligence, among other things. In July 2017, the Chinese government released the “New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan,” proposing at the national strategic level to “initially establish a legal, ethical, and policy system for artificial intelligence” and “ensure the safe, reliable, and controllable development of artificial intelligence.” In April 2019, the European Commission released ethical guidelines for artificial intelligence, proposing seven conditions including transparency, fairness, safety, and human oversight. In October 2019, the U.S. Defense Innovation Board proposed five principles for the application of military artificial intelligence: responsibility, fairness, traceability, reliability, and controllability. Looking to the future, there is an urgent need for the international community to prioritize security and reliability as a key development direction for intelligent technologies. Strategic dialogue is crucial in areas such as the explainability and transparency of military intelligence, preventing the security risks of “instantaneous collapse” of autonomous weapon systems, and the design of new rules of engagement. This dialogue aims to promote the establishment of international rules for the military application of artificial intelligence and jointly address the global challenges that intelligent warfare may bring.
Strategic initiatives to meet the challenges of intelligent warfare
The advent of intelligent warfare may create a new military generation gap, militarily impacting the balance of power between nations and even triggering a new round of great power rise and fall. Intelligent warfare presents both new and unprecedented challenges to national security and a rare strategic opportunity for our military to achieve a leapfrog development. Faced with these opportunities and challenges, there is an urgent need for forward-looking planning, strategic deployment, and comprehensive measures to seize the strategic high ground in future military competition and firmly grasp the strategic initiative in safeguarding national security and winning intelligent warfare.
Proactively design intelligent warfare. First-rate armies design warfare, second-rate armies respond to warfare, and third-rate armies follow warfare. Facing the impending intelligent warfare, we must anticipate and proactively design warfare as early as possible, aiming to transform from following, keeping pace, to leading, and strive to become visionaries and rule-makers of future warfare. First, we must focus on designing intelligent warfare from a technological perspective, enhancing our understanding of cutting-edge technologies, keenly grasping new trends in technological development, and identifying key areas, directions, and technologies that can trigger the evolution of warfare. We must design the initiative of warfare through technological advancement, the flexibility of warfare through technological integration, and the asymmetry of warfare through technological disruption. Second, we must focus on strengthening the development of new intelligent combat concepts, considering the future security threats facing my country and the missions undertaken by our military. Based on the development, application, and impact of military intelligence, we must focus on how to leverage intelligent warfare to overcome the war threats and strategic dilemmas facing my country. Around various strategic directions and new security fields, we must systematically envision the intelligent combat scenarios that may be faced in the future, vigorously promote innovation in intelligent combat theory, and accelerate the construction of an intelligent combat theory system with Chinese characteristics. Third, we should focus on strengthening the demand-driven development of intelligent warfare, focusing on new intelligent warfare styles, systematically describing the required capabilities, systems, and equipment, and using operational needs to drive the development of military intelligence, ensuring that operational needs are implemented in all aspects and throughout the entire process of military intelligence development, and comprehensively improving the combat effectiveness of military intelligence development.
Developing intelligent weaponry and equipment. Intelligent weaponry and equipment are the material foundation of intelligent warfare and an important symbol of an intelligent military. First, we must adhere to system construction. Information warfare is about systems, and intelligent warfare is even more about systems. Currently, intelligent weaponry and equipment, represented by intelligent command and control systems, intelligent drones, intelligent tanks, intelligent missiles, and intelligent landmines, are still in a stage of fragmented development and far from forming a systematic development. How to build an intelligent weaponry and equipment system, especially an intelligent network information system, has become a major strategic issue facing us. Second, we must adhere to a balanced approach of offense and defense. Where there is a spear, there will inevitably be a shield; where there is intelligent weaponry and equipment, there will inevitably be anti-intelligent weaponry and equipment. We must coordinate the development of offensive and defensive intelligent weaponry and equipment. For intelligent weaponry and equipment, once the enemy obtains the source code, it is equivalent to gaining the right to use the weapon. This places new and higher demands on the construction of intelligent weaponry and equipment that combines offense and defense. Third, we must coordinate the integrated development of mechanization, informatization, and intelligence. We must adhere to the principle of supporting intelligence with mechanization and informatization, and driving mechanization and informatization with intelligence. Through the coupling, proportional optimization, and system integration of elements of mechanization, informatization, and intelligence, we can accelerate the transformation, upgrading, and efficiency improvement of intelligent weaponry and equipment construction.
Shaping an intelligent organizational structure. Without the modernization of the military’s organizational structure, there can be no modernization of national defense and the armed forces. The fundamental function of the military’s organizational system is to ensure the effective integration of personnel and equipment, enabling the formation and continuous improvement of the military’s overall combat capability. To win intelligent wars and build an intelligent military, it is essential to establish an intelligent organizational system and construct an intelligent military force system. An intelligent military force system is an organic whole comprised of combat forces with intelligent weapon platforms as its backbone, organized according to human-machine collaboration and machine self-organization collaboration, conducting combat operations under authorized control or supervision by humans, as well as combat support forces providing reconnaissance, intelligence, communication, and algorithm design, and logistics and equipment support forces. Following the principles of “emphasizing coordinated development, focusing on competitive advantages, and promoting system integration,” and centering on expanding the scale and optimizing troop composition, while inheriting the traditional tree-like structure and service branch structure organizational models, a dual organizational system balancing stability and innovation should be established. Efforts should be made to construct a command system with a virtualized center of gravity, explore and innovate new organizational methods such as cross-domain mixed forces and manned/unmanned mixed formations, and strive to achieve the flexible, organic, and efficient operation of the intelligent military force system.
Strengthening Strategic Management of Intelligentization. The evolution of intelligent warfare begins with technology and is perfected through management. To meet the challenges of intelligent warfare and accelerate the development of military intelligence, we must prioritize strategic management, focusing on improving the quality and efficiency of military intelligence development and the operational efficiency of intelligent military systems. From a holistic perspective, we must strengthen overall planning, system design, centralized management, and categorized guidance, forging a path of intensive and efficient intelligent development. Adapting to the rapid response capabilities required by intelligent warfare, we must optimize management systems and mechanisms, adopting networked and autonomous management models. We must improve the planning and implementation of cutting-edge intelligent technology research and development and the transformation and application of scientific and technological achievements, increasing R&D investment and support to ensure that technological innovation remains at the forefront of the times. We must strengthen the construction of a military standard system for artificial intelligence, promptly promulgate relevant laws, regulations, and rules concerning intelligent facilities, intelligent systems, intelligent weaponry, intelligent personnel, and intelligent warfare, and continuously improve key policies and systems supporting the development of military intelligence. Given the ubiquitous and easily disseminated nature of artificial intelligence technology, and the high degree of coupling between national strategic capabilities, social productivity, and military combat effectiveness, we must further optimize the open and integrated layout of intelligentization construction, streamline organizational leadership mechanisms, build a favorable development environment, and promote the organic unity of national prosperity and military strength.
