Tag Archives: #Cognitive Confrontation

#Information Support Force, #Russia #Ukraine, Asymmetric Warfare, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Combat Planning, Intelligent Warfare, Mosaic Warfare, National Defense and Military Modernization, Russia Network Forces, Russian Cyber Warfare

Chinese Military in-depth Analysis of the Latest “Cognitive Warfare” Case in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Leave a comment

中國軍方深入解析俄烏衝突最新「認知戰」案例

2023-10-07 09:00　來源: 述策

現代英語：

It is said that on September 22, the Ukrainian Air Force used the “Storm Shadow” cruise missile to attack the Black Sea Fleet Command in Sevastopol. Since then, the life and death of Admiral Victor Sokolov, commander of the Black Sea Fleet, has been a topic of concern to the outside world. After a few days of undercurrents, on September 25, the Ukrainian Special Operations Command (SOF) announced that they had successfully “killed” Admiral Sokolov, commander of the Black Sea Fleet, and dozens of officers below him. Even Admiral Romanchuk, commander of the Russian Zaporizhia Cluster, was injured by the Ukrainian army.

Unexpectedly, Ukraine’s news was “slapped in the face” less than a day after it was released-on September 26, the Russian Ministry of Defense held a meeting of the National Defense Committee. Senior leaders of the Ministry of Defense, commanders of various military regions, and commanders of various military services attended the meeting in person or via video. At the meeting, Admiral Sokolov, commander of the Black Sea Fleet, who was declared “killed” by Ukrainian officers, appeared. After the news was released, the Ukrainian side was extremely embarrassed and had to announce that they wanted to collect more information. But then someone claimed that Admiral Sokolov, who attended the meeting, was “just a photo” and not a real person.

Nevertheless, the battle between the Russian and Ukrainian armies over the life and death of General Sokolov can be seen as a classic case of cognitive warfare in the Russian-Ukrainian military conflict. It is worthwhile for us to analyze this case specifically, and it is even more worthwhile for us to “talk about” this case and talk about the battle between the Russian and Ukrainian armies in the field of cognitive warfare in the Russian-Ukrainian military conflict.

  1. Is the “beheading” of General Sokolov not an isolated case?

It is not the first time that the Ukrainian propaganda department has fallen into the trap of “beheading” Russian generals. For example, in mid-June this year, the Ukrainian army spread rumors that the Vice President of Chechnya, Lieutenant General of the Chechen National Guard, and Kadyrov Jr.’s right-hand man, Drimkhanov, was “killed” by the Ukrainian army’s HIMARS rocket launcher.

From the perspective of the implementation process of the entire cognitive warfare, whether it was the “beheading” of Drimkhanov in June or the “beheading” of General Sokolov this time, the whole process was similar:

The first step: The Ukrainian propaganda department deliberately “created topics”. The so-called “creating topics” can be regarded as a “primer” in cognitive warfare, which serves to trigger heated public discussion. This kind of “primer” is often not necessarily released by the official, but may be released by some semi-official channels or channels with close ties to the official. For example, the fact that Lieutenant General Drimkhanov was “killed” by the Ukrainian army’s “HIMARS” rocket launcher was first said to have been released from a telegram group of the Ukrainian armed forces, and the statement was ambiguous. The earliest source of the news that Admiral Sokolov was “beheaded” this time was traced back to a telegram group in Russia. The news in this telegram group is mixed, some of which are of low credibility, but some are surprisingly accurate. In a sense, releasing the “primer” of cognitive warfare through these groups is even more likely to arouse public attention and discussion than official news.

The second step can be regarded as “reinforcement” of public opinion. The first step of cognitive warfare, namely “primer information”, often lacks details for a complete news, but it doesn’t matter. Judging from the efficiency and characteristics of information dissemination in the current society, a “lead information” that lacks details but is easy to arouse everyone’s interest, but has information barriers due to some factors, will naturally be “supplemented with details” during the dissemination process. This is true whether Admiral Sokolov was “shot dead” or Drimkhanov was “beheaded”. Information lacks details, but it is very important “Breaking News” for the media. At the same time, due to military secrets, it is impossible to cross the information barrier to obtain more information in time. Therefore, this will inevitably lead the media to a result – public opinion “reinforcement”, and everyone will do it together, and in the process of word of mouth, a lead information will be constantly detailed and “real”. For example, in the process of dissemination, Drimkhanov was “beheaded”, and the “time” and “place” of his beheading were supplemented one after another (even due to different dissemination channels, these time and place elements are also different), sometimes appearing in Kremenaya and sometimes in Gorlovka. The same is true for Admiral Sokolov’s “killing”. During the process of information dissemination, people have come up with a whole set of details such as “The Black Sea Fleet held a regular meeting on Friday, and the Ukrainian army seized the opportunity to launch a strike”, “Two missiles hit the headquarters office, and the other missile launched a supplementary strike when the rescuers went in to rescue people”. It is precisely in this “decentralized” word of mouth that the “fact” that these two senior generals were “beheaded” has been continuously strengthened, and the lack of information sources is even more conducive to the cognitive shaping of ordinary information recipients.

After several days of fermentation, the cognitive war has come to the third step – “the final word”. The Ukrainian official did not “finally decide” the “beheading” of Drimkhanov. Kadyrov Jr. couldn’t sit still first, and soon released a video of himself and Drimkhanov sitting together for a meal and picnic, and even took out his mobile phone on the spot to show the shooting time, “slapping his face”. Admiral Sokolov was “finally decided” by large departments such as the Ukrainian Special Operations Command and the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense. According to the process of cognitive warfare, this kind of official media “final word” should play the role of completing the cognitive shaping process in the field of cognitive warfare, that is, completing a complete logical closed loop from releasing “primers” to “speculation reinforcement” by the outside world, and finally “stamping and confirming” by the official. However, the Russian army took the initiative and performed a “slap in the face on the spot”, which not only made all the information dissemination of the Ukrainian army in front of it useless, but also made Ukraine’s two key units, the Special Operations Command and even the Ministry of Defense, become clowns.

  1. Cognitive warfare in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, is the Ukrainian army coming in full force?

Many people may be puzzled by the Ukrainian army’s cognitive warfare propaganda department’s personal participation in the rumor that Chechen Vice President Delimkhanov or General Sokolov was “killed” by the Ukrainian army: If the Russian side responds quickly, pulls these senior generals out to show their faces, and self-confirms that “I am still alive”, then won’t the rumors of the Ukrainian cognitive warfare be self-defeating?

It seems reasonable, but the Russian army did not clarify it once it was rumored. Why? Because things are not that simple.

First, from a tactical perspective, if the Russian army arranges for generals to come out and refute rumors every time the Ukrainian army creates a rumor about a senior general, the most direct consequence is that it will cause unnecessary interference and trouble to the daily combat command of senior generals. In combat operations, the time of senior officers above the rank of general is very precious, the daily workload is extremely high, and the brainpower is extremely consumed. It is impossible for them to have so much time to appear and refute rumors endlessly. If the Russian army refutes a rumor every time the Ukrainian army creates a rumor, then these senior generals will have nothing to do in their daily lives and just shoot videos to refute rumors every day.

Second, for information that enters the cognitive shaping cycle, in some cases, “refutation” is not only useless, but will further create more rumors. For example, regarding the “beheading” of General Sokolov, although the Russian army has arranged to refute the rumor, some Ukrainian groups are still “picking on it”, believing that General Sokolov did not move in front of the camera and that the time and place of General Sokolov’s interview could not be seen, so it was just “information countermeasures” arranged by the Russian side. Even for some Russian generals who were “officially announced” and “beheaded” by Ukraine last year but then appeared on certain occasions, such as Major General Gerasimov, Chief of Staff of the 41st Army, there are still Ukrainian supporters who claim that “this person is dead”. The only reason is that this person did not show up again after showing up!

Therefore, in the field of cognitive warfare, many things are not as simple as we think.

Having said that, at the strategic level, there is indeed a big gap between the Russian army and the Ukrainian army in the field of cognitive warfare in the Russian-Ukrainian military conflict. The Ukrainian army is very good at creating topics, and it is flexible and mobile and pays attention to participation.

In terms of creating topics, Ukraine takes the initiative to create topics almost every time in cognitive warfare, from the Mariupol Theater incident at the beginning, to the Bucha incident later, to the chemical explosion in Rubezhnoy, and the Zaporizhia Nuclear Power Plant incident and the explosion of the New Kakhovka Hydropower Station Dam. Almost every time, Ukraine “takes the lead”. Russia is in a state of passive response, and as a result, Ukraine continues to create topics and continuously attacks, which puts it in a disadvantageous position.

In terms of mobility and flexibility, the Ukrainian army is very familiar with the characteristics of modern media communication. For example, in the cognitive warfare against the “beheading” of Admiral Sokolov, the Ukrainian army took advantage of the characteristics of modern media’s fast communication speed and decentralized communication mode, released the “primer” in a semi-official form, and let netizens “reinforce” it (in fact, it is the self-growth of information), and finally the more authoritative official media came out to “finalize the final word”.

In terms of “focusing on participation”, the Ukrainian army is better at creating a sense of participation of ordinary netizens in specific topics. For example, after the Bucha incident and the Battle of Mariupol, Ukraine immediately launched a set of websites called “The Executioner’s Book”. Anyone can log in to these websites or network plug-ins at will and register the so-called “Russian army’s atrocities” or Russian army movements. The United States immediately responded and opened the “Observation Post” project belonging to the US State Department in response to the “Executioner’s Book” project, which is used to record the “atrocities” of the Russian army in the conflict. These public topics are set up quite cleverly, making the outside world feel that they are highly involved, while the specific content is true and false, which is different from the false information indoctrination of traditional information warfare. In the cognitive warfare of the Ukrainian army, these highly involved projects once made the entire network trend one-sided.

Compared with the propaganda and operation of the Ukrainian army in the field of cognitive warfare, the Russian army is far behind in the field of cognitive warfare. For example, in response to Ukraine’s formation of a combat mode that emphasizes mass participation and mass experience in the cognitive field, Russia is still using the old method – announcing ambiguous combat conditions in the form of daily combat reports, with only Major General Konashenko “acting as an emotionless reading machine” in front of the camera. As a result, most combat observers do not take his combat reports seriously. Another example is the tactics of Ukraine frequently setting topics and carrying out cognitive shaping in steps, and Russia can only defend itself. Every time Ukraine creates topics, Russia responds passively, and then Ukraine continues to create new topics based on Russia’s response, leaving Russia in a state of exhaustion. From this perspective, the Russian army’s cognitive warfare against the Ukrainian side’s “beheading” of Admiral Sokolov, and the sudden arrangement of the rumor-busting “face-slapping”, is just a tactical “flash of inspiration”, and the effect does not seem to be very good. It has not completely changed the basic power comparison between the Russian and Ukrainian armies in the field of cognitive warfare. Ukraine’s “cognitive warfare advantage” over Russia will continue.

  1. How do we deal with cognitive warfare in the new combat form?

In terms of definition, “cognitive warfare” can be traced back to the concept of “network-centric warfare” proposed by the US military in military reform at the beginning of this century. After years of development, by 2017, related discussions began to frequently appear in the speeches of senior NATO generals. For example, on August 14, 2017, Stewart, director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency, clearly put forward the assertion that “the fifth-generation war is cognitive warfare” at the 2017 Defense Intelligence Information System Annual Conference. On September 17, 2017, Goldfein, then Chief of Staff of the US Air Force, also clearly put forward the concept of “cognitive warfare” at the annual meeting of the US Air Force Association. Soon, NATO comprehensively developed this novel operational concept. In March 2020, NATO released the concept book “Operation 2040”, which clearly stated that “information and cognitive warfare” will play an important role in future operations. In June, NATO appointed François du Creuse, former French colonel and head of the NATO Innovation Center, to study cognitive warfare, and produced a detailed report on “Cognitive Warfare” in January 2021. In June 2021, NATO held a scientific conference on cognitive warfare and released a special report on “Cognitive Warfare: Cognition Dominates the Future”, thus forming a more systematic and complete cognitive warfare theory.

Compared with traditional information warfare and propaganda warfare, the biggest feature of cognitive warfare is that it is based on the working principle of the human brain, that is, the process of acquiring, perceiving, understanding, processing, inferring, evaluating, judging, calculating, and making decisions on external information. In short, cognitive warfare is superior in terms of operational characteristics. It is not a unilateral indoctrination, but a good use of people’s cognitive process to “reshape” everyone’s worldview, values, ideology, and even cognitive and understanding processes in an all-round way, so as to fully rebuild the individual’s interpretation and response to information and interfere with the individual’s ideology and value orientation. The final result is not only to use various false information to disrupt the opponent, but more importantly to reshape the opponent’s social psychology, thereby affecting the opponent’s strategic decision-making, “defeating the enemy without fighting.” This determines that cognitive warfare is a new generation of propaganda warfare and information warfare. Compared with the traditional information warfare that focuses on the tactical level, the role of cognitive warfare can be further improved to the strategic level, which may affect the direction or outcome of the war.

So, facing a new type of combat form such as cognitive warfare, referring to the current situation in which Russia has been at a disadvantage in the field of cognitive warfare with Ukraine in the Russian-Ukrainian military conflict, how should we respond to future cognitive warfare?