Technology and war are inextricably intertwined. While technological innovation continuously alters the face of warfare, it hasn’t changed the violent nature and coercive purpose of war. In recent years, with the rapid development and application of artificial intelligence (AI) technology, the debate about its impact on warfare has never ceased. Compared to artificial intelligence (AI), artificial general intelligence (AGI) possesses a higher level of intelligence and is considered a form of intelligence comparable to human intelligence. How will the emergence of AGI affect warfare? Will it change the violent and coercive nature of war? This article will explore this question with a series of reflections.
Is AGI merely an enabling technology?
Many believe that while large-scale models and generative artificial intelligence demonstrate the powerful military application potential of AGI, 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 as “cyber warfare weapons” were once highly anticipated by many countries when they first appeared, but now it seems that these expectations were somewhat exaggerated.
The disruptive nature of AGI is entirely different. It brings profound changes to the battlefield with reaction speeds and knowledge far exceeding those of humans. More importantly, it fosters rapid technological advancement, resulting in massive disruptive outcomes. 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, with AGI playing a crucial role. Currently, the military applications of artificial intelligence include autonomous weapons, intelligence analysis, intelligent decision-making, intelligent training, and intelligent support, applications that are difficult to summarize simply as “empowerment.” Moreover, AGI develops rapidly, with short iteration cycles, and is constantly evolving. Future warfare requires prioritizing AGI and paying close attention to its potential changes.
Will AGI make wars disappear?
Historian Jeffrey Blainey argues that “wars always occur because of 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 unexplainability of AGI, along with the lack of experience in using AGI, will introduce new uncertainties, plunging people into an even deeper “fog of artificial intelligence.”
AGI algorithms also present rational challenges. Some scholars believe that AGI’s ability to mine and accurately predict crucial intelligence has a dual impact. In practice, AGI does indeed make fewer mistakes than humans, improving intelligence accuracy and reducing misjudgments; however, it can sometimes lead to overconfidence and encourage reckless actions. The offensive advantage brought by AGI results in the optimal defensive strategy being “preemptive strike,” disrupting the balance between offense and defense, triggering a new security dilemma, and ultimately increasing the risk of war.
AGI (Automatic Generative Technology) is highly versatile and easily integrated into 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 wars has spurred many small and medium-sized countries to begin large-scale drone procurement. The low-cost equipment and technologies offered by AGI could very well trigger a new arms race.
Will AGI be the ultimate deterrent?
Deterrence is maintaining a capability to intimidate an adversary from taking actions that exceed one’s own interests. Ultimate deterrence is when it becomes so powerful as to be unusable, such as nuclear deterrence that ensures mutual destruction. But ultimately, however, it is “human nature” that determines the outcome—a crucial element that will never be absent from war.
Without the considerations of “humanity,” will AGI become a formidable deterrent? AGI is fast but lacks empathy; its execution is resolute, severely compressing the space for strategic maneuvering. 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 opponent’s capabilities. Furthermore, regarding autonomous weapon control, whether to have humans on-site, providing full supervision, or to have humans off-site, completely relinquishing control, undoubtedly requires careful consideration. Can the firing control of intelligent weapons be handed over to AGI? If not, the deterrent effect will be greatly diminished; if so, can human life and death truly be decided by machines unrelated to them? Research at Cornell University shows that large-scale wargaming models frequently escalate wars with a “sudden nuclear attack,” even when in a neutral state.
Perhaps one day in the future, AGI will surpass human capabilities, rendering us unable to regulate and control it. Jeffrey Hinton, who coined the term “deep learning,” says 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-intelligent AI. Faced with powerful AGI in the future, will we truly be able to control them? This is a question worth pondering.
Will AGI change the nature of warfare?
With the widespread use of AGI, will battlefields filled with violence and bloodshed disappear? Some argue that AI warfare far exceeds human capabilities, potentially pushing humanity out of the fray. When AI transforms warfare into a conflict entirely between autonomous robots, will it still be a “violent and bloody war”? When adversaries with unequal capabilities clash, the weaker party may not even have a chance to act. Can war be ended before it even begins through war games? Will AGI fundamentally alter the nature of warfare? Is a “war” without human intervention 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. “Artificial intelligence that can tell stories will change the course of human history.” When AGI gains control over language, the entire system of civilization built by humanity could be overturned, without even requiring AGI to develop consciousness. Like Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, will humanity worship AGI as a new “god”?
AGI (Artificial Intelligence Generative Devices) establishes a close relationship with humans through human language and alters their perceptions, making them difficult to discern and identify. This poses a risk that the will to fight could be controlled by those with ulterior motives. Harari stated that computers don’t need to deploy killer robots; if necessary, they will allow humans to pull the trigger themselves. AGI precisely manufactures and refines situational information, controlling battlefield perception through deepfakes. This can be achieved through drones faking battlefield situations and pre-war propaganda, as evidenced in recent local wars. The cost of war would thus decrease significantly, leading to 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 the definition of 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 confrontation 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. Therefore, we cannot outsource all ethical, political, and decision-making issues to artificial intelligence, nor can we expect it to automatically generate “human nature.” Artificial intelligence technology may be abused due to impulsive passions, so it must be under human control. Since artificial intelligence is trained by humans, it will never be without bias, so it cannot be completely free from human supervision. 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 require continuous reflection and understanding in practice.
Will AGI revolutionize war theory?
Most academic knowledge is expressed in natural language. A comprehensive language model, encompassing the vast body 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’ve found that it can comprehensively analyze all scholars’ viewpoints and also offer its own “insights,” without sacrificing originality. Therefore, some have suggested that AGI could also be used to re-analyze and interpret war theory, stimulating human innovation and driving significant evolution and reconstruction of war theory and its systems. Perhaps theoretically, this could indeed lead to some improvements and developments, but war science is not only theoretical but also practical, and practicality and realism are fundamentally beyond AGI’s capabilities. Can classical war theory truly be reinterpreted? If so, what is the significance of the theory?
In short, AGI’s disruptive impact on the concept of warfare will far exceed “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. (Rong Ming, Hu Xiaofeng)
Postscript
Think ahead and envision the future with an open mind
Futurist Roy Amara famously asserted that people tend to overestimate the short-term benefits of a technology while underestimating its long-term impact, a principle known as “Amara’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, every time people think they have completed 90% of the process, looking back, they may have only completed less than 10%. The driving role of technological revolution in military revolution is becoming increasingly prominent, especially as high-tech, represented by AI, penetrates the military field in multiple ways, profoundly changing the mechanisms, elements, 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 no one can halt it. Whoever can use keen insight and a clear mind to see the trends and future of technology, to recognize its potential and power, and to penetrate the “fog of war,” is more likely to seize the initiative and gain the upper hand.
This reminds us that exploring the future forms of warfare requires a broader perspective and more nuanced thinking to get closer to the underestimated reality. Where is AGI headed? Where is intelligent warfare headed? These questions test human wisdom. (Ye Chaoyang)
The principle of training troops to fight future battles is a fundamental tenet of military strategy throughout history. An army that does not study and predict warfare is a foolish army, destined to fail when war strikes.
To date, there have been four major military transformations in the world: the first was the shift from primarily using wooden and stone weapons to primarily using metal weapons; the second was the shift from primarily using cold weapons (metal weapons) to primarily using firearms (gunpowder weapons); the third was the shift from firearms to mechanized weapons; and the fourth occurred after the 1990 Gulf War, when warfare shifted from primarily using mechanized weapons to primarily using precision-guided weapons, driving the transformation of military development from mechanization to informatization.
The fourth military revolution, also known as the new military revolution by academics, involves the world’s major military powers engaging in comprehensive competition in areas such as information technology, network technology, precision-guided technology, aerospace technology, new energy technology, biotechnology, and stealth technology. This competition has now culminated in the pursuit of advantages in big data, cloud computing, and intelligent robots, aiming to create real-life versions of “Iron Man,” “Batman,” and “Terminator.” The revolution is actively promoting the transformation of military construction from informatization and networking to intelligentization and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) deployment. The military is developing towards a lean, small, efficient, intelligent, and integrated “human-machine (robot/UAV)” model, seeking to enable robot soldiers, UAVs, and human soldiers to fight together.
According to statistics, the militaries of more than 60 countries worldwide have already equipped themselves with military robots, encompassing over 150 different types. It is projected that by 2040, half of the world’s major military powers may be comprised of robots. In addition to the US, Russia, the UK, France, Japan, Israel, Turkey, and Iran, which have already launched their own robot warriors and drones, other countries are also investing in the research and development of unmanned weapons, which will inevitably give rise to unmanned combat forces.
The term “unmanned combat force” is a general term for combat robots or battlefield killing robot systems. With the development of various information-based, precision-based, and data-driven weapons and equipment, intelligent platforms have become the driving force for pre-designed battlefields, combat robots have become the main force on the battlefield, and the combination of “human and machine” confrontation has become the key to defeating the enemy. In the future, the battlefield space forces will highlight the development trend of three-dimensional unmanned operation and human-machine integration across land, sea, and air.
In combat command and control, AI can automatically and rapidly generate combat plans. War is fought, but it is also designed. With the emergence of various information-based, precision, and intelligent weapons and equipment, and the widespread application of artificial intelligence, big data, and 5G networks, the future battlefield will essentially achieve integrated “human-machine” collaborative combat, inevitably revolutionizing traditional combat methods. Intelligent platforms, leveraging the advantages of big data, will become the behind-the-scenes directors of pre-designed battlefields, providing more accurate predictions and technical parameters, making future battlefield design more precise and efficient. Using AI technology, by inputting elements such as the deployment of enemy and friendly forces, equipment performance, personnel numbers, and battlefield environment into the combat command information system template, AI-based combat plans can be quickly generated for commanders’ operational decision-making. If commanders feel something is amiss and want to fight a battle they are confident of winning, they can also use intelligent simulated combat laboratories, employing artificial intelligence, big data, 5G networks, and simulation equipment and materials, to simulate the technical performance of enemy and friendly weapons and equipment, battlefield conditions, personnel quality, and combat actions, to test and refine the scientific and rational nature of the war design scheme, striving to find the optimal combat plan. 5G’s massive machine-to-machine communication capabilities can be combined with artificial intelligence to accelerate the comprehensive analysis and systematic research of combat effectiveness elements and combat processes using new intelligent algorithms, and to quickly derive combat capability assessment indices. This provides technical means for the large-scale use of unmanned weapons.
AI-generated combat plans differ from traditional automated combat command systems, though they share some similarities, they also have fundamental differences. In a sense, both are automated systems, but combat command automation, by inputting various combat elements, aims to output combat command decisions—these are essentially fixed. AI-generated combat plans, however, are different. The input combat elements can be fixed or variable, but the output is invariably unpredictable, almost entirely unpredictable. For example, even with the same total number of elements and parameters, different input orders will generate different results, potentially producing unexpected outcomes—this is the essence of artificial intelligence.
In terms of surprise in warfare, the coordinated operations of drones or manned aircraft have ushered in a new era. Night warfare, whether in the past or modern, has been a more effective way to achieve tactical and operational surprise. Today, night warfare is even more favored by informationized and intelligent armies. At night and in the early morning, people are in a state of sleep or semi-awakeness, and are relatively tired or complacent. Therefore, launching a war at this time makes it easier to achieve surprise. In the Kosovo War, the US launched its airstrikes at 8 PM. In the Afghan War, the US launched its airstrikes late at night. In the Iraq War, after launching its airstrikes at 5:36 AM, the US extensively used various means, including space reconnaissance satellites, aerial reconnaissance aircraft, and ground reconnaissance, to build a comprehensive information reconnaissance network system covering the air, space, and ground, firmly controlling “information superiority” and ensuring the smooth conduct of air strikes and nighttime ground military operations. With the development of night vision equipment and the increasing sophistication of night warfare methods, night and early morning have become common means of achieving surprise in air strikes. Seizing the favorable opportunities of darkness and early morning to launch surprise air strikes is the spark that will ignite future wars. Before the outbreak of future wars, unmanned reconnaissance aircraft will cooperate with manned high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft and space satellites to conduct reconnaissance of enemy forward and deep-space targets. In particular, once a drone detects a target, it can quickly transmit image information such as the target’s location and size to its own command center, drone operator, or manned aircraft pilot for decision-making reference and to issue long-range strike orders. During the Gulf War, multinational forces deployed drones to conduct day and night reconnaissance over Iraqi front-line positions, providing real-time images and guiding ground troops to destroy Iraqi positions. During the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan last year, Armenian media released a video showing the Armenian army using the Seahawk-10 drone to guide ground artillery attacks on Azerbaijani infantry units. In the video, the Armenian army’s Seahawk-10 drone transmitted information about a group of soldiers advancing in skirmish lines detected at high altitude to the drone operator. After several zoom-in confirmations, the drone operator used the drone to collect data on the target and transmit it to the artillery at the rear. After receiving the target coordinates, the Armenian artillery first conducted multiple single-shot test firings. The Seahawk-10 UAV then conducted real-time assessments of the test firing results in the air and promptly adjusted the target coordinate parameters to transmit to the Armenian artillery for concentrated and precise firing.