From a strategic perspective, we should realize that in the field of cognitive warfare, pure passive response is the most unreliable and inefficient form of combat. For example, Russia’s passive response to Ukraine’s agenda setting is equivalent to passively being beaten. Of course, compared with firepower warfare or mobile warfare, cognitive warfare is a thorough “open conspiracy” without too much feint and deception. It mainly relies on the ideological superiority and media skills of the West, and relies on the legal rights of the Western media in the field of the “fourth power”. Since we are temporarily at a disadvantage in the field of media compared with Western countries, it is actually a relatively difficult thing to implement cognitive confrontation with them in the whole system and at all levels. Therefore, even if we also adopt the strategy of strategic offensive in cognitive warfare, its implementation effect may not be as good as that of the other party. One way may be to firmly grasp our basic plate strategically and form a “you fight yours, I fight mine” pattern.

In the field of tactics, we should fully learn from the experience and lessons of both sides in cognitive warfare in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Judging from the cognitive warfare strategy implemented by the Ukrainian army, in areas such as topic shaping, it mainly exploits the loopholes of information asymmetry. Then, our possible response strategy is to disclose some information in a timely manner and change the original concept that “military operations must be kept confidential and not disclosed to the outside world.” In fact, public information itself is a process of cognitive shaping. Both sides can carry out a lot of cognitive warfare confrontation around the timing, content, and timing of information disclosure. For example, in the field of setting topics, we can “take the initiative” and first seek the ability to set topics and carry out cognitive shaping in countries such as the Belt and Road, BRICS or Shanghai Cooperation Organization countries, at least to ensure that the people of our country and some friendly countries can offset the influence of the Western cognitive warfare. For another example, in response to the “cognitive warfare” implemented by the other party against different groups in multiple dimensions and levels, or the rumors created step by step, we can make extensive use of the influence of KOL (Key Opinion Leader) and the platform to form a “cognition against cognition” combat pattern.

In short, cognitive warfare, as a new combat style that has been studied by NATO for many years, appeared in large numbers in the Russian-Ukrainian military conflict and played a certain role, deserves further research to ensure that it is invincible in future military operations.

This articleThe article on cognitive warfare is just an appetizer, and there will be a main course later. This studio took about a year to complete the “Research on Cognitive Warfare in the United States and Other Western Countries”, which has a text of more than 40,000 words (excluding more than 7,000 words of notes), which is much richer and more in-depth. The report will be officially launched and introduced the day after tomorrow, so stay tuned.

現代國語：

據稱，9月22日烏克蘭空軍使用「風暴陰影」巡航飛彈襲擊塞瓦斯托波爾黑海艦隊司令部。此後，關於黑海艦隊司令維克托.索科洛夫上將的生死一直是外界關注的議題。經過幾天暗流湧動後，9月25日，烏克蘭特戰司令部（SOF）對外宣布，他們成功「擊斃」黑海艦隊司令索科洛夫上將及以下數十名軍官，甚至俄軍札波羅熱集群司令羅曼丘克上將也被烏軍擊傷。

沒想到，烏克蘭的消息剛放出來不到一天就慘遭「打臉」——9月26日，俄羅斯國防部召開國防委員會會議，國防部高級領導人、各軍區司令、各軍兵種司令等以現場出席或視訊連線的方式參會，會上赫然出現了被烏軍官宣「擊斃」的黑海艦隊司令索科洛夫上將。消息放出後，烏方極為尷尬，只好宣布他們要收集更多資訊。但隨後又有人宣稱說參會的索科洛夫上將“只是照片”，不是真人。

儘管如此，從這次俄烏兩軍圍繞索科洛夫上將的生死問題展開的鬥法，可以被看做是俄烏軍事衝突中關於認知戰的一個經典案例，既值得我們就這一案例進行專門剖析，更值得我們從這個案例中“說開去”，談一談俄烏軍事衝突中俄烏兩軍在認知戰領域展開的較量。

一、索科洛夫上將“被斬首”，並非孤例？

關於「斬首」俄軍將領，烏克蘭宣傳部門栽進坑裡已經不是第一次了。例如今年6月中，烏克蘭軍隊造謠稱車臣副總統、車臣國民近衛軍中將、小卡德羅夫左膀右臂德里姆哈諾夫被烏軍海馬火箭砲「擊斃」。

從整個認知戰的實施過程看，無論是6月那次德里姆哈諾夫被“斬首”，還是這次索科洛夫上將被“斬首”，整個過程大同小異：

第一步：烏克蘭宣傳部門有意「製造議題」。所謂“製造議題”，在認知戰中可以被視為一個“引子”，作用是引發輿論熱議。這種「引子」往往不一定由官方放出，可能是由一些半官方的管道或與官方關係比較緊密的管道放出。例如德里姆哈諾夫中將被烏軍的「海馬」火箭炮「打死」一事，最早據說是從烏克蘭武裝部隊的一個電報群組裡放出來的，而且說法模稜兩可。這次索科洛夫上將被“斬首”，最早的消息來源經過追溯則是俄羅斯的某個電報群組。這種電報群組的消息魚龍混雜，有些消息則可信度很低，但有些消息卻出奇準確。將認知戰的「引子」透過這些群組放出，某種意義上說甚至比官方消息更容易引發輿論關注和討論。

第二步可以被視為輿論的「補強」。認知戰的第一步即「引子資訊」對一個完整的新聞來說往往缺乏細節，但不要緊。從當前社會訊息傳播的效率和特徵來看，一個缺乏細節、但容易引起大家興趣、卻又因某種因素出現信息壁壘的“引子信息”，在傳播過程中，大家自然會對其進行“細節補充」。無論是索科洛夫上將被“擊斃”還是德里姆哈諾夫被“斬首”，都是如此。資訊缺乏細節，但對傳媒來說偏偏又是非常重要的「Breaking News」（突發新聞），同時基於軍事機密的因素，想穿越資訊壁壘及時獲取更多的資訊也不可能。因此，這必然會使傳媒導向一個結果——輿論“補強”，而且是大家一起上，在口耳相傳的過程中不斷把一個引子信息細節化、“真實”化。例如德里姆哈諾夫被「斬首」在傳播過程中，先後彌補上了他被斬首的「時間」、「地點」（甚至由於傳播管道不同，這些時間和地點要素也各不相同），時而出現在克雷緬納亞，時而出現在戈爾洛夫卡。索科洛夫上將被「擊斃」同樣如此，訊息在傳播過程中，被先後腦補出一整套「黑海艦隊週五開例會，烏軍抓住機會實施打擊」、「兩發飛彈一發擊中了司令部辦公室，另一發飛彈在救援人員進去救人的時候實施了補充打擊」這種細節。正是在這種「去中心化」的口耳相傳，這兩名高級將領被「斬首」的「事實」被不斷強化，消息來源的缺失甚至更有利對普通信息受眾進行認知塑造。

經過數天發酵之後，認知戰來到第三步－「一錘定音」。德里姆哈諾夫被“斬首”一事並沒有輪到烏克蘭官方“一錘定音”，小卡德羅夫先坐不住了，很快放出了自己和德里姆哈諾夫坐在一起吃飯野餐的視頻，甚至當場拿出手機展示拍攝時間，進行「打臉」。索科洛夫上將則是烏軍特戰司令部、烏克蘭國防部這樣的大部門出面完成「一錘定音」。按照認知戰的過程，這種官方媒體“一錘定音”應該起到在認知戰領域完成認知塑造過程的作用，也就是完成一個從放出“引子”，到外界“猜測補強”，最後官方「蓋章確認」的完整邏輯閉環。但俄軍居然後發製人，表演了一出“當場打臉”，不僅讓烏軍前面的所有信息傳播都變成了無用功，還讓烏克蘭的兩個要害單位特戰司令部甚至國防部變成了小丑。

二、俄烏衝突中的認知戰，烏軍來勢洶洶？

對於烏軍認知戰宣傳部門親自上陣、造謠車臣副總統德里姆哈諾夫或索科洛夫上將被烏軍“擊斃”，很多人可能大惑不解：如果俄羅斯方面迅速反應，把這些高級將領拉出來亮個相，自我確認一下“我還活著”，那麼烏方認知戰的謠言不就不攻自破了嗎？

看似有理，但俄軍並沒有被造謠一次就照上面的辦法澄清一次。為什麼？因為事情沒有那麼簡單。

其一，從戰術角度來說，如果烏軍每製造一個關於高級將領的謠言，俄軍就安排將領出面闢謠，最直接的後果就是對高級將領的日常作戰指揮造成不必要的干擾和麻煩。在作戰行動中，將官以上的高級軍官時間非常寶貴，每天工作量極高，對腦力消耗極大，根本不可能有那麼多時間沒完沒了地現身闢謠。如果烏軍每造一個謠俄軍就闢一個謠，那這些高級將領平時啥也別幹了，就天天拍視頻闢謠吧。

其二，對於進入認知塑造循環的訊息來說，某些情況下，「闢謠」不僅沒用，還會進一步製造出更多謠言。例如索科洛夫上將被“斬首”一事，儘管俄軍已經安排了闢謠，但一些烏克蘭群組依然在“挑刺死磕”，認為索科洛夫上將在鏡頭前沒有動，索科洛夫上將在受訪時看不出時間和地點，因此只是俄方安排的「資訊反制」。甚至對一些去年曾經被烏克蘭方面「官方宣布」「斬首」、但隨後又在某些場合露面的俄軍將官，比如第41集團軍參謀長格拉西莫夫少將，目前依然有烏克蘭支持者宣稱“此人已死”，唯一的原因就是這人在露面之後居然沒有再度露面！

所以，在認知戰領域，很多事沒有想的那麼簡單。

話又說回來，在戰略層面上，俄軍在俄烏軍事衝突的認知戰領域相比烏軍確實存在較大差距。烏軍非常善於製造議題，而且機動靈活，注重參與。

製造議題方面，幾乎每次認知戰都是烏克蘭主動製造議題，從一開始的馬裡烏波爾大劇院事件，到後來的布查事件，再到魯別日諾耶的化學物質爆炸事件，還有後來的札波羅熱核電廠事件和新卡霍夫卡水力發電廠大壩爆破事件，幾乎每次都是烏克蘭「先聲奪人」。俄羅斯則處於被動應對的狀態，結果被烏克蘭繼續製造議題連續攻訐，處於不利地位。

機動彈性方面，烏軍對現代傳媒的傳播特徵非常熟稔，例如對索科洛夫上將被「斬首」展開的認知戰，烏軍利用了現代傳媒傳播速度快、傳播模式去中心化的特點，以半官方形式放出“引子”，放任網民對其進行“補強”（事實上就是信息的自生長），最後再由比較權威的官方媒體下場“一錘定音”。

「注重參與」方面，烏軍更善於營造普通網民對特定議題的參與感。例如布查事件和馬裡烏波爾戰役之後，烏克蘭方面立即上線了一套名叫「劊子手之書」的網站，任何人都可以隨意登陸這些網站或者網絡插件，在裡面登記所謂的「俄羅斯軍隊的暴行」或俄軍動向。美國立即回應，針對「劊子手之書」項目，開通了屬於美國國務院的「觀察站」項目，從而用於記錄俄軍在衝突中的「暴行」。這些公共議題設定相當巧妙，令外界群眾感受到的參與度極高，而在具體內容上則真真假假，不同於傳統資訊戰的假訊息灌輸。在烏克蘭軍隊的認知戰中，這些參與度極高的計畫一度讓整個網路風向呈現一面倒的趨勢。

和烏軍在認知戰領域的宣傳和操作相比，俄軍在認知戰領域差太遠。例如針對烏克蘭方面在認知領域塑造極為強調群眾參與、群眾體驗的作戰模式，俄羅斯方面依然在沿用著老辦法——以每日戰情通報的形式對外公佈模棱兩可的戰況，只有一個科納申科少將在鏡頭前“當一個沒有感情的讀稿機器”，結果絕大多數戰況觀察者都不太把他的戰況通報當回事。又如對烏克蘭方面頻繁設置議題、依照步驟進行認知塑造的戰法，俄羅斯方面更是只有招架之功。每次都是烏克蘭製造議題，俄羅斯方面被動應對，然後烏克蘭方面根據俄羅斯的應對情況繼續製造新的議題，使俄羅斯處於疲於奔命的狀態。從這個角度來看，俄軍此次針對索科洛夫上將被“斬首”的烏方認知戰塑造，突然安排闢謠“打臉”，只是戰術上“靈光乍現”而已，而且效果似乎也沒多好，也沒有徹底改變目前俄烏兩軍在認知戰領域的基本力量對比，烏克蘭對俄羅斯的「認知戰優勢」還會持續下去。

三、新型作戰形式認知戰，我們如何因應？

從定義上來說，「認知戰」最早可追溯到本世紀初美軍在軍事改革中提出的「網路中心戰」概念，經過多年的發展，到2017年，相關論述開始頻頻見於北約高級將領的言論集中，譬如2017年8月14日，美國國防情報局局長史都華在國防情報資訊系統2017年會上就明確提出了「第五代戰爭是認知戰」這一論點。到了2017年9月17日，時任美國空軍參謀長戈德費恩在美國空軍協會年會上同樣明確地提出了「認知戰」這個概念。很快，北約就對這個新穎的作戰概念進行了全面發展。 2020年3月，北約發布《作戰2040》概念書，明確提出「資訊與認知戰」將在未來作戰中扮演重要角色。 6月，北約又指派前法軍上校、北約創新中心負責人弗朗索瓦.杜.克魯澤專題研究認知戰，並在2021年1月拿出了《認知戰》的詳細報告書。 2021年6月，北約召開了認知戰科學會議，並發布了《認知戰：認知主導未來》專題報告，從而形成了較有系統、完整的認知戰作戰理論。