In future wars, drones are poised to replace conventional fighter jets, becoming one of the mainstays of aerial warfare. Their ability to execute precise, real-time strikes will revolutionize the traditional manned aircraft-based surprise attack methods employed in the dark or early morning. Currently, the UK is developing a new high-tech unmanned stealth fighter with stealth capabilities. It can test and drop munitions over multiple targets and defend itself against attacks from other manned and unmanned aircraft. Even without ground command, it can communicate with command centers via satellite and operate autonomously, executing precision strikes against long-range targets. Thus, drones, as a rapidly emerging force, have evolved from “reconnaissance and support” to “offensive protagonists.” They not only effectively supplement satellite reconnaissance but also perform diverse combat missions such as long-range reconnaissance, border patrol, target identification, electromagnetic interference, supply delivery, precision strikes, autonomous strikes, integrated reconnaissance and strike operations, and damage assessment. They are destined to become the vanguard in future wars.
On the land battlefield, unmanned tanks, unmanned armored vehicles, and combat robots are charging to the front lines, forming mixed formations with ground soldiers to fight collaboratively. To execute battlefield missions more efficiently and reduce casualties, future battlefields may see a large number of unmanned vehicles such as tanks, armored vehicles, and logistics transport vehicles. Leveraging the high speed, low latency, and interconnectivity of 5G networks, these vehicles can autonomously traverse various complex terrains and obstacles without human intervention, making instantaneous decisions to effectively ensure safety and reliability. Land robots can not only perform offensive and defensive combat missions but also deliver ammunition, medical supplies, and food, conduct patrols, and carry out reconnaissance and surveillance. Unmanned tanks allow soldiers to remotely control them, automatically load ammunition, and autonomously conduct indirect precision strikes. In 2019, Russia tested a robotic system called “Wooden Boat” to unify the command of several military robots. The Russian military and robotics research institutions also conducted collaborative exercises with newly developed combat robots, achieving good results and summarizing training methods in practice. According to Russian media reports, Russia is preparing to establish a combat robot force, a completely new type of military unit. These robots can achieve maximum automation, requiring minimal human intervention and essentially completing battlefield combat missions independently. Russian military-industrial complexes will begin developing the “Comrade” and “Assault” robot systems, composed of medium and heavy robots respectively, starting in 2020. They are currently working to improve the performance of some robots to better enable them to perform tasks in urban and coastal environments. In August 2015, on the Syrian battlefield, in addition to deploying traditional combat forces, the Russian military deployed for the first time a fully-fledged robot combat company, primarily composed of unmanned combat platforms, to conduct positional assault operations. Employing a new combat model of mixed manned and unmanned formations, they captured a high ground that Russian soldiers would find difficult to conquer in just 20 minutes, achieving a victory with zero casualties and 77 enemy kills. On April 21, 2018, the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) special forces launched a raid against extremist terrorist groups, publicly deploying armed unmanned combat vehicles equipped with machine guns as the vanguard for the first time. Following large-scale testing of combat robots at an event called “Autonomous Warrior 2018,” the British Army has unified drones, unmanned vehicles, and combat personnel as a common practice for world-class militaries in the coming decades. The US Army, having formally established unmanned platoons, plans to form unmanned combat brigades and has already developed a standardized set of hardware and software. Once installed on vehicles, these can be remotely controlled, even semi-autonomously, automatically following predetermined routes or choosing the smoothest, most direct path, or driven by a human driver. One emerging project, the “optional manned tank,” aims to propel the Army into a new generation of joint operations. It may be capable of firing lasers, controlling drones, high-speed maneuvering, destroying enemy helicopters, penetrating enemy armored formations, and performing highly lethal robotic combat missions against enemy fire. The US Army has also made rapid progress in manned-unmanned combined arms operations. This means that robotic systems will increasingly operate with greater autonomy, while still being commanded and controlled by human decision-makers. Robotic vehicles deployed at the front lines can directly attack enemy mechanized formations at close range, launch weapons, perform high-risk surveillance missions, and deliver munitions when necessary. The U.S. Marine Corps tested its unmanned combat vehicle, nicknamed “Hunter Wolf,” in Arizona. Equipped with a 30mm M230LF “short-barreled” chain gun, the vehicle conducted a rapid-fire live-fire demonstration, achieving a perfect 6-for-6 hit. The “Hunter Wolf” is 2.3 meters long, 1.4 meters wide, and 1.17 meters high, weighing only 1.1 tons, yet capable of carrying a 450-kilogram modular combat payload. It uses a hybrid electric system, offering a maximum range of 100 kilometers without refueling, a top speed of 32 kilometers per hour, a maximum endurance of 72 hours, and the ability to climb slopes with a gradient of 30 degrees.
In the naval battlefield, unmanned ghost fleets, composed of unmanned surface and underwater vessels, are mixed with manned fleets and operate in coordinated formations. Since the 1990s, the increasing application of artificial intelligence and big data in the military field has ushered in a true golden age for unmanned surface and underwater vessels, giving rise to underwater robots (AUVs) and surface robots (ASVs). Various unmanned submarines and unmanned underwater vehicles perform a variety of tasks such as underwater search, reconnaissance, and mine clearance. Unmanned warships can travel thousands of miles and perform various maritime combat missions without onboard personnel. After the Iraq War in 2003, countries around the world saw the great potential and broad prospects of unmanned marine systems, which also reduce manpower and improve combat effectiveness, thus initiating a competition to build unmanned ghost fleets. Israel, as a country that places particular emphasis on reducing soldier casualties, took the lead in launching the development of modern “Protector” unmanned surface vessels, which are used to patrol the Lebanese coast and monitor Hezbollah activities and deployments. France and Russia already possess manned submersible research vessels capable of diving to depths of 6,000 meters. Japan has proposed a concept for the “Shinkai 12000,” a new manned submersible research vessel capable of diving to the world’s deepest point. Following its “Future Maritime Aviation Acceleration Day” event, the UK continues to develop a “plug-and-play” autonomous maritime platform development system. This system, once integrated into Royal Navy vessels, will simplify the acquisition and use of automation and unmanned technologies.
In the aerial battlefield, drones and manned aircraft are mixed in formation and cooperate in combat. In 2019, approximately 30 countries worldwide had developed over 50 types of drones, and more than 50 countries had deployed drones. The main types include: cryptographic drones, multi-functional drones, AI-powered drones, long-endurance drones, anti-missile drones, early warning drones, stealth drones, micro drones, air combat drones, mapping drones, aerial photography drones, armed drones, and drone wingmen. With the widespread application of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and big data in the military field, the performance of equipment on drones is constantly improving. They will integrate multiple functions such as reconnaissance, fire correction, surveillance, battle result assessment, target identification, attack guidance, radio relay, and ground attack. They can conduct electronic jamming and deception at long distances from the enemy, and can also autonomously attack important ground targets when necessary. The future aerial battlefield will essentially realize unmanned or human-machine (drone) cooperative air strikes, or autonomous drone air strikes, which will inevitably revolutionize traditional air combat methods. In the future, fighter pilots will control unmanned attack aircraft or bombers from their cockpits to evade enemy air defense systems, while offensive forces will receive real-time intelligence data more quickly—all thanks to the rapid advancements in artificial intelligence technology. In future air strikes, swarms of drones will swarm in, using sophisticated instruments for detection, reconnaissance, and counter-reconnaissance. Once they lock onto targets, they will calmly launch missiles, possessing integrated reconnaissance and strike capabilities, autonomous attack, and human-machine collaborative strike capabilities. The Russian Aerospace Forces will equip themselves with heavy attack drones capable of maneuvering around enemy air defense systems without command, autonomously searching for and striking the most important targets, and then retreating safely back to base. This aircraft will be equipped with artificial intelligence components and can be remotely controlled by Su-57 fighter jets. According to RIA Novosti, the Russian S-70 “Hunter” heavy attack drone can attack targets according to instructions issued from Su-57 stealth fighter jets. Currently, the control station where the “Hunter” ground operators are located is equipped with joysticks, keyboards, and several multi-function LCD screens, similar to those used in manned fighter jets. These screens display various information transmitted from the “Hunter’s” onboard systems and sensors. In the near future, this ground-based remote control equipment may achieve full automation. The S-70 “Hunter” UAV, developed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau, is designed and manufactured based on a flying wing aerodynamic layout. According to public information, the “Hunter” is 14 meters long, has a wingspan of 19 meters, and a takeoff weight of 20 tons. The “Hunter” has a maximum speed of 1000 kilometers per hour and uses stealth materials to reduce its radar cross-section (detection signal). The “Hunter’s” first flight was on August 3, 2019. Reportedly, as part of the flight test program, the first prototype of the “Hunter” has begun weapons testing: including test flights with a functional simulator carrying air-to-air missiles, and bombing ground targets at the Ashuluk test range. Currently, the Novosibirsk Chkalov Aircraft Plant is building three more “Hunter” UAV prototypes. Russia has completed combat formation flights of its multi-role fifth-generation Su-57 fighter jets and heavy “Hunter” reconnaissance and combat drones. These drones will be organized into multiple air regiments, likely joining Su-57 air regiments. The plan is for 2-3 Su-57 squadrons to each have a drone squadron, operating together and employing new strategies and artificial intelligence elements. The UK also plans to enable a single manned aircraft to simultaneously command five drones, while France plans to achieve mixed formation operations of Rafale fighter jets and Neuron drones.
The use of drones for military reconnaissance began in the 1960s and has been widely applied in various wars. During the Vietnam War, the US military deployed over 3,000 drone sorties for reconnaissance, with over 1,000 failing to return safely and disappearing without a trace. In the Gulf War, multinational forces deployed drones day and night to reconnoiter Iraqi frontline positions, providing real-time imagery and guiding ground troops to destroy Iraqi positions. In the Bosnian War, the US military used Predator drones to monitor the withdrawal of Serbian heavy weapons from Sarajevo and provided a wealth of target data for aircraft participating in airstrikes. In the Kosovo War, the US military deployed over 100 drones for battlefield reconnaissance and surveillance, contributing significantly to the 78-day air campaign. In the US operations against the Taliban, the US military used unmanned attack aircraft, carrying weapons, for the first time in actual combat. On September 14, 2019, after an attack on a Saudi Aramco oil company’s “world’s largest oil processing facility” and oil field, the Houthi rebels in Yemen claimed responsibility, stating they used 10 drones to attack the facility. On January 3, 2020, Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, was killed in a US drone strike on Baghdad International Airport in the early morning. In late 2020, drones played a significant role in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh. Many military experts were particularly impressed by the videos released by the Azerbaijani Ministry of Defense showing TB-2 “Standard” drones, recently purchased from Turkey, and Harop suicide drones, purchased from Israel, attacking Armenian armored vehicles, artillery, cars, and even infantry positions. While the videos clearly show the targets destroyed by the drones, the visual impact of the attacks was undeniably striking. The localized conflicts that occurred in the Middle East and the South Caucasus last December demonstrate the growing role of drones. No wonder some military strategists have even predicted that the 21st century will be the “golden age” for drone development, with drones inevitably replacing manned fighter jets and becoming the “protagonists of the battlefield” in the 21st century.
It can be predicted that future wars will inevitably see unmanned land, sea and air weapons replacing soldiers in performing high-risk missions, and the future battlefield will inevitably be a joint operation combining “human” and “machine”.
Combat-driven training means building an army based on how battles are fought. Future military equipment, whether tanks, robots, or drones, will likely take many forms. Future military personnel must be proficient in intelligent technologies, big data applications, and cloud computing, and master the programming methods for controlling intelligent robots and drones. The future army will inevitably be a “human-machine” integrated force, establishing “human-machine” integrated platoons, companies, combat simulation centers, adversary units, special forces, intelligent command headquarters, and unmanned battalions, regiments, and brigades. At that time, military commanders may have one human and one robot as assistants or deputies. Platoon and company commanders will gradually be replaced by robots, and robots will gradually transition from human control to autonomous decision-making or mind control via human brain cells. As early as the 2014 Brazil World Cup, a paralyzed teenager wearing a “mechanical exoskeleton armor” kicked the first ball through mind control. Today, the technology of mind control over objects or experimental animals is becoming increasingly sophisticated.
In future warfare, it will become possible for a small number of soldiers to lead a massive swarm of unmanned robots, such as bees, ants, or schools of fish, to carry out combat missions. Through thought-based group control, soldiers’ mission comprehension and battlefield control capabilities can be greatly enhanced, enabling efficient identification of friend or foe, remote real-time command, intelligent mission planning, and efficient autonomous collaboration. The Russian Foundation for Future Research states that they have mastered brain-computer interface technology for controlling machines through thought. Previously, British researchers developed a brain-computer interface device for controlling a spacecraft simulator; when worn on a test subject, it successfully controlled the flight of a model spacecraft. However, there is still a long way to go before soldiers can effectively control complex unmanned combat swarms using this technology. Military camps may also see further changes. Troop management may involve one or a few military commanders leading teams of multiple or even dozens of intelligent robots with different tasks to complete tasks previously performed manually. Alternatively, military training may involve a single military commander in a command and control center, using video to control all intelligent robots in the training field for adversarial training, or remotely controlling robot commanders to issue new training instructions, adjust mission deployments, and change training grounds in real time.
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.
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.
As a high-intensity, targeted training closely aligned with actual combat, realistic combat training plays a crucial role in enhancing the combat effectiveness of the armed forces and is an inevitable choice for adapting to the evolving nature of warfare and responding to complex security threats. In the intelligent era, the deep integration of military technology, the suddenness of war outbreaks, and the rapid pace of offensive and defensive transitions are becoming increasingly prominent, posing systemic challenges to realistic combat training in areas such as demand guidance, environment construction, tactical innovation, and technological empowerment. To this end, we should focus on building a new training management model that accurately maps needs, deeply embeds adversaries, makes tactics flexible and effective, and deeply integrates technology, so as to achieve resonance between training scenarios and combat environments, dynamic coupling between training content and combat actions, and precise alignment between training results and actual combat needs, thereby comprehensively improving the overall quality and efficiency of combat-oriented training.