相較於傳統的資訊戰和宣傳戰，認知戰的最大特徵是基於人的大腦運作原理，也就是對外在資訊的獲取、感知、理解、加工、推論、評估、判斷、計算、決策的過程。總之，認知戰在作戰特質上可謂更勝一籌，不是進行單方面灌輸，而是要善於利用人們的認知過程，對每個人的世界觀、價值觀、意識形態，甚至認知、理解過程進行全方位“重塑”，從而全面重建個人對訊息的解讀和反應，干涉個人的意識形態和價值取向，最終的結果不僅是要利用各種假訊息擾亂對手，更重要的是重塑對手的社會心理，從而對對手的戰略決策產生影響，「不戰而屈人之兵」。這決定了認知戰是新一代的宣傳戰和資訊戰，相對於傳統的專注於戰術層面上的資訊戰，認知戰的角色可以進一步提高到戰略層面上，可能會影響戰爭的走向或結局。

那麼，面對認知戰這樣一種新型的作戰形式，參考俄烏軍事衝突中俄羅斯在和烏克蘭的認知戰領域長期處於下風的現狀，我們對未來的認知戰究竟該如何應對呢？

從戰略角度來看，我們應當認識到，在認知戰領域，單純的被動應對是最不可靠、效率最低的作戰形式，如俄羅斯在烏克蘭的議題設定面前被動應對等於被動挨打。當然，認知戰相比於火力戰戰或機動戰，是徹底的“陽謀”，並沒有太多佯動和詭詐，依託的主要是西方的意識形態優勢地位和傳媒功力，靠的是西方媒體「第四權」領域的法權。由於我方相比西方國家在傳媒領域暫時處於下風，要在全系統、全層面上與其實施認知對抗作戰其實是一件相對困難的事情。因此，即使我們在認知戰上同樣採取戰略進攻的策略，其實施效果可能也不如對手。辦法之一或許是從策略上牢牢把握住我們的基本盤，形成「你打你的，我打我的」格局。

而在戰術領域，要充分借鏡俄烏衝突中雙方在認知作戰上的經驗教訓。從烏克蘭軍隊實施的認知戰策略來看，在議題塑造等領域，主要鑽了資訊不對稱的空子。那麼，我方可能的因應策略是及時公開部分訊息，要改變原有的「軍事行動必須保密、不要對外界公開」的觀念。事實上，公開資訊本身就是認知塑造的過程，雙方圍繞著資訊公開的時機、內容、時序上，可以展開大量的認知戰對抗。如在設置議題領域，我方可以“先發製人”，先求得在諸如一帶一路沿線國家、金磚國家或上海合作組織國家內設置議題、展開認知塑造的能力，起碼確保本國群眾和一些友好國家能夠對沖西方認知戰領域的影響。再如，針對對方在多維度、多層次上針對不同人群實施的「認知戰」或步步為營塑造出的謠言，我方可廣泛利用KOL（Key Opinion Leader，即意見領袖）及平台的影響力，形成以「認知對認知」的作戰模式。

總之，認知戰作為一種被北約研究多年、在俄烏軍事衝突中大量出現且起到一定作用的新型作戰樣式，值得進一步進行研究，以確保在未來的軍事行動中立於不敗之地。

這篇關於認知戰的文章只是“開胃菜”，隨後還有“正餐硬菜”——本工作室歷時約一年完成了《美國等西方國家的認知作戰研究》，正文4萬多字(不含註7千多字)，要豐富和深入得多。該報告將於後天正式推出並進行介紹，敬請關注。

中國原創軍事資源：https://www.163.com/dy/article/IGEFT5CB0515NAKC888.html

Asymmetric Warfare, China's Military Organization - Intelligence, Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Dimensionality Reduction Strikes, Dissipative Warfare, Intelligent Warfare, Metaverse, Mosaic Warfare, Multi-Domain Operations, 中國的情報戰, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 中國認知戰和領域作戰, 中國軍事應用與比特幣在未來戰爭中的應用, 中國軍事未來戰爭, 中國軍事特徵及認知域作戰與戰爭發展趨勢, 中國軍事認知域作戰的重點是什麼、重點在哪裡？, 中國軍事認知戰, 中國軍事認知領域作戰, 中國軍民融合計劃, 中國軍用反衛星武器研製, 中國軍隊瞄準未來戰爭打好五場認知戰, 中國軍隊聚焦認知域戰是主攻戰場對抗的新著力點, 元宇宙, 國家網絡空間安全戰略, 國防和軍隊現代化建設, 域作战突出属性, 認知戰, 新軍事變革, 智慧戰爭, 認知域戰, 認知戰

Chinese Intelligent Warfare is Accelerating and Advancing

Leave a comment

中國智能化戰爭正在加速推進

中國軍網 國防部網. 2022年3月17日 星期四

現代英語：

With the widespread application of artificial intelligence in the military field, intelligent warfare has gradually become a hot topic. History has repeatedly proved that the evolution of war forms will lead to profound changes in the winning mechanism. In today’s era when information warfare is developing in depth and intelligent warfare is beginning to emerge, the armies of major countries in the world have made great efforts to promote military intelligence, and many of these trends are worthy of attention.

Strengthen top-level design

Outlining a “roadmap” for intelligent warfare

Driven by a new round of scientific and technological revolution and industrial revolution, intelligent military transformation is developing in depth. The United States, Russia, Japan and other countries have regarded artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology that “changes the rules of the war game” and have made early arrangements, strengthened top-level design and planning guidance, and explored the direction of military application of artificial intelligence.

The U.S. military has detailed the current status and development plan of artificial intelligence in documents such as “Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence”, “National Artificial Intelligence Research and Development Strategic Plan”, “Artificial Intelligence and National Security”, “Integrated Roadmap for Unmanned Systems, Fiscal Year 2017-2042”, and “American Artificial Intelligence Initiative: First Annual Report”, and has elevated the development of artificial intelligence to the national strategic level. In 2021, the U.S. military pointed out in its “U.S. Department of Defense Artificial Intelligence Posture: Assessment and Improvement Recommendations” that the U.S. military should consider three guiding questions in developing artificial intelligence: what is the current state of artificial intelligence related to the U.S. military; what is the current situation of the U.S. military in artificial intelligence; and what internal actions and potential legislative or regulatory actions may enhance the U.S. military’s artificial intelligence advantage.

Russia has invested a lot of resources to maintain a balance with the United States in the competition for the application of artificial intelligence in the military field. In 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated at the first Defense Ministry meeting of the year that artificial intelligence will greatly promote changes in the military field, and the Russian Federation Armed Forces must accelerate the research and development of artificial intelligence application technologies such as robots, intelligent individual systems, and intelligent weapon modules, so as to form core technical capabilities and battlefield competitive advantages as soon as possible. Documents such as “Special Outline for the Research and Development of Future Military Robot Technology and Equipment before 2025”, “Future Russian Military Robot Application Concept”, and “The Development Status and Application Prospects of Artificial Intelligence in the Military Field” have established a series of mechanisms at the national level for the Russian military to promote the military application of artificial intelligence.

The Japanese government has also issued an “Artificial Intelligence Strategy” to lead the research and development of artificial intelligence technology and industrial development. In the “Robotics and Artificial Intelligence” strategic plan formulated by the United Kingdom, the application of artificial intelligence in battlefield construction is emphasized. In January 2021, the Australian Department of Defense released “Fighting the Artificial Intelligence War: Operational Concepts for Future Intelligent Warfare”, which explores how to apply artificial intelligence to land, sea and air combat.

Innovative combat concepts

Promoting the “Thinking First” Approach to Intelligent Warfare

The innovation of operational concepts has an ideological driving effect on the development of military science and technology and the evolution of war forms. In the past, people’s understanding and grasp of war mainly came from the summary of practical experience, and operational concepts were empirical concepts. In the future era of intelligent warfare, operational concepts are not only empirical concepts, but also the conception, design and foresight of operations.

The U.S. Army has proposed the concept of “multi-domain warfare”, which requires deep integration and close coordination of combat capabilities in various domains such as land, sea, air, space, electromagnetic, and network. To this end, the U.S. Army has successively issued white papers such as “Multi-Domain Warfare: The Development of Synthetic Arms in the 21st Century (2025-2040)”, “U.S. Army Multi-Domain Warfare (2028)”, and “Using Robotics and Autonomous Technologies to Support Multi-Domain Warfare”. In March 2021, the U.S. Department of the Army issued the document “Army Multi-Domain Transformation: Preparing to Win in Competition and Conflict”, indicating that “multi-domain warfare” has become a “flag” leading the transformation and development of the U.S. Army. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency proposed the concept of “mosaic warfare”, which aims to create a highly decentralized and highly adaptable “kill net” composed of different combat functional units, based on advanced computer technology and network technology. The U.S. Department of Defense strongly supports the concept of “joint all-domain operations”. In March 2020, the U.S. Air Force took the lead in writing “joint all-domain operations” into the doctrine to explore how the Air Force can play a role in “joint all-domain operations”.

The Russian military proposed the concept of “charge disintegration”. “Disintegration” is one of the most important operational concepts in Russia at present. The Russian electronic warfare forces set the goal of making the enemy’s information, charge, electronic warfare and robot systems ineffective, and believe that this goal will “determine the fate of all military operations”. Disrupting the command and control of enemy forces and weapon systems and reducing the efficiency of enemy reconnaissance and use of weapons are the primary tasks of electronic warfare. At present, the Russian military is considering forming 12 types of electronic warfare forces. The Russian military also proposed the concept of “non-nuclear containment system”, the core of which is to use non-nuclear offensive strategic weapons to contain opponents. The non-nuclear offensive strategic weapons it defines include all ballistic missiles equipped with non-nuclear warheads, as well as strategic bombers and long-range air-based and sea-based cruise missiles. In addition, the Russian military also proposed the concept of “hybrid warfare”, hoping to use artificial intelligence systems to seek battlefield information advantages.

The British Ministry of Defense has proposed the concept of “multi-domain integration” and will develop a new command and control system with intelligent capabilities to achieve comprehensive, persistent, accurate and rapid battlefield perception and force coordination.

Focus on technology research and development

Shaping the Intelligent Warfare Operational Model

The key to the effectiveness of artificial intelligence is the combination with other technologies, which is also described as the “AI stack”. Various technologies interact to produce a combined effect, thereby enhancing the capabilities and effects of each technology. In the intelligent warfare supported by artificial intelligence technology, the collaborative combat mode of “man-machine integration, cloud brain control”, the cluster combat mode of “mixed formation, group intelligence”, and the cognitive combat mode of “intelligence-led, attacking with intelligence first” will constantly update people’s understanding of war.

Focus on the research and development of innovative projects. The US military is vigorously promoting the application of artificial intelligence chips in existing weapons and equipment systems, adding “intelligent brains” to weapons to enable them to have human-like thinking and autonomous interaction capabilities. In October 2021, the US Navy launched the “Beyond Plan”, which is regarded as the “current highest priority”. It aims to accelerate the delivery of artificial intelligence and machine learning tools by building a military Internet of Things for maritime operations, integrating manned and unmanned joint formations, supporting a new intelligent naval architecture, enhancing large-scale firepower killing, and realizing intelligent distributed operations of the navy. In addition, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has also carried out cognitive electronic warfare projects such as “Adaptive Electronic Warfare Behavior Learning”, “Adaptive Radar Countermeasures”, and “Communications under Extreme Radio Frequency Spectrum Conditions”, and developed a prototype of a cognitive radar electronic warfare system. The Russian Ministry of Defense’s Intelligent Technology and Equipment Research and Experimental Center cooperated with the Institute of Control Problems of the Russian Academy of Sciences to develop and test autonomous intelligent algorithms including drone swarm command and control, and also jointly developed an object automatic recognition software system based on neural network principles with the National Aviation System Research Institute.

Establish innovative R&D institutions. The continuous emergence of new technologies is an inexhaustible driving force for the vigorous development of military intelligence. High-level military intelligence construction cannot be separated from the technical research and development of professional institutions. Some countries and militaries have established R&D centers, focusing on innovative development from a technical level. The U.S. Department of Defense has established a joint artificial intelligence center, which is planned to be built into a national key laboratory to lead the promotion of hundreds of artificial intelligence-related projects and ensure the efficient use of artificial intelligence-related data and information to maintain the United States’ technological advantage in this field. Russia has established an artificial intelligence and big data alliance, a national artificial intelligence center, and a robotics technology research and experimental center under the Ministry of Defense, mainly conducting theoretical and applied research in the fields of artificial intelligence and information technology. France has established an innovative defense laboratory, the United Kingdom has set up an artificial intelligence laboratory, and India has established an artificial intelligence task force to explore related technologies.