The need to meet the demands of “combat” necessitates intensive training based on specific plans.
In the intelligent era, the diversification of weapons, equipment, and combat methods has brought more variables to combat operations. Realistic training must be aligned with actual combat needs, calibrate training objectives through testing in real scenarios, continuously enhance the flexibility of combat plans, and improve the adaptability of troops.
Operational guidance calibrates training targets. As a form of training closely aligned with actual combat, realistic training can only achieve maximum effectiveness by closely adhering to the needs of intelligent warfare, transforming abstract operational concepts into concrete training topics, and deconstructing strategic and operational requirements into quantifiable and assessable tactical indicators. Emphasis should be placed on battlefield adaptability training in complex and ever-changing battlefield environments, strengthening training on challenging issues such as cyber and electronic warfare, autonomous coordination, and the integration of new technologies, to ensure that a proactive battlefield advantage is always maintained. Training content should be dynamically optimized by closely monitoring cutting-edge operational concepts, continuously promoting the interaction and coupling of actual combat and training, and consistently maintaining a high level of combat readiness training.
Practice refines and strengthens the resilience of operational plans. Intelligent warfare is fast-paced and rapidly changing; only through repeated verification and refinement in realistic training can the feasibility and adaptability of operational plans be guaranteed. A multi-functional, intelligent, and professional training ground system should be constructed to continuously refine key aspects such as command and decision-making, force deployment, and operational coordination in scenario-based training, constantly testing the resilience of the command chain, the robustness of coordination mechanisms, and the sustainability of the support system. In fact, testing and improving operational plans through realistic training is timeless. Prior to the Normandy landings, the Allied forces conducted Exercise Tiger at Slapton Beach to improve combat skills, enhance combat experience, and test coordination efficiency. Despite a series of oversights and errors, serious deficiencies in command and communication, landing and unloading were also discovered. By revising and improving the combat plan and addressing the shortcomings, the actual combat casualty rate was greatly reduced, laying a solid foundation for the successful implementation of the final landing operation.
Mission-driven training strengthens capabilities. High-intensity, near-real combat training effectively exposes weaknesses and deficiencies, forcing units to develop targeted measures and ultimately boosting combat capabilities. Close attention should be paid to the specific tasks undertaken by the troops, such as reconnaissance and surveillance, information warfare, force projection, and unmanned operations. Problems should be identified during exercises and practical training, and countermeasures should be developed according to local conditions to address weaknesses in combat capabilities. Before the Hundred Regiments Offensive during the War of Resistance Against Japan, a unit of the Eighth Route Army, recognizing its weak railway sabotage capabilities, conducted targeted intensive training focusing on reconnaissance and surveillance, explosives demolition, and dismantling and transportation. This significantly improved the unit’s railway sabotage capabilities, laying a crucial foundation for victory.
Based on the standard of “war”, we insist on independent confrontation.
In the intelligent era, intelligent unmanned equipment is being used extensively, new combat forces with new characteristics are constantly emerging, and the features of hybrid games and system confrontation are becoming more prominent. This requires that combat-oriented training must be based on actual combat standards and targeted confrontation training must be carried out against strong adversaries.
Reconstructing cognitive benchmarks through re-enactment of enemy situations. Accurate understanding of the operational target system and the adversary’s combat capabilities is not only a prerequisite for winning intelligent warfare but also the foundation for planning and organizing effective combat-oriented training. We must closely monitor the adversary, comprehensively, accurately, and systematically grasp the latest military intelligence dynamics regarding their operational theories, command methods, tactics, operational deployments, and the performance of key weapons and equipment. Furthermore, we must deeply study countermeasures, cultivate the ability to win, and ensure that we anticipate the enemy’s moves and achieve surprise victories in wartime. We should systematically deconstruct the future battlefield environment, starting from multiple dimensions such as the strategic domain, physical domain, network domain, and electromagnetic domain, and use multiple methods to construct a training environment that matches information-based and intelligent warfare, providing strong support for key training subjects and seeking winning strategies.
Red-Blue competition drives a qualitative leap in capabilities. In the context of intelligent warfare, combat-oriented training places greater emphasis on targeted and intense confrontation, requiring the creation of simulated “Blue Force” forces to higher standards, the design of appropriate training content, and the effective implementation of adversarial red-Blue confrontation training. It is essential to focus on tactical confrontation training, operational confrontation exercises, and in-depth strategic game-based confrontation simulations, ensuring their effective implementation at all levels of combat-oriented training. Emphasis should be placed on both virtual simulation confrontation exercises and live-fire confrontation exercises, combining virtual and real elements to provide strong support for combat-oriented training. The training should not only present the size and weaponry of the adversary but also reflect their tactical applications and systemic operations, providing a reliable and credible “touchstone” for combat-oriented training.
Extreme training is essential for honing systemic capabilities. Only by benchmarking against actual combat and organizing realistic training with the standards and intensity of “war” can we objectively assess the combat effectiveness of the troops and promote the improvement of their systemic capabilities. Based on specific enemy situations and complex battlefields, we must deeply anticipate unforeseen circumstances, starting with the most difficult, complex, and passive situations. We should create numerous dangerous, stalemate, difficult, critical, and dire situations to cultivate the confidence and courage to fight and win, and the ability to adapt and achieve victory in perilous circumstances, thereby comprehensively testing and refining the troops’ combat capabilities.
Anchoring “Battle” Effectiveness Innovations in Tactics and Combat Methods
Combat operations in the intelligent era exhibit some new characteristics, emphasizing information dominance and system integration, as well as precise control and accurate energy release. This also requires combat-oriented training to focus on combat effectiveness and seek more effective methods and measures for innovative tactics and maneuvers.
Training and research should be integrated to drive tactical innovation. Effective tactics are often gradually refined and formed through actual combat training. By leveraging the “tempering” process of realistic combat training, weaknesses in tactical application can be exposed to the greatest extent, prompting the innovation and improvement of tactics and methods. Based on the fundamental orientation of practicality and effectiveness, we should strengthen the innovative application of tactics and training methods, deeply analyze combat patterns, capability chains, key nodes, force organization, and tactical means in theoretical research and practical exercises, accelerate the integration of new domains and new quality systems, and ensure the effective implementation of new combat concepts, tailoring “trump cards” and “tactical sets” for countering and defeating the enemy.
Realistic combat training drives the testing of tactics. Tactics that remain at the theoretical level have no vitality; only tactics that have undergone repeated testing in realistic combat can quickly adapt to the future battlefield. Therefore, realistic combat training places greater emphasis on tactics originating from practice, being tested in practice, and being applied to practice. Through repeated simulation training, deduction exercises, and live-fire drills, scientific and applicable command principles, action points, and support essentials should be formed. Tactics should be tested, enriched, and improved in practice to fully adapt to future informationized and intelligent warfare.
Advancing the evolution of tactics in accordance with the times. No matter how times change, surprise and flexibility remain the “soul” of tactical application and the prerequisite for gaining the initiative on the battlefield. In the intelligent era, new equipment and tactics supported by model algorithms are constantly emerging. Only by keeping pace with the trends of military reform, proactively analyzing the laws of war and the mechanisms of victory, and being one step ahead in discovering and updating tactics, can we ensure that we can deploy our forces and exert our strength one step ahead of the enemy in wartime. Recent local conflicts have repeatedly demonstrated to us the practical application of new operational concepts and the continuous emergence of new tactics and methods. We should focus on strong enemy targets, confront threats and challenges head-on, actively adapt to changes, and proactively seek changes. Based on operational concepts such as flexible mobility and asymmetric enemy control, we should develop and design strategies and tactics to defeat the enemy and comprehensively improve our battlefield adaptability.
Strengthen technological capabilities in line with the trends of “warfare”.
In the intelligent era, the extensive and in-depth application of new-generation military technologies has not only accelerated the pace of warfare, changed the form of war, and given rise to new threats, but also provided more options for combat-oriented training.
Knowledge reshaping elevates cognitive thinking. Cognitive thinking reflects the depth of understanding of warfare and the degree of adaptability to the battlefield. Therefore, some consider cognitive thinking a key foundational element of command ability. In the intelligent era, only those with keen technological awareness and battlefield perception can accurately grasp the battlefield situation, precisely control forces, and flexibly manage actions to gain a combat advantage. It is crucial to strengthen the learning of the latest technologies such as big data, the Internet of Things, cloud computing, and blockchain, and through targeted training, systematically master the characteristics and laws of informationized and intelligent warfare, establish a systemic warfare mindset, and enhance technological effectiveness for realistic combat training.
Simulation interaction optimizes environmental conditions. Virtual simulation technology not only has advantages in reducing material input and lowering safety risks, but also in constructing intelligent warfare scenarios to improve training quality. Emphasis should be placed on utilizing virtual reality, augmented reality, and mixed reality technologies to construct highly immersive and interactive virtual battlefield spaces, providing trainees with realistic visual, auditory, and tactile experiences. Emphasis should also be placed on leveraging intelligent wearable devices, sensor arrays, and virtual simulation systems to construct training scenarios that closely resemble actual combat, supporting trainees in battlefield awareness and action simulation training, and comprehensively improving the quality of combat-oriented training.
Intelligent empowerment revitalizes data and information. In the intelligent era, the multidimensionality of the environment, the diversity of force equipment, and the variety of offensive and defensive confrontations have led to a massive surge of combat training data, making its management and application a major challenge in training practice. Data mining technology should be fully utilized, leveraging big data, algorithms, and large models to transform the vast amounts of scattered behavioral, physiological, and environmental data generated in training practice into quantifiable, traceable, and optimizable digital resources. This will enable the centralized delivery and innovative application of training information. Based on this, a closed-loop management system for training information—”decision-planning-collection-processing-evaluation”—can be established to drive the transformation of combat training from generalized, extensive management to intelligent, precise management.
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.
The nature of warfare is rapidly evolving towards intelligence. The intelligent transformation of the military is not merely a simple accumulation of technologies, but a systemic change supported by data, algorithms, and computing power. These three elements mutually empower and organically integrate, forming the technological foundation for generating new combat capabilities. To accelerate the intelligent development of the military, we must deeply grasp the technological logic of intelligent transformation, solidify the data foundation, activate the algorithm engine, and strengthen computing power support to provide a solid guarantee for winning future intelligent wars.
Operational data: the “digital cornerstone” of intelligent transformation
Data is the “lifeblood” of intelligence. Without the accumulation of high-quality, large-scale, and multi-dimensional operational data, the transformation of military intelligence will be like water without a source or a tree without roots. In intelligent warfare, all activities across the entire chain, including battlefield perception, command and decision-making, and combat operations, are essentially processes of data generation, flow, processing, and application. The completeness, accuracy, and timeliness of operational data directly determine the perception precision, decision-making speed, and strike accuracy of intelligent systems, and are an indispensable cornerstone for the intelligent transformation of the military field.
The core value of operational data lies in breaking through the “fog of war” and enabling a shift from experience-driven to data-driven approaches. In traditional warfare, commanders primarily rely on battlefield reconnaissance, intelligence analysis, and combat experience to make decisions. Limited by the breadth and depth of information acquisition, these decisions often carry a degree of subjectivity and limitation. However, in the era of intelligent warfare, a single reconnaissance drone can transmit 5GB of image data per second, and satellite networks constantly track tens of thousands of ground targets, resulting in a geometrical increase in the rate of battlefield data generation. This operational data, originating from multiple domains including land, sea, air, space, cyber, electronic, and psychological domains, can, after standardized processing and in-depth analysis, construct a transparent battlefield situation across all domains, providing commanders with precise decision-making support.
Building a comprehensive operational data resource system requires focusing on key aspects of the entire lifecycle governance. In the data acquisition phase, it’s essential to base data acquisition on the needs of all-domain operations, broaden data source channels, and achieve full coverage of data in both traditional and new domains. Traditional domains should focus on land, sea, and air battlefields, accurately collecting data on troop deployments, equipment performance, and terrain. New domains should extend to outer space, deep sea, polar regions, and cyberspace, prioritizing the collection of data on space target trajectories, deep-sea environmental parameters, and cyberspace situational awareness. In the data fusion and processing phase, a unified data standard system must be established to address prominent issues such as multiple values for a single data point and inconsistent formats, achieving interconnectivity between data from different sources and of different types. In the data sharing phase, a sound cross-domain sharing mechanism must be established, along with tiered and categorized sharing rules, breaking down service-specific barriers, departmental boundaries, and network isolation to build a ubiquitous, all-encompassing, and interconnected data sharing environment, maximizing the utilization of data resources.
To fully leverage the multiplier effect of combat data, the key lies in cultivating data-driven thinking and building a strong professional team. Data-driven thinking is the prerequisite for activating data value. It is essential to guide officers and soldiers to develop the habit of “thinking with data, speaking with data, managing with data, and making decisions with data,” abandoning traditional thinking patterns based on experience and intuition. In operational planning, quantitative analysis should be based on data; in training evaluation, precise measurement should be based on data standards; and in equipment development, iterative optimization should be supported by data. Simultaneously, efforts should be focused on building a professional data talent team, clarifying the responsibilities of each position, and connecting the entire process from data generation to data application. Through various means such as academic training, on-the-job experience, and specialized training, the professional skills of officers and soldiers in data collection, processing, analysis, and application should be improved, creating a composite talent team that understands both military operations and data technology, providing talent support for releasing the value of data.