Strengthen equipment research and development and deployment. In recent years, many countries have attached great importance to the research and development of intelligent weapons and equipment, and unmanned aerial vehicles, unmanned combat vehicles, unmanned ships, unmanned submarines, etc. have continued to emerge. At present, the US Air Force has begun to practice the combat concept of “man-machine collaboration, man in the loop” on the F-35 fighter. The US XQ-58A “Valkyrie” stealth drone previously mainly carried out man-machine collaborative operations with F-35 and F-22 fighters. In April 2021, the stealth drone successfully launched the ALTIUS-600 small drone system, further enhancing its manned and unmanned collaborative combat capabilities. Russia is focusing on reconnaissance and surveillance, command and decision-making, firepower strikes, combat support and other fields, and is developing and deploying intelligent equipment. It plans to increase the proportion of unmanned combat systems in weapons and equipment to more than 30% by 2025. Russia’s ground unmanned combat weapons, represented by the “Uranus” series and “Platform-M” and “Argo” models, are developing rapidly. Among them, the Nerekhta unmanned combat vehicle can be equipped with remote-controlled machine guns and rocket launchers. In addition to the combat capabilities of ordinary armored vehicles, it also has transportation and reconnaissance functions. In addition, the Japanese Self-Defense Forces plan to officially deploy an unmanned aerial formation with strong combat capabilities in 2035.

(Author’s unit: National University of Defense Technology)

國語中文：

■賈珍珍 丁 寧 陳方舟

隨著人工智慧在軍事領域的廣泛應用，智慧化戰爭逐漸成為備受矚目的焦點話題。歷史多次證明，戰爭形態的演進將引發致勝機理的深刻改變。在資訊化戰爭向縱深發展、智慧化戰爭初露端倪的當今時代，世界主要國家軍隊紛紛下大力推動軍事智慧化，其中的諸多動向值得關注。

加強頂層設計

勾勒智能化戰爭“路線圖”

在新一輪科技革命與產業革命推動下，智慧化軍事變革正向縱深發展。美國、俄羅斯、日本等國紛紛把人工智慧視為「改變戰爭遊戲規則」的顛覆性技術，並事先佈局，加強頂層設計和規劃引領，探索人工智慧的軍事應用方向。

美軍在《為人工智慧的未來做好準備》《國家人工智慧研究與發展戰略計畫》《人工智慧與國家安全》《2017至2042財年無人係統綜合路線圖》《美國人工智慧計畫》：在首個年度報告》等文件中，詳述了人工智慧的發展現狀和發展規劃，並將人工智慧發展提升至國家戰略層面。 2021年，美軍在發布的《美國防部人工智慧態勢：評估與改進建議》中指出，美軍發展人工智慧應考慮三個指導性問題：與美軍相關的人工智慧現處於何種狀態；美軍目前在人工智慧方面的態勢如何；哪些內部行動以及潛在的立法或監管行動可能會增強美軍的人工智慧優勢。

俄羅斯投入大量資源，以維持與美國在人工智慧軍事領域應用競爭的平衡。 2021年，俄總統普丁在年度首場國防部會議上表示，人工智慧將大幅推動軍事領域變革，俄國聯邦武裝力量要加速機器人、智慧單兵系統和武器智慧化模組等人工智慧應用技術的研發工作，早日形成核心技術能力和戰場競爭優勢。 《2025年前未來軍用機器人技術裝備研發專題綱要》《未來俄軍用機器人應用構想》《人工智慧在軍事領域的發展現狀以及應用前景》等文件，從國家層面為俄軍推動人工智慧軍事應用確立了一系列機制。

日本政府也推出了《人工智慧戰略》，旨在引領人工智慧技術研發和產業發展。在英國制定的《機器人與人工智慧》戰略規劃中，強調了人工智慧在戰場建設中的應用。 2021年1月，澳洲國防部發布《打好人工智慧戰爭：未來智慧化戰爭之作戰構想》，這份文件探討如何將人工智慧應用到陸、海、空作戰領域。

創新作戰概念

推動智慧化戰爭“思想先行”

作戰概念創新對軍事科技發展、戰爭形態演變具有思想牽引作用。過去人們對戰爭的認識與掌握，主要源自於對實踐經驗的歸納總結，作戰概念即經驗概念。未來智慧化戰爭時代，作戰概念不僅是經驗概念，更是對作戰的構想、設計與前瞻。

美陸軍提出「多域戰」概念，要求陸、海、空、天、電磁、網路等各域作戰能力深度整合與密切協同。為此，美陸軍先後發布《多域戰：21世紀合成兵種的發展（2025至2040）》《美國陸軍多域戰（2028）》《運用機器人與自主技術支援多域戰》等白皮書。 2021年3月，美陸軍部發布文件《陸軍多域轉型：準備在競爭和衝突中取勝》，顯示「多域戰」已成為引領美陸軍轉型發展的一面「旗幟」。美國防高級研究計畫局提出「馬賽克戰」概念，旨在打造一種由不同作戰功能單元構成的、以先進電腦技術與網路技術為基礎的、高度分散、具有高度適應性的「殺傷網」。美國防部大力支持「聯合全域作戰」概念。 2020年3月，美空軍率先將「聯合全域作戰」寫入條令，探討空軍如何在「聯合全域作戰」中發揮作用。

俄軍提出「指控瓦解」概念。 「瓦解」是當前俄羅斯最重要的作戰概念之一，俄軍電子戰部隊把使敵人的訊息、指控、電子戰和機器人系統失效作為目標，認為這一目標將「決定所有軍事行動的命運」。擾亂敵方部隊和武器系統的指揮和控制，降低敵方偵察和使用武器的效率，是進行電子戰的首要任務。目前，俄軍正在考慮組建12種類型的電子戰部隊。俄軍也提出「非核武遏制體系」概念，核心是使用非核武進攻性戰略武器來遏制對手。其所定義的非核武攻擊性戰略武器既包括所有裝備非核彈頭的彈道飛彈，也包括戰略轟炸機和遠程空基、海基巡航飛彈。此外，俄軍也提出「混合戰爭」概念，希望利用人工智慧系統謀求戰場資訊優勢。

英國防部提出「多域融合」概念，將發展具備智慧化能力的新型指控系統，以實現全面、持久、準確、快速的戰場感知與力量協同。

注重技術研發

塑造智慧化戰爭作戰模式

人工智慧發揮效用的關鍵是與其他多種技術的組合，這種組合也被描述為「人工智慧堆疊」。各種技術透過互動的方式產生組合效應，進而提升每項技術所產生的能力與效果。在人工智慧技術支援的智慧化戰爭中，「人機一體、雲腦控制」的協同作戰模式，「混搭編組、群體智慧」的集群作戰模式，「智慧主導、攻智為上」的認知作戰模式等，將不斷更新人們對戰爭的認知。

聚焦創新專案研發。美軍正在大力推廣人工智慧晶片在現有武器裝備系統中的應用，為武器加上“智慧大腦”，使之具備類人思考和自主互動能力。 2021年10月，美海軍推出被視為“當前最高優先事項”的“超越計劃”，旨在通過構建海上作戰軍事物聯網，整合有人無人聯合編隊，加速交付人工智能和機器學習工具，支撐全新的智慧化海軍架構，提升大規模火力殺傷、實現海軍智慧化分散式作戰。此外，美國防高級研究計畫局也進行了「自適應電子戰行為學習」「自適應雷達對抗」「極端射頻頻譜條件下的通訊」等認知電子戰項目，研發出認知雷達電子戰系統原型機。俄國防部智慧技術裝備科研試驗中心與俄聯邦科學院控制問題研究所合作，開發測試了包括無人機群指揮控制在內的自主智慧演算法，也與國家航空系統科研所共同開發基於神經網路原理的物體自動辨識軟體系統。

組成創新研發機構。新技術的不斷湧現是軍事智慧化蓬勃發展的不竭動力，高水準的軍事智慧化建設離不開專職機構的技術研發。一些國家和軍隊組成研發中心，注重從技術層面創新發展。美國國防部建立了聯合人工智慧中心，計劃將該中心打造成國家級重點實驗室，用於領導數百個與人工智慧相關的項目，確保對人工智慧相關數據資訊的高效利用，以保持美國在該領域的技術優勢。俄羅斯組成了人工智慧和大數據聯盟、國家人工智慧中心和隸屬國防部的機器人技術科研試驗中心，主要進行人工智慧和資訊科技領域的理論和應用研究。法國成立了創新國防實驗室，英國設立了人工智慧實驗室，印度組成了人工智慧特別工作小組，進行相關技術探索。

加強裝備研發列裝。近年來，多國重視研發智慧武器裝備，無人飛行器、無人戰車、無人艦艇、無人潛航器等不斷湧現。目前，美空軍已開始在F-35戰機上實踐「人機協同，人在迴路」的作戰理念。美XQ-58A「女武神」隱身無人機先前主要與F-35和F-22戰機進行人機協同作戰，2021年4月該隱身無人機成功投放ALTIUS-600小型無人機系統，進一步提升了其有人無人協同作戰能力。俄羅斯正聚焦偵察監視、指揮決策、火力打擊、作戰支援等多個領域，展開智慧裝備研發和列裝工作，計畫到2025年將無人作戰系統在武器裝備中的比例提高到30%以上。以“天王星”系列和“平台-M”“阿爾戈”等型號為代表的俄地面無人作戰武器發展迅速。其中，Nerekhta無人戰車可搭載遙控機槍和火箭發射器，除擁有一般裝甲車的戰鬥力外，還兼具運輸和偵察功能。此外，日本自衛隊計劃在2035年正式部署具有較強作戰能力的無人空中編隊。

（作者單位：國防科技大學）

中國軍事資料來源：http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-03/17/content_311555.htm

Asymmetric Warfare, Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Dissipative Warfare, Mosaic Warfare, 中國的情報戰, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 中國軍事特徵及認知域作戰與戰爭發展趨勢, 中國軍事認知域作戰的重點是什麼、重點在哪裡？, 中國軍事認知戰, 中國軍事認知領域作戰, 中國軍民融合計劃, 中國軍用反衛星武器研製, 中國軍隊瞄準未來戰爭打好五場認知戰, 中國軍隊聚焦認知域戰是主攻戰場對抗的新著力點, 國家網絡空間安全戰略, 國防和軍隊現代化建設, 域作战突出属性, 認知戰, 新軍事變革, 智慧戰爭, 認知域戰, 認知戰

How the Chinese Military Identify Key Targets for Cognitive Domain Operations

Leave a comment

中國軍隊如何辨識認知域作戰的關鍵目標

現代英語：

Cognitive domain combat targets refer to the specific role of cognitive domain combat. In cognitive domain combat, compared with combat targets, combat targets solve the problem of precise aiming, that is, to let commanders understand and grasp the precise coordinates of what to hit, where to hit, and to what extent. Only by deeply understanding the connotation and characteristics of cognitive domain combat targets can we accurately find key targets through appearances and thus seize the initiative in future combat.

Cognitive focus that influences behavioral choices

The cognitive focus is the “convergence point” of the cognitive subject’s multi-dimensional thinking cognition in war activities. As a dynamic factor, it affects the cognitive process and behavioral results. Generally speaking, the cognitive factors that affect individual behavioral choices in war activities mainly include political attribute cognition, interest-related cognition, group belonging cognition, risk loss cognition, emotional orientation cognition, war morality cognition, etc. For war activities and groups or individuals who pay attention to war activities, the cognitive focus that affects their attitudes, tendencies and behaviors is not the same. Judging from the local wars and regional conflicts in the world in recent years, there are obvious differences in the cognitive focus of different groups or individuals. Politicians pay more attention to political attribute cognition and interest-related cognition, those who may intervene in the war pay more attention to risk loss cognition and interest-related cognition, ordinary people pay more attention to interest-related cognition and emotional orientation cognition, and people in other countries outside the region generally pay more attention to war morality cognition and group belonging cognition because their own interests will not be directly lost. In combat practice, foreign militaries are good at targeting the cognitive focus of different objects, accurately planning topics, and pushing related information to induce specific behavioral choices. For example, before the Gulf War, the Hill Norton public relations company fabricated the non-existent “incubator incident” by using Naira, the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States, as a “witness” to show the “inhumanity” of the Iraqi army, induce the American people’s ethical and moral cognition, and then support the US government to send troops to participate in the Gulf War.

Style preferences that constrain command decisions

Cognitive style directly affects decision-making behavior preferences. Cognitive style refers to the typical way of individual cognition, memory, thinking, and problem solving. According to the preference of command decision-making style, commanders can be divided into calm cognitive style and impulsive cognitive style. Commanders with calm cognitive style pay attention to accuracy but not speed in the decision-making process. The quality of the decisions they make is high, but they are prone to fall into the comparison and analysis of various intelligence information sources and overemphasize the accuracy and objectivity of information analysis. Commanders with calm cognitive style are often easily disturbed by the diverse and diverse information stimulation in battlefield cognitive offensive and defensive operations, and their mental energy is easily disturbed and dissipated, which may lead to missed opportunities. Commanders with impulsive cognitive style pay attention to speed but not accuracy. The decision-making reaction speed is fast, but the quality is not high. They are easily emotional and prone to conflict with team members. Commanders with impulsive cognitive style are also prone to over-interpret the ambiguous external security environment, and constantly look for “evidence” to strengthen and verify individual erroneous thinking, narrowing individual attention and leading to command decision-making deviations. In combat practice, foreign armies pay more attention to analyzing the decision-making style of commanders of combat opponents, and then select specific information to influence them psychologically. For example, during the U.S. invasion of Panama, when besieging the hiding place of Panamanian President Noriega, the U.S. military repeatedly played rock and heavy metal music, and used language that stimulated and humiliated Noriega to carry out cognitive and psychological attacks on him, causing Noriega to gradually collapse physically and mentally.

Backdoor channel to control thinking and cognition

Once a computer is infected with a “Trojan” virus, it will send a connection request to the hacker control terminal at a specific time. Once the connection is successful, a backdoor channel will be formed, allowing the hacker to control the computer at will. Similarly, the human brain also has a cognitive “backdoor” and may be controlled by others. Cognitive psychologists have found that by sending information to the target object’s audio-visual perception channel, carefully pushing information content that the target object recognizes and accepts, catering to the target object’s existing experience memory, conforming to the target object’s thinking habits, and stimulating the target object’s emotional pain points, it is possible to control and interfere with the target object’s cognition and promote its instinctive emotional and behavioral reactions. With the support of cutting-edge cognitive science and technology, using the two modes of automatic start and control processing of brain information processing, the target object can easily fall into a “cognitive cocoon”. In cognitive domain operations, by immersing individuals in massive amounts of artificially constructed information, and continuously providing them with “evidence” to prove that their judgments and cognitions are “correct”. Over time, the individual’s cognitive vision becomes smaller and smaller, and the ability to perceive the external environment gradually decreases. Eventually, they will not be able to see the truth of the matter and will be immersed in the “cognitive cocoon” and unable to extricate themselves. When foreign militaries conduct operations in the cognitive domain, they often target their opponents’ cognitive biases on a certain issue and continuously push situational information and intelligence information through various channels to support their opponents’ so-called “correct cognition,” causing errors and deviations in their opponents’ command decisions.

Sensory stimuli that induce attention

Effective perceptual stimulation is the first prerequisite for attracting the attention of the target object. The human brain will perceive and react to stimuli within the perceptual range. Cognitive psychology experimental research has found that information such as dynamic, dangerous, relevant, survival safety, and contrast between before and after is more likely to attract the attention of the human brain. In the era of intelligence, the psychological cognitive process of the target object often follows the law of “attracting attention, cultivating interest, actively searching, strengthening memory, actively sharing, and influencing others”. In combat, foreign troops often use exclusive revelations, intelligence leaks, authoritative disclosures, on-site connections, and other methods, and cleverly use exaggeration, contrast, association, metaphor, suspense, and contrast to push information that subverts common sense, cognitive conflicts, and strong contrasts to attract the attention of the target object. For example, the “Lin Qi rescue incident” created by the US military in the Iraq War and the “Gaddafi Golden Toilet” in the Libyan War mostly choose stories familiar to the audience as the blueprint, hiding the purpose and embedding the viewpoint in the story plot, which attracted the attention of the general public. In addition, the human brain will also process stimuli outside the perceptual range. In recent years, the military of Western countries has attached great importance to the research of subthreshold information stimulation technology, and has developed subthreshold visual information implantation technology, subthreshold auditory information implantation technology, subthreshold information activation technology, subconscious sound manipulation technology of the nervous system, etc., continuously expanding the application scope of neurocognitive science and technology in the military field.

Meta-value concepts that give rise to cognitive resonance

In cognitive theory, cognitive resonance refers to information that can cross the cognitive gap between the two parties and trigger the ideological and psychological resonance and cognitive empathy of both parties, thereby achieving the deconstruction and reconstruction of the other party’s cognitive system. In cognitive domain warfare, this cognitive energy-gathering effect is not a simple concentration of power, but an internal accumulation of system synergy. Under the diffusion and dissemination of modern information media, this cognitive resonance effect can spread rapidly to all parts of the world in a short period of time, and produce secondary indirect psychological effects or more levels of derivative psychological effects, presenting a state of cumulative iteration. Once it exceeds the psychological critical point, it will present a state of psychological energy explosion, thereby changing the direction or outcome of the event. The targets that can induce this cognitive resonance are mainly value beliefs, moral ethics, common interests, etc. In war, if one party touches or violates human meta-values, common emotional orientation, etc., it is very easy to induce collective condemnation, bear the accusation of violating human morality, and fall into a moral trough. For example, a photo during the Vietnam War shows a group of Vietnamese children, especially a 9-year-old girl, running naked on the road because of burns after being attacked by US napalm bombs. In 1972, this photo caused a huge sensation after it was published, setting off an anti-war wave in the United States and even the world, and accelerating the end of the Vietnam War.

Cognitive gaps in a split cognitive system

In daily life, seemingly hard steel is very easy to break due to the brittleness of the material due to factors such as low temperature environment, material defects, and stress concentration. The same is true for the cognitive system. Cognitive gaps refer to the cracks, pain points, weaknesses, and sensitive points in the cognitive thinking of the target object, which are mainly manifested as the individual’s worry that he is unable to cope with or adapt to the environment, and under the influence of anxiety, cognitive vulnerability is formed. The experience of security threats, the looseness of group structure, the confusion of beliefs and ideals, and the loss of voice of authoritative media will all cause cognitive conflicts and tearing of the target object. In cognitive domain operations, sometimes seemingly powerful combat opponents hide a large number of thinking cracks and psychological weaknesses behind them. Often a news event can shake the cognitive framework of the combat opponent and puncture the cognitive bubble. In addition, this cognitive psychological conflict will also cause moral damage and psychological trauma to individuals. In recent years, the U.S. and Western countries’ troops carrying out overseas missions have faced “enemies disguised as civilians” that appear anytime and anywhere, and their uncertainty about the battlefield environment has continued to increase. They generally lack the perception of the significance of combat, and are filled with guilt and sin. A large number of soldiers developed post-traumatic stress disorder, the number of self-harm on the battlefield, post-war suicides and crimes increased sharply, and the number of suicides among veterans of the war even exceeded the number of deaths on the battlefield.

(Author’s unit: Political Science Academy of National Defense University)

國語中文：

引言

認知域作戰標靶是指認知域作戰的具體作用指向。在認知域作戰中，相較於作戰對象，作戰標靶解決的問題是精確瞄準，也就是讓指揮官了解掌握具體打什麼、往哪裡打、打到什麼程度的精準座標問題。只有深刻理解認知域作戰標靶的內涵特點，才能透過表象準確找到關鍵標靶，以便在未來作戰中掌握先機。

影響行為選擇的認知重心

認知重心是戰爭活動中認知主體多元思維認知的“匯聚點”，作為一種能動因素影響認知進程和行為結果。一般而言，影響戰爭活動中個人行為選擇的認知因素，主要包含政治屬性認知、利益關聯認知、群體歸屬認知、風險損失認知、情緒定向認知、戰爭道德認知等。對於戰爭活動以及關注戰爭活動的群體或個體而言，影響其態度、傾向和行為的認知重心並不相同。從近年來的世界局部戰爭和地區衝突來看，不同群體或個體關注的認知重心有著明顯差異，政治人物更加關注政治屬性認知和利益關聯認知，戰爭可能介入者更關注風險損耗認知和利益關聯認知，一般民眾更關注利益關聯認知和情感定向認知，而域外他國民眾由於自身利益不會受到直接損失，普遍更關注戰爭道德認知和群體歸屬認知。外軍在作戰實踐中，善於針對不同對象的認知重心，精準策劃主題，推送關聯訊息，誘發特定的行為選擇。如同在海灣戰爭前，希爾·諾頓公關公司炮製了根本不存在的“育嬰箱事件”，就是利用科威特駐美大使的女兒娜伊拉“做證”，展現伊拉克軍隊的“慘無人道”，誘發美國民眾的倫理道德認知，進而支持美國政府派兵參加海灣戰爭。

制約指揮決策的風格偏好

認知風格直接影響決策行為偏好。認知風格是指個體認知、記憶、思考、解決問題的典型方式。根據指揮決策風格偏好，指揮家可以分為冷靜型認知風格和衝動型認知風格。冷靜型認知風格的指揮者在決策過程中重視準確但不重視速度，作出的決策品質較高，但容易陷入對各類情報資訊來源的比對分析，過度強調資訊分析的準確客觀。冷靜型認知風格的指揮在戰場認知攻防行動中，常常容易受到紛繁多元的信息刺激幹擾，心智精力容易被擾亂和耗散，進而可能貽誤戰機。衝動型認知風格的指揮者重視速度但不重視準確度，作出的決策反應速度較快，但品質不高，且容易情緒激動，易與團隊成員發生衝突。衝動型認知風格的指揮者也容易將模稜兩可的外在安全環境進行過度曲解，並不斷尋找「證據」強化和驗證個體錯誤思維，使個體注意力變窄，導致出現指揮決策偏差。外軍在作戰實務中，比較著重分析作戰對手指揮官決策風格，進而選擇特定資訊對其進行心理影響。如美軍入侵巴拿馬戰爭中，在圍攻巴拿馬總統諾列加躲藏處時，美軍反複播放搖滾和重金屬音樂，運用刺激和羞辱諾列加的語言對其進行認知打擊和心理進攻，使諾列加身心逐漸崩潰。

控制思維認知的後門通道

電腦一旦中了「木馬」病毒，會在特定時間向駭客控制端發送連線請求，一旦連線成功就會形成後門通道，使得駭客可以隨心所欲地控制電腦。與之相似，人類大腦也存在認知“後門”，也可能被他人控制。認知心理學家研究發現，透過給目標對象視聽感知通道發送訊息，精心推送目標對象認可的、接受的信息內容，迎合目標對像已有的經驗記憶，順應目標對象思維習慣，刺激目標對象的情感痛點，就可以控制干擾目標物認知，促進其產生本能情緒行為反應。在尖端認知科學技術的支撐下，運用大腦資訊加工的自動啟動和控制加工兩種模式，目標物很容易陷入「認知繭房」之中。認知域作戰中，透過讓個體沉浸在人為構設的海量資訊之中，並源源不斷地為其提供「證據」用來佐證其判斷和認知是「正確」的。長此以往，個體的認知視野就變得越來越小，對外在環境的感知能力逐漸降低，最終會看不到事情的真相，沉湎於「認知繭房」中無法自拔。外軍在認知域作戰中，常常針對作戰對手對某一問題的認知偏差，持續透過多種管道推送佐證作戰對手自以為「正確認知」的態勢訊息和情報訊息，使作戰對手指揮決策出現失誤和偏差。

誘發關注的感知覺刺激

有效的知覺刺激是引發目標對象關注的首要前提。人類大腦對感知覺範圍內的刺激會有所察覺，並做出各種反應。認知心理學實驗研究發現，動態、危險、利害關係人、生存安全、前後反差等類別資訊更容易引起人類大腦的注意。在智慧化時代，目標對象的心理認知過程往往遵循「引起注意、培養興趣、主動搜尋、強化記憶、主動分享、影響他人」的規律。外軍在作戰中，常運用獨家爆料、情報外洩、權威揭露、現場連線等方式，巧用誇張、對比、聯想、比喻、懸念、襯託等手法，推播顛覆常識、認知衝突、對比強烈等訊息，來引發目標對象注意。例如伊拉克戰爭中美軍塑造的“營救女兵林奇事件”，利比亞戰爭中的“卡扎菲黃金馬桶”，大多選擇受眾對象熟知的故事為藍本，藏目的、寓觀點於故事情節，吸引了廣大民眾的注意力。此外，人類大腦也會對感知覺範圍外的刺激進行加工。近年來，西方國家軍隊非常重視知覺閾下資訊刺激技術的研究，開發發展了閾下視覺訊息植入技術、閾下聽覺訊息植入技術、閾下訊息啟動技術、神經系統潛意識聲音操控技術等，不斷擴大神經認知科學技術在軍事領域的應用範圍。

催生認知共振的後設價值概念

認知理論中，認知共振是指跨越雙方認知鴻溝，能夠引發雙方思想心理與認知共鳴共感的訊息，進而實現對對方認知體系的解構與重建。在認知域作戰中，這種認知聚能效應不是簡單意義上的力量集中，而是體系合力的內在累積。在現代資訊傳媒的擴散傳播作用下，這種認知共振效應能在短時間內迅速擴散到全球各地，並產生二次間接心理效應或更多層次的衍生心理效應，呈現出一種累積迭代的狀態，一旦超過心理臨界點，即呈現出心理能量爆發狀態，從而改變事件走向或結果。能夠誘發這種認知共振的靶標，主要有價值信念、道德倫理、共通利益等。戰爭中，若某一方觸及或違反人類元價值觀、共同情感指向等，則極易誘發集體聲討，承擔違背人類道德的指責，陷於道義低谷。如越戰期間的一張照片，畫面呈現的是遭遇美軍凝固汽油彈襲擊後，一群越南孩子特別是一名9歲女孩在公路上因為燒傷而裸體奔跑。 1972年，這張照片刊登後引發巨大轟動，掀起美國乃至全球的反戰浪潮，加速了越戰的結束。

分裂認知體系的認知縫隙

日常生活中，看似堅硬的鋼鐵，受低溫環境、材質缺陷、應力集中等因素影響，非常容易因材料脆性而斷裂，認知體係也是如此。認知縫隙是指目標對象認知思考中的裂縫、痛點、弱點與敏感點，主要表現為個體擔心自己沒有能力應對或無法適應環境的想法，並在焦慮情緒的作用下，構成認知脆弱性。安全威脅的經驗、團體結構的鬆散、信念理想的迷惘、權威媒介的失聲等，都會使得目標物出現認知上的衝突與撕裂。認知域作戰中，有時看似強大的作戰對手，背後卻潛藏著大量的思維裂隙與心理弱點，往往一個新聞事件就能動搖作戰對手的認知框架，刺破認知泡沫。此外，這種認知心理衝突也會使個體產生道德損傷和心理創傷。近年來，執行海外任務的美西方國家軍隊面對隨時隨地出現的“偽裝成平民的敵人”，對戰場環境的不確定感不斷提升，普遍缺乏作戰意義感知，進而內心充滿內疚與罪惡。大量士兵產生戰爭創傷後壓力障礙，戰場自殘自傷、戰後自殺與犯罪人數激增，參戰老兵自殺人數甚至超過戰場死亡人數。

（作者單位：國防大學政治學院）唐國東

中國軍網 國防部網 // 2023年3月23日 星期四

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2023-03/23/content_336888.htm

China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 認知域戰, 認知戰

Chinese Military Training and the Metaverse: Challenges & Opportunities Coexist

Leave a comment

中國軍事訓練與虛擬世界：挑戰與機會並存

現代英語：

 In the field of military training, the basic technology of the Metaverse has long been used as a virtual resource by the military to varying degrees. It must be acknowledged that the value and potential of the Metaverse in military training is immeasurable and is the focus of current and future military competition. However, due to the immaturity of the development of Metaverse-related technologies and their application in military training, the bright prospects are accompanied by potential risks.

1. The past and present of the military training metaverse
        The metaverse relies on a technology group with virtual reality technology as its core. In its early form in the military field, it is also called virtual simulation or simulated Internet. It can be said that virtual simulation training is very close to today’s concept of the metaverse and is the primary form of the military training metaverse. From ancient times to the present, the progress that has brought great influence in the field of science and technology is generally for winning wars or maintaining combat effectiveness. As the leading technology of the third scientific and technological revolution, the metaverse is used for military training in different forms of basic metaverses in the global military field.
      The US military began to deploy the “Military Metaverse” plan very early. In 1978, Jack Thorpe, a captain of the US Air Force, proposed the idea of ​​a military simulator network in his paper, hoping to establish a distributed or networked military modeling system to facilitate training. In 1983, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) of the US Department of Defense developed the Virtual Battlefield Network Simulator (SIMNET Simulator), which uses computers to generate virtual battlefields, simulate the situation of fighting between the two sides, and summarize errors and failures. Replacing field exercises in this way saves costs to a certain extent and improves the effectiveness of training. Although the SIMNET simulator, as the earliest version, was still at a lower level of battlefield simulation, it pioneered distributed or networked modeling and simulation. By the end of the 1980s, the project reached its peak, and eventually more than 200 simulated interconnected tank and aircraft simulators based on local area networks and wide area networks were formed across the United States and across Europe, and used for large-scale training and exercises. The distributed interactive simulation (DIS) protocol developed at that time is still in use today, and through more advanced high-level architectures, different military simulations can be linked to provide a richer collective training or mission preparation experience. It can be said that the SIMNET simulator project directly or indirectly promoted the development of many key technologies of the current metaverse. Today, the US military is very interested in the metaverse that has sprung up like mushrooms after rain. The newly established military branch, the United States Space Force (USSF), wants to create a military-specific metaverse for collaborative operations, training, and mission execution. Its chief technology officer, Lisa Costa, declared: “Soldiers cannot go to space in person. The only way they can experience their own combat territory is through visual data display. The virtual reality environment will provide them with situational awareness and understand their options in order to make decisions.”
       In recent years, virtual reality and augmented reality technologies of the metaverse have been incorporated into the regular military training of the US military. In 2014, the BlueShark project developed by the Office of Naval Research and the Institute for Creative Technologies at the University of Southern California allowed soldiers to collaborate in a virtual environment to conduct driving technology training; in 2018, the US Army and Microsoft cooperated to develop an integrated visual enhancement system IVAS for soldiers to conduct regular training; in 2020, the US Navy launched the Avengers Project to conduct flight course training through virtual reality, artificial intelligence and biometric technology; in 2021, Boeing created a military aircraft training system that enables maintenance personnel to use AR technology for related simulated maintenance drills; on May 10, 2022, two US fighter pilots took a jet and completed a high-altitude prototype metaverse experiment over the California desert. Refueling operations were performed using a virtual tanker through a specially designed augmented reality display connected to a computer system that displayed a glowing image of a virtual refueling aircraft.

 (I) The US military uses virtual reality technology for military training on a large scale
        . At the same time, Russia is also a leader in the development of virtual training systems. Almost all of its advanced weapons and equipment are equipped with corresponding virtual training systems, and are developing in the direction of universalization and embeddedness. For example, the Sound M universal virtual training system is a universal virtual training equipment for combat personnel of surface-to-air missile weapon systems. The Tor M1 surface-to-air missile system is also equipped with a special virtual training vehicle, which can complete battlefield simulation training while searching for targets and conducting weapon operations.

 (II) The Tor M1 surface-to-air missile system is also equipped with a dedicated virtual training vehicle.
         In addition, other countries have also begun to explore the combination of metaverse technology and military training. The British Army has been committed to studying the use of extended reality technology, which can put more than 30 soldiers in the same virtual training scene. The British Ministry of Defense’s “Single Synthetic Environment” has used this technology in soldier training. In South Korea, a developer and supplier of a military training simulator called “Optimus Prime” completed the development of the DEIMOS military training system based on metaverse technology in 2019 and applied it to the training of the armed forces. The system can create various environments for professional military training, including precision shooting training, tactical behavior training and observation training.

       2. The inherent advantages of the metaverse in military training Military training
       is a commonplace in the military, specifically referring to the military theory and related professional knowledge education, combat skills training and military operations exercises conducted by the armed forces and other trainees. The continuous innovation of technologies such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality has accelerated the trend of intelligentization in future wars. Single actual combat exercises in traditional forms will be difficult to meet the combat requirements under the new situation. As a huge group of new technologies, the metaverse plays an increasingly important role in military training. If training is an important support for combat effectiveness, then the primary use of the metaverse in military training is as an important “enabler” for simulation training.       Immersive experience can improve the effectiveness of battlefield environment simulation. As a practical science, military training is centered on experience and the key to training is immersion. The virtual space created by the metaverse makes people feel a “common sense of embodied presence”, allowing trainees to fully immerse themselves in the virtual space and experience a war close to reality. Battlefield environment simulation uses virtual reality technology to process battlefield element data such as battlefield terrain, battlefield personnel, weapons and equipment through computer systems, and finally creates a realistic three-dimensional battlefield environment. Soldiers are immersed in digital environments such as deserts, mountains or plateaus. Each environment has different tactics, techniques and procedures, and soldiers can constantly practice tasks. Even if the soldiers are not in the actual battlefield environment, this technology is enough to restore the authenticity of the environment. More importantly, through battlefield simulation training, not only can soldiers become familiar with the battlefield environment and obtain information to the greatest extent, but they can also improve their ability to observe things from multiple angles and solve emergencies. The US military has developed a virtual reality system called a laser sand table, which can identify and convert photos and videos sent back by satellites, and turn them into realistic three-dimensional maps, presenting the battlefield environment thousands of miles away to commanders. Before the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US military used virtual reality technology to create real war scenes, including battlefield conditions, personnel appearances, etc., in order to allow soldiers to adapt to the environment in advance and improve their combat capabilities.

 (II) On the eve of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. military used virtual reality technology to create real war scenes
        . Open interconnection better supports synthetic training. The various parts of the Metaverse ecosystem can be interconnected and operated, and information can be transmitted across platforms and across the world (between virtual worlds or between the virtual world and the real world) without hindrance. Synthetic training uses the open interconnection advantage of Metaverse technology to supplement actual combat training. According to statistics, since 2015, the number of non-combat deaths in the U.S. military has exceeded the number of deaths in actual military operations each year, and many of the deaths in non-combat operations are caused by conventional military training. Therefore, the U.S. Army has begun to use Metaverse to carry out synthetic training in an attempt to establish a virtual synthetic training environment (STE) to reduce casualties in training. From urban warfare to mountain warfare, the “synthetic training environment” integrates “real-time, virtual and constructive training environments into a single synthetic training environment, and provides training functions to ground, transport and air platforms and command posts where needed.” Practice has proved that the synthetic training environment built by the metaverse, with the help of multi-sensory simulation and restoration, can help soldiers break through the limitations of theoretical learning and cognition, and improve the quality and ability of team combat coordination, injury treatment and safe evacuation. On the eve of the Iraq War, the US military stationed in Kuwait conducted synthetic training on Iraq’s urban conditions, which enhanced the soldiers’ urban combat capabilities while minimizing casualties in actual combat. The
      imaginative space stimulates innovation in military training thinking to the greatest extent. War exercises have been valued by military strategists since ancient times. During the Warring States Period, Mozi and Gongshu Ban’s deduction games of “untying belts to make a city” and “wooden pieces to make weapons” rehearsed the real situation on the battlefield, thus avoiding fighting between the two armies. In the deep scene era opened by the future metaverse, the military system will become highly intelligent, and the two sides of the war may be able to conduct war deductions in the battlefield metaverse, and even compete in the virtual world. Based on the information obtained in the virtual world, the two sides of the deduction capture and predict the changes in the battlefield through thinking processes such as association, reasoning and logical judgment, which is not only conducive to learning more war laws, but also can exercise the soldiers’ logical deduction ability. In the Gulf War of 1991, the U.S. military conducted war games based on the training level of the troops, the possible course of the war, and the time required for actual combat before implementing Operation Desert Storm. Practice has proved that the U.S. military used the problems found in this war game to transform the combat concept into an actual action plan and ultimately won. This also fully demonstrates that the real battlefield is full of uncertainties, so it is necessary to be fully prepared through continuous war exercises. Undoubtedly, it is almost impossible for the enemy and us to conduct coordinated deductions in the real world, but if the deployment of the enemy and us can be made public to a certain extent by their respective satellites, air and ground reconnaissance equipment, then at a certain time point, between two or more parties about to break out a military crisis, it is expected that the deployment of troops in the metaverse can be carried out first, and the actual military conflict can be resolved.
      The application of metaverse technology in military training can not only avoid accidental casualties during training, but also allow a single or many trainees to complete training tasks in different virtual environments without leaving home and without actual contact. And this kind of non-contact training plays a more obvious role in the regular form of the new crown epidemic.
       3. Potential risks of the metaverse in military training
      Although the metaverse provides technical support for military training to a large extent, it should never be simply understood as a training program or considered as a means of conducting training. Even if the metaverse technology brings convenience and innovation to military training, the technology itself and its accompanying challenges and uncertainties cannot be ignored.
      The development of metaverse technology may cause security issues. The metaverse is a huge technology group. Its system architecture, core algorithms and immersive technology are still in a stage of continuous development. The supporting industry, value consensus, management standards, etc. have not yet been reached. In general, the metaverse is still a new thing, and its application in military training is even more so. Although the use of virtual training systems can reduce casualties to a certain extent, it is worth thinking about whether such training can be truly used in combat sites. It is still an unknown. And whether the technology is safe enough in operation is also an urgent problem to be solved. James Crowley of Virtual City Training Experts pointed out that computer power may be the most influential part of it. Unless the delay can be reduced to a level that does not make people uncomfortable and feels real, and unless the movement and communication data between different people can be stored in different simulators, it will not be able to provide practical training tools. At the same time, another challenge is the security issue of mutual contact between the armies of different countries in the open virtual world of the Metaverse.
      Virtual training environments are prone to cognitive illusions. Military training in the Metaverse world is the result of a contest between human intelligence and technology. War simulations and military training conducted in a virtual environment can have a powerful deterrent effect on future wars, just like “nuclear weapons”. Although it makes up for the limited senses of people at the physiological level, it also brings psychological cognitive illusions to trainees. Taking unmanned combat military training as an example, long-term combat training under a virtual system will cause the operator to have a gaming mentality. Because the audiovisual senses are out of touch with the real battlefield situation, they are alienated from the real people and society, and have a numb mentality towards the behavior of depriving others of their lives. With the continuous maturity of Metaverse technology, the interaction between the virtual world and the real world will become closer and closer, forming a mixed world that is difficult to distinguish between the real and the virtual. By then, it will not only cause a distinction dilemma for the cognitive psychology of soldiers, but also a major challenge for future military training. The
      “decentralization” of the Metaverse deviates from the traditional military training structure. In the world of the metaverse, all parties involved are virtual entities with equal status after computer processing and digitization. They can act autonomously in the metaverse, so they pursue “decentralization”. However, the traditional military training organizational structure is highly centralized and hierarchical management from top to bottom, which is contrary to the value needs of the metaverse. The US military has made a lot of efforts in pursuing “decentralized” operations, such as the “network-centric warfare” proposed in the 1990s, and the current distributed lethality and mosaic warfare. However, the traditional military training structure and thinking inertia are still obstacles to “decentralization”, and this situation is common in the armies of various countries.
     Yuval Noah Harari said in “Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind” that humans conquer the world by relying on the ability of fiction and imagination. The metaverse gives us the ability to fiction and imagine, and at the same time, the uncertainty of the metaverse in the field of military training also increases the element of fear. Therefore, we must pay attention to innovative scientific and technological theories, develop cutting-edge metaverse technologies, continuously stimulate the potential of the military training metaverse, and at the same time improve relevant laws, regulations and moral and ethical regulations to make advance preparations for winning future intelligent wars.

國語中文：

在軍事訓練領域，元宇宙的基本技術其實早就作為一種虛擬資源，在不同程度上為軍方使用。必須承認，元宇宙在軍事訓練中的價值潛力不可估量，是當下和未來軍事領域爭鋒的焦點。但由於元宇宙相關技術的發展及其在軍事訓練中的應用尚不成熟，美好前景背後也伴隨著潛在風險。
一、軍事訓練元宇宙的前世今生
元宇宙依賴的是以虛擬實境技術為核心的技術群，在軍事領域的早期形態又稱為虛擬模擬或模擬互聯網。可以說，虛擬模擬訓練已經非常接近今天的元宇宙概念，是軍事訓練元宇宙的初級形態。從古至今，科技領域帶來巨大影響力的進步普遍都是為了贏得戰爭或保持戰鬥力。作為第三次科技革命的領導技術，元宇宙在全球軍事領域，以不同形式的基本元宇宙被用於軍事訓練。
美軍很早就開始部署「軍事元宇宙」計畫。 1978年，美空軍上尉傑克·索普在自己的論文中提出了軍事模擬器網路的構想，希望建立一個分散式或網路化的軍事建模系統方便訓練。 1983年美國防部高級研究計畫局（DARPA），開發了虛擬戰場網路模擬器（SIMNET模擬器），以電腦生成虛擬戰場，模擬雙方交戰的情形進行推演，總結錯誤和失敗。用這樣的方式取代實地演習，一定程度上節省了成本，也提高了訓練的效果。雖然SIMNET模擬器作為最早的版本仍處於較低階的戰場仿真，但卻開闢了分散式或網路化建模仿真的先河。到了20世紀80年代末，該計畫達到頂峰，最終落地形成200多個遍布美國、橫跨歐洲，基於區域網路和廣域網路的模擬互聯坦克和飛機模擬器，並用於大規模訓練與演習。而當時開發的分散式互動式模擬（DIS）協議，至今仍在使用，並且透過更先進的高階體系結構，可以連結不同的軍事模擬，以提供更豐富的集體訓練或任務準備體驗。可以說SIMNET模擬器專案直接或間接推動了當前元宇宙的許多關鍵技術的發展。時至今日，美軍對如雨後春筍般崛起的元宇宙興趣正濃，新成立的軍種——美國太空部隊（USSF）欲打造軍事專用元宇宙，用於協同作戰、訓練、執行任務。其技術主管利薩·科斯塔宣稱：「軍人們並不能親自上太空，他們體驗自身作戰疆域的唯一途徑就是視覺數據顯示，虛擬現實環境會為他們提供態勢感知，並了解自己的選項，以便做出決策。
近年來，元宇宙的虛擬實境和擴增實境技術已納入美軍的常規軍事訓練。 2014年，南加州大學海軍研究辦公室和創意技術研究所開發的BlueShark項目，讓士兵在虛擬環境中協作配合，進行駕駛技術訓練；2018年，美陸軍與微軟合作開發了一款集成視覺增強系統IVAS ，供士兵進行常規訓練；2020年，美海軍又推出了復仇者計劃，透過虛擬現實、人工智慧以及生物識別技術，開展飛行課程培訓；2021年，波音公司打造了一個軍用飛機培訓系統，使維修人員利用AR技術進行相關模擬維修演練；2022年5月10日，兩名美軍戰鬥機飛行員乘坐噴射機，在加州沙漠上空完成了一次高空原型元宇宙實驗。透過特製的擴增實境顯示器，連接到一個虛擬加油飛機發光影像的電腦系統，使用虛擬加油機進行了加油操作。
（一）美軍大量採用虛擬實境技術進行軍事訓練
同時，俄羅斯在虛擬訓練系統的開發上也是領先者，其先進武器裝備幾乎都配有相應的虛擬訓練系統，並且正在朝著通用化和嵌入式的方向發展。如音色M通用虛擬訓練系統就是用於地對空飛彈武器系統作戰人員的通用虛擬訓練裝備。道爾M1型地對空飛彈系統也配備有專用虛擬訓練車，可在目標搜尋和武器作戰的同時完成戰地模擬訓練。

（二）道爾M1型地空飛彈系統也配備有專用虛擬訓練車
此外，其他國家也紛紛開始探索元宇宙技術與軍事訓練的結合。英陸軍一直致力於研究擴展實境技術的使用，可以讓30多名士兵處於相同的虛擬訓練場景。英國防部的「單一合成環境」已經在士兵訓練中使用了這項技術。在韓國，一家名為「擎天柱」的軍事訓練模擬器的開發商和供應商，在2019年完成了基於元宇宙技術的DEIMOS軍事訓練系統研發並應用於武裝部隊的訓練。該系統能夠為專業軍事訓練創造各種環境，包括精準射擊訓練、戰術行為訓練和觀察訓練。
二、軍事訓練元宇宙的內在優勢
軍事訓練乃是兵家常事，具體指武裝力量及其他受訓對象所進行的軍事理論及相關專業知識教育、作戰技能教練和軍事行動演練的活動。人工智慧、虛擬實境等技術的不斷革新，加速了未來戰爭的智慧化趨勢。傳統形式下的單一實戰演練將難以滿足新情勢下的作戰要求。而元宇宙作為一個龐大的新技術群，在軍事訓練中扮演越來越重要的角色。如果說訓練是戰鬥效能的重要支撐，那麼元宇宙在軍事訓練中的首要用途便是作為模擬訓練重要的「賦能器」。
沉浸式體驗能夠提升戰場環境模擬效能。軍事訓練作為實踐科學，訓練的核心在體驗，訓練的關鍵在沉浸。元宇宙所創造的虛擬空間，使人感受到一種“共同的具身在場感”，讓受訓者完全沉浸虛擬空間，體驗一場接近真實的戰爭。戰場環境模擬正是利用虛擬實境技術，透過電腦系統對取得的戰場要素資料如戰場地形、戰場人員、武器裝備等進行處理，最終創設出逼真的立體戰場環境。士兵們沉浸在沙漠、山區或高原的數位環境中，每個環境都有不同的戰術、技術和程序，士兵們可以不斷地演練任務。即便士兵不是在實際的戰場環境中，但這項技術足以還原環境的真實度，更重要的是透過戰場模擬訓練，不僅能夠讓士兵熟悉戰場環境，最大程度獲取信息，而且還能提升其多角度觀察事物、解決突發狀況的能力。美軍目前已研發出一款被稱為雷射沙盤的虛擬實境系統，能夠辨識和轉換衛星發回的照片和錄像，並將其轉變成逼真的立體地圖，將遠在千里外的戰場環境呈現給指揮員。在阿富汗戰爭和伊拉克戰爭前夕，美軍都採用了虛擬實境技術來打造真實的戰爭場景，包括戰地狀況、人員樣貌等。旨在讓士兵提前適應環境，提升作戰能力。

（一）元宇宙所創造的虛擬空間，使人感受到一種“共同的具身在場感”

（二）在阿富汗戰爭和伊拉克戰爭前夕，美軍都採用了虛擬實境技術打造真實的戰爭場景
開放式互聯較能支撐合成訓練開展。元宇宙生態系統各部分之間可以實現相互連接和操作，資訊可以暢通無阻地實現跨平台和跨世界傳輸（在虛擬世界之間或虛擬世界與現實世界之間）。合成訓練正是利用元宇宙技術的這一開放式互聯優勢，來實現實戰訓練的補充。根據統計，從2015年開始，美軍每年的非戰鬥死亡人數超出了在實際軍事行動中犧牲的人數，而在非戰鬥行動中喪生的人員很多是由常規軍事訓練造成的。因此，美陸軍已經開始採用元宇宙進行合成訓練，試圖建立虛擬合成訓練環境（STE）來減少訓練中的傷亡。從城市作戰到山地作戰，「合成訓練環境」將「即時、虛擬和建設性的訓練環境整合到一個單一的合成訓練環境中，並在有需要的地方向地面、運載和空中平台以及指揮所提供訓練功能」。實務證明，透過元宇宙建構的合成訓練環境，藉助多感官模擬還原，能夠幫助戰士突破理論學習和認知局限，提升團隊作戰協同、傷情處置和安全撤離等素質和能力。伊拉克戰爭前夕，駐紮在科威特的美軍就對伊拉克的城市狀況進行了合成訓練，增強了士兵城市作戰能力的同時，把實戰中的傷亡降到了最低。
想像性空間最大程度激發軍事訓練思維創新。戰爭演習自古就受到兵家重視，戰國時期墨子和公輸班「解帶為城」「木片為械」的推演遊戲將戰場上的真實情況演練出來，從而避免了兩軍交戰。在未來元宇宙開啟的深度場景時代，軍事體系將走向高度智慧化，作戰雙方或許能在戰場元宇宙進行戰爭推演，甚至在虛擬世界一決高下。推演雙方根據虛擬世界獲取的信息，透過聯想、推理和邏輯判斷等思維過程，對戰場風雲變化進行捕捉和預判，不僅有利於習得更多戰爭規律，還能夠鍛鍊士兵的邏輯推演能力。 1991年的海灣戰爭中，美軍就在實施「沙漠風暴」行動前，根據部隊的訓練水準和可能的戰爭進程，以及實際作戰所需時間進行了兵棋推演。實踐證明，美軍借助這次兵棋推演發現的問題，將作戰設想轉化為實際行動方案，最終取得勝利。這也充分說明了真實的戰場充滿了種種不確定性，因此需要透過不斷進行戰爭演習來做好充分準備。毋庸置疑，敵我雙方在現實世界中進行協同推演幾乎是不可能的，但若敵我雙方的兵力部署可以被各自的衛星、空中和地面偵查設備進行一定程度的公開，那麼在某個時間節點，在即將爆發軍事危機的雙方或多方之間，先在元宇宙中進行排兵布陣，可以化解現實的軍事衝突則有望實現。
元宇宙技術在軍事訓練中的應用不僅可以避免訓練中的人員意外傷亡，還可以讓單一或眾多參訓者在足不出戶，無需實際接觸便可在不同虛擬環境下完成訓練任務。而這種非接觸式訓練在新冠疫情的常規化形態下，所扮演的角色更加明顯。
三、軍事訓練元宇宙的潛在風險
元宇宙在很大程度上雖然為軍事訓練提供技術支撐，但絕不能僅僅將其簡單地理解為一種訓練項目，或者被認為是一種開展訓練的手段。即使元宇宙技術為軍事訓練帶來便利和創新，也不能忽視科技本身及其伴生的挑戰和不確定性。
元宇宙技術發展或引發安全問題。元宇宙是一個龐大的技術群，其體系架構、核心演算法和沈浸技術等尚處於不斷開發的階段，配套產業、價值共識、管理標準等還沒有達成，總的來說，元宇宙還是一個新事物，在軍事訓練中的應用更是如此。儘管使用虛擬訓練系統能夠在一定程度上減少傷亡，但值得思考的是這樣的訓練是否能夠真正用於作戰現場，目前仍是一個未知數。而技術在運作中是否夠安全也是一個亟待解決的問題。虛擬城市訓練專家公司的詹姆斯·克勞利指出，電腦能力可能是其中最有影響力的部分，除非可以將延遲降低到不會讓人不適並且感覺真實的程度，除非可以在不同的模擬器中儲存不同人之間的行動和通訊數據，否則將無法提供實用的訓練工具。同時，另一個擺在眼前的挑戰則是在開放的元宇宙虛擬世界中，不同國家軍隊之間相互接觸的安全問題。
虛擬訓練環境易造成認知錯覺。元宇宙世界裡的軍事訓練是人類智力和技術較量的結果，在虛擬環境下進行的戰爭推演、軍事訓練等對未來戰爭的作用，如同「核武」一般，不用動用實槍實彈也能起到強大的威懾效果。儘管在生理層面彌補了人的有限感官，同時也帶來了受訓者在心理上的認知錯覺。以無人作戰的軍事訓練為例，長期在虛擬系統下進行作戰訓練，將會造成操縱者的遊戲心態。由於視聽感官與真實戰場情況脫節，而疏離了現實的人與社會，對於剝奪他人生命的行為產生麻木心態。隨著元宇宙技術的不斷成熟，虛擬世界、現實世界的互動將會越來越緊密，形成虛實難分的混合世界。到那時，不僅對士兵的認知心理造成區分困境，對於未來的軍事訓練也是重大挑戰。
元宇宙「去中心化」與傳統軍事訓練結構相背離。在元宇宙的世界中，參與各方都是經過電腦處理、資料化後產生的地位平等的虛擬主體，可以在元宇宙中自主活動，因而其追求「去中心化」。但傳統的軍事訓練組織結構則是高度集中、自上而下的分層化管理，這一方面與元宇宙的價值需求是背離的。美軍在追求“去中心化”作戰上做出了很多努力，如20世紀90年代提出的“網絡中心戰”，以及當前的分散式殺傷以及馬賽克戰等。但傳統的軍事訓練結構和思維慣性仍然是「去中心化」的阻力，而這種情況普遍存在於各國軍隊。
尤瓦爾·赫拉利在《人類簡史》中談道，人類靠著的是虛構和想像的能力征服世界。元宇宙給了我們虛構和想像的能力，同時元宇宙在軍事訓練領域的不確定性也增加了恐懼的成分。因此，我們必須關注創新科技理論、發展元宇宙前沿科技，不斷激發軍事訓練元宇宙的潛力，同時完善相關法律法規和道德倫理規約，為打贏未來智慧化戰爭做好超前準備。
版權聲明：本文刊於2023年1期《軍事文摘》雜誌，作者：張愷悅、李傑春，如需轉載請務必註明「轉自《軍事文摘》」。

中國軍事原文來源：http://www.81it.com/2023/0321/14167.html

Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Dissipative Warfare, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 認知域戰, 認知戰

Chinese Military Analysis on the Application of Metaverse in Military Communication

Leave a comment

中國軍事分析虛擬宇宙在軍事通訊的應用

現代英語翻譯:

Abstract: Metaverse, as an innovative concept of the clustering effect of advanced technologies, will become the key to future media content production and cognitive advantage. Looking forward to the development prospects of Metaverse, this article explains the concept of Metaverse and analyzes its development prospects, key technologies and practical applications, aiming to provide reference for the application of Metaverse in the field of military communication.

Keywords: Metaverse; Military Communication; Development Prospects

The Metaverse has become a hot topic that people are competing to talk about, and has been selected as one of the “Top Ten Internet Terms of 2021”. Globally renowned Internet companies from Facebook to ByteDance are all planning the Metaverse. The 2022 Russia-Ukraine conflict was called a “public opinion war” and “cognitive war” with various means by domestic and foreign public opinion experts. Some experts even exclaimed that cognitive domain warfare in the form of the Metaverse has begun. The Metaverse, as an innovative concept of the clustering effect of advanced technology, will become the key to future media content production and gaining cognitive advantages. Exploring the application of the Metaverse in the field of military communication has become an important topic in the era of omnimedia.

1. The special functions of the metaverse determine its broad development prospects

Metaverse was born in the 1992 science fiction novel Snow Crash. The Metaverse described in the novel is a virtual shared space parallel to the real world. According to relevant information, as early as 1990, Qian Xuesen had a vision of virtual reality and Metaverse, and gave it a very meaningful name – “Spirit Realm”. Four years later, Qian Xuesen specifically mentioned: “Spirit Realm technology is another technological revolution after the computer technology revolution. It will trigger a series of changes that will shock the world and must be a major event in human history.” Qian Xuesen had already foreseen that Metaverse-related technologies would bring profound changes to human society.

From originating from science fiction to entering reality, the industry has not yet reached a consensus on the definition of the metaverse. According to the research of relevant experts, the essential characteristics of the metaverse are two: virtual-real integration and immersive experience. Virtual-real integration means that the boundary between the digital world and the physical world gradually disappears, and the economy, life, assets and identity of the two worlds are fully integrated. Immersive experience means that people’s two-dimensional audio-visual experience of the Internet is expanded into a three-dimensional, immersive, full-sensory experience. The special functions of the metaverse determine its broad development prospects.

The Metaverse is the next generation of the Internet. Looking back at the development of the Internet, from PC Internet to mobile Internet, the sense of immersion when using the Internet has gradually increased, and the distance between virtual and reality has gradually shortened. Under this trend, the Metaverse, where both immersion and participation have reached their peak, may be the “ultimate form” of the Internet. Regarding the future development of the Metaverse, some experts predict that: in terms of hardware terminals, with the portable development of wearable devices such as VR/AR glasses, their popularity will increase significantly, and people will gradually adapt to and accept the larger visual range and more natural interaction methods brought by new devices; in terms of content ecology and application scenarios, explosive Metaverse content will continue to emerge, and application scenarios will gradually expand. In the Metaverse, user experience has achieved an improvement and transformation from “online” to “presence”, thus entering the “scenario era”.

The metaverse is a new type of holographic medium. With the development of media technology, the presentation of media content has evolved from one-dimensional, two-dimensional to multi-dimensional. The emergence of the metaverse is another revolution in communication media after radio, television, and the Internet. From the perspective of user experience, the metaverse not only expands the user’s experience space, but also brings an immersive experience of “you are not just watching the content, you are in it as a whole”. From the perspective of media products, a large number of “we are on the scene” news media products will appear in the metaverse. The media products of the metaverse will achieve the advancement of news content with immersive narratives. For example, major sudden incident reports, large-scale live events, news documentaries, etc., can make the complete news scene into a digital scene of the metaverse, allowing the audience to enter the scene from various perspectives for experience. From the perspective of communication methods, there are currently four main modes of information communication: mass communication, network communication, social communication, and intelligent communication. The arrival of the new media of the metaverse will enrich the means of information communication in the era of intelligent communication, and “holographic communication” will become possible.

The metaverse is the future battlefield of cognitive domain warfare. The essence of communication media is the communication platform and channel, which is the material basis and main weapon of cognitive narrative in cognitive domain warfare. The 2022 Russia-Ukraine conflict was reported to the world in countless “first-person perspectives”. Both Russia and Ukraine spoke out on online media and social platforms to compete for the dominance of international communication cognitive narrative. As a new type of holographic medium, the metaverse transmits cognition in a full-dimensional, full-system and immersive way. It can shape people’s thinking and cognition more comprehensively, deeply and lastingly, and has immeasurable application value in cognitive warfare. In addition, the metaverse provides a parallel cognitive space that digitally twins real combat scenarios, where cognitive warfare can be efficiently promoted and presented in a panoramic manner.

2. A Preliminary Study on the Application of Metaverse in the Field of Military Communication

Like other new technologies, the metaverse was quickly applied to the field of military communication. The PLA News and Communication Center made a bold attempt and launched the “Holographic Military Newspaper” during the National People’s Congress for three consecutive years. It used technologies such as extended reality and digital construction to show a newspaper full of futuristic atmosphere: you can wear VR glasses to experience the “Holographic Military Newspaper” immersively, or you can watch it through your mobile phone. The “Holographic Military Newspaper” is the first of its kind in the domestic newspaper publishing industry and has been selected as an innovative case of deep integration and development of China’s newspaper industry. During the 2021 National People’s Congress, the center also launched the military media intelligent cartoon virtual person “Xiaojun”, which realized the same-screen interaction between 3D cartoons and real people. In 2022, the center and the Art Department of the PLA Culture and Art Center jointly launched the “2022 Metaverse Military Camp Network Spring Festival Gala”, which used metaverse technology to build a virtual space and interactive platform. Netizens and audiences can enter the three-dimensional virtual space by avatars, visit the performance site, and choose their favorite seats to watch the Spring Festival Gala. They can also interact with the audience around them through language and gestures. Some netizens commented: “It’s so shocking! The literary and artistic light cavalry team expressed it in the form of the metaverse, which shows the advancement of technology!” In addition, the center’s network department also took the lead in launching the public welfare NFT digital collection “Stars Accompany Me to Guard the Border”.

At present, the military-related authoritative media is organizing a team to promote the preliminary research and design of the Metaverse Editorial Department. Looking at the development process from traditional news editorial departments to intelligent editorial departments, combined with the advanced technology and future development of the Metaverse, experts have proposed the concept of “Metaverse Editorial Department”, that is, “Metaverse Editorial Department” enables editors and reporters at multiple locations to efficiently complete planning, interviews, editing, publishing and other tasks “face to face” in the same virtual space, the same chain of command, and the same work system. This will be the evolution of the news editorial department in the future. Each editor and reporter has his or her own virtual workspace. When there is a need for a meeting discussion, they can instantly travel to the virtual conference room for “face-to-face” communication.

3. Thoughts on how to win the cognitive war in the metaverse

A major feature of the 2022 Russia-Ukraine conflict is the deep involvement of social media. Mobile Internet has become the main source of information related to this conflict. As mentioned earlier, the special functions of the metaverse determine its broad development prospects. How to win the cognitive war in the metaverse urgently requires us to think forward-lookingly.

Strive to achieve the autonomy and control of the core technologies of the future metaverse. As a pioneering and innovative frontier field, the metaverse has huge initial R&D costs and requires long-term and continuous high investment to achieve the docking and unification of massive standards and specifications and the connection and interaction of ultra-large-scale users. This also leads to the inherent monopoly gene of the metaverse. At present, American companies such as Facebook, Google, and Microsoft, with the support of their governments and military, have deeply laid out the metaverse, and are very likely to become the technology monopolist and ruler of the future metaverse, just like the current situation of the Internet. In this Russia-Ukraine conflict, these technology giants “one-sidedly” pointed their spearheads at Russia, restricted or even banned Russia from using its technology products, and provided support for the United States to impose comprehensive sanctions. This warns us that in order not to be constrained in technology in the future, we should concentrate the superior forces of the military and the local area, aim at the metaverse technology, work together to tackle key problems, and strive to achieve the autonomy and control of the core technologies of the future metaverse.

Develop a metaverse platform that adapts to cognitive warfare. Developing a metaverse platform that is autonomous, controllable, has a wide coverage, and has a great influence is the key to winning in the cognitive domain battlefield in the future. Back to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, in order to suppress Russia from public opinion, American social platforms such as YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook, at the instruction of the US officials, directly restricted the exposure of Russian media. It can be said that they have taken advantage of the platform at the cognitive warfare level. This requires us to actively think about the future form of military communication platforms, develop metaverse platforms that adapt to cognitive warfare, and strive to create explosive products. For example, launching a metaverse version of the military’s new media platform.

We should speed up the production and accumulation of immersive content suitable for the era of the Metaverse. In addition to the traditional visible content types, content creation in the Metaverse era has also added a large amount of three-dimensional content, including panoramic shooting, digital twins of the real world, artificial construction of virtual space, and the display of virtual digital people. It is an issue that needs to be considered at present to speed up the production and accumulation of immersive content suitable for the era of the Metaverse. For example, the creation of digital history museums, the creation of heroic virtual people, the reproduction of classic battles, etc., can truly make history “perceptible” and make cultural relics “speaking”. In addition, the independent research and development of content creation tools is also critical.

國語中文：

摘 要：元宇宙作為先進技術群聚效應的創新概念，將成為未來媒體內容生產、贏得認知優勢的關鍵。展望元宇宙發展前景，本文闡釋了元宇宙概念，並圍繞其發展圖景、關鍵技術和實踐應用進行闡釋分析，旨在為元宇宙在軍事傳播領域的應用提供借鑒參考。

關鍵字：元宇宙；軍事傳播；發展前景

元宇宙，目前成為人們競相談論的熱門話題，並入選了「2021年度十大網路用語」。從Facebook到位元組跳動等全球知名網路公司都在版面元宇宙。 2022年的俄烏衝突被國內外輿論戰專家稱作是一場手段多樣的“輿論戰”“認知戰”，有專家甚至驚呼元宇宙形態下的認知域作戰拉開了序幕。元宇宙，作為先進技術群聚效應的創新概念，將成為未來媒體內容生產、贏得認知優勢的關鍵。探尋元宇宙在軍事傳播領域的應用，成為全媒體時代一門重要課題。

一、元宇宙的特殊功能決定了其廣闊的發展前景

元宇宙（Metaverse），誕生於1992年的科幻小說《雪崩》。小說中所描述的元宇宙是一個平行於現實世界的虛擬共享空間。根據相關資料顯示，早在1990年，錢學森就對虛擬實境與元宇宙有過展望，並為其起了個頗有意境的名字—「靈境」。 4年後，錢學森特別提到：「靈境技術是繼電腦科技革命之後的另一場科技革命。它將引發一系列震撼全世界的變革，一定是人類歷史中的大事。」錢學森當時就已預見元宇宙相關技術將對人類社會帶來的深層變革。

從源自科幻到走進現實，業界對於元宇宙的定義還沒能達成共識。根據相關專家的研究，認為元宇宙的本質特徵是兩個：虛實融合和沈浸體驗。虛實融合，就是數位世界和實體世界的邊界逐漸消失，實現兩個世界的經濟、生活、資產和身分認同等全方位的融合。沉浸體驗，就是人們對網路的二維視聽體驗拓展為三維立體、沉浸式的全感官體驗。元宇宙的特殊功能決定了其廣闊的發展前景。

元宇宙是下一代互聯網。回顧網路的發展歷程，從PC互聯網到行動互聯網，使用網路時的沉浸感逐漸提升，虛擬與現實的距離也逐漸縮短。在此趨勢下，沉浸感和參與度都達到高峰的元宇宙或是網路的「終極形態」。對於元宇宙的未來發展，有專家預計：硬體終端方面，隨著VR/AR眼鏡等穿戴設備的便攜化發展，其普及程度將大幅度提高,人們逐漸適應和接受新設備帶來的更大的視覺範圍和更自然的互動方式；內容生態及應用場景方面，爆款元宇宙內容將不斷湧現，應用場景也將逐步拓展。在元宇宙中，使用者體驗實現了從「線上」到「在場」的提升和轉變，從而進入「場景時代」。

元宇宙是新型全息媒介。隨著媒介技術的發展，媒體內容的呈現方式從一維、二維到多維不斷演進。元宇宙的出現，是繼廣播、電視、網路之後傳播媒介的另一次革命。從使用者體驗來看，元宇宙不僅拓展了使用者的體驗空間，也帶來了「你不只是觀看內容，你整個人就身在其中」的沉浸式體驗。從媒體產品來看，元宇宙將出現大量「我們在現場」式的新聞媒體產品。元宇宙的媒體產品將以沉浸式敘事實現新聞內容的進階。例如，重大突發事件報導、大型現場活動、新聞紀錄片等，可以將完整的新聞現場做成元宇宙的一個數位場景，讓觀眾以各種視角進入現場進行體驗。從傳播方式來看，目前，訊息傳播主要有4種傳播模式：大眾傳播、網路