Specialized Algorithms: The “Digital Engine” of Intelligent Transformation
If data is the “fuel” of intelligence, then algorithms are the “engine” that transforms fuel into power. Specialized algorithms, as the core driving force of military intelligence, are the key link in realizing the transformation of data into knowledge, knowledge into decision-making, and decision-making into combat effectiveness. In intelligent warfare, the quality of algorithms directly determines the reaction speed, decision-making accuracy, and combat effectiveness of the combat system, becoming the engine of intelligent transformation in the military field.
The core advantage of algorithms lies in reconstructing the operational chain and achieving rapid iteration of the OODA loop. In traditional warfare, the chain of observation, judgment, decision-making, and action is lengthy and often struggles to adapt to rapidly changing battlefield situations due to limitations in human processing capabilities. Intelligent algorithms, however, can leverage machine learning, deep learning, and other technologies to process massive amounts of operational data in seconds, perform real-time analysis, and uncover patterns, significantly shortening the decision-making cycle. In simulation tests, foreign military AI command systems generated multiple complete operational plans in a very short time, demonstrating response speed and decision-making efficiency far exceeding that of human command teams, fully showcasing the enormous advantages of algorithms in accelerating the decision-making process. In combat operations, algorithms can span the entire chain, from reconnaissance and perception, command and decision-making, fire strikes, and effect assessment, constructing an autonomous, closed-loop “kill chain.” From target identification to threat ranking, from plan generation to fire allocation, from strike implementation to damage assessment, algorithms can autonomously complete a series of complex tasks, achieving a “detect and destroy” operational effect.
Enhancing the practical application effectiveness of algorithms requires strengthening technological innovation and scenario empowerment. In terms of technological innovation, it is essential to keep pace with the development trends of artificial intelligence and accelerate the military application transformation of cutting-edge algorithms. Focusing on emerging technologies such as generative AI, neuromorphic computing, and brain-computer interfaces, we should explore pathways for the deep integration of algorithms with military needs. Regarding scenario empowerment, we must build diverse typical scenarios for algorithms based on actual combat requirements, develop specialized algorithms for target recognition, situational assessment, and virtual training, overcome bottlenecks in information processing in complex electromagnetic environments, promote the modularization and lightweight transformation of algorithms, and rapidly integrate them with command and control systems and unmanned equipment systems. This will allow algorithms to continuously iterate and optimize in specific tasks within typical scenarios, transforming algorithmic advantages into practical combat capabilities.
Strengthening algorithm security is crucial for ensuring the steady and sustainable development of intelligent transformation. While algorithms enhance combat effectiveness, they also face security risks such as tampering, deception, and misuse, potentially leading to serious consequences like “algorithmic runaway.” It is essential to establish an algorithm security review mechanism to conduct full-process security assessments of algorithm models in military intelligent systems, focusing on their reliability, transparency, and controllability to prevent algorithmic bias and logical vulnerabilities. Strengthening the research and development of algorithmic countermeasures technologies is also vital. This involves improving the anti-interference and anti-attack capabilities of our own algorithms while mastering techniques to interfere with and deceive enemy algorithms, thus gaining the initiative in algorithmic confrontation. Simultaneously, it is crucial to emphasize algorithmic ethics, clearly defining the boundaries and rules of algorithm application to ensure that algorithm development and use comply with international laws and ethical standards, avoiding any violations of war ethics.
Supercomputing Power: The “Digital Energy” for Intelligent Transformation
Computing power is the fundamental capability supporting data processing and algorithm execution, much like the “energy support” for intelligent systems. In the transformation towards military intelligence, the explosive growth of data and the increasing complexity of algorithms have placed unprecedented demands on computing power. The scale, speed, and reliability of supercomputing power directly determine the operational efficiency and combat effectiveness of military intelligent systems, becoming the driving force behind the intelligent transformation of the military field.
The core role of computing power lies in overcoming performance bottlenecks and supporting the efficient operation of complex intelligent tasks. The demand for computing power in intelligent warfare exhibits an “exponential growth” characteristic: an advanced AI command system needs to run thousands of algorithm models simultaneously when processing battlefield data across the entire domain; a swarm of drones performing collaborative combat missions requires real-time interaction and decision-making calculations involving massive amounts of data; a large-scale virtual combat training exercise needs to simulate the interactive behaviors of tens or even hundreds of thousands of combat units. The completion of these complex tasks is inseparable from powerful computing power. Without sufficient computing power, even the highest quality data cannot be processed quickly, and even the most advanced algorithms cannot operate effectively. Currently, computing power has become a crucial indicator for measuring the level of military intelligence; whoever possesses stronger computing power holds the initiative in intelligent warfare.
Building a computing power system adapted to the needs of intelligent transformation requires creating a collaborative computing power layout across the cloud, edge, and terminal. In the cloud, distributed cloud computing centers need to be constructed to build a computing power foundation that covers the entire domain and is elastically scalable. Relying on infrastructure such as big data centers and supercomputing centers, various computing resources should be integrated to form a large-scale, intensive computing power supply capability. At the edge, computing power should be deployed more readily, enhancing the autonomous computing capabilities of the battlefield. For special scenarios such as forward positions, naval vessels, and air platforms, miniaturized, low-power, and highly reliable edge computing nodes should be developed to transfer some computing tasks from the cloud to the edge. This reduces reliance on communication links and data transmission latency, and ensures that combat units can autonomously complete basic tasks such as target identification, path planning, and coordination even in extreme environments such as communication interruptions or signal blackouts, thus improving the system’s survivability. At the terminal, the built-in computing power of equipment should be strengthened to improve the intelligence level of individual combat platforms. By embedding high-performance AI chips into platforms such as drones, unmanned vehicles, and missile weapons, equipment is endowed with the ability to autonomously perceive, make decisions, and act, making it an intelligent unit with independent combat capabilities and laying the foundation for cluster collaboration and system-on-system confrontation.
Enhancing the combat readiness of computing power support requires strengthening technological innovation and security protection. In terms of technological innovation, it is crucial to keep pace with the development trends of computing power technology and accelerate the military application of new computing technologies. Focusing on cutting-edge areas such as quantum computing, photonic computing, and neuromorphic computing, we must break through the performance bottlenecks of traditional computing architectures and develop disruptive new computing power equipment. Simultaneously, we must strengthen the construction of computing power networks, building high-bandwidth, low-latency, and interference-resistant computing power transmission networks. By integrating technologies such as 5G, 6G, and satellite communication, we can ensure computing power collaboration and data interaction between the cloud, edge, and terminals, achieving seamless connection and efficient scheduling of computing power resources. In terms of security protection, we must establish a computing power security system to prevent the risks of attacks, hijacking, and misuse of computing power resources. By adopting technologies such as encrypted computing and trusted computing, we can ensure the security and privacy of data during the computing process; strengthen the physical and network protection of computing power facilities, and build a multi-layered, all-round protective barrier to ensure that the computing power system can operate stably in wartime and is not subject to enemy interference or damage.
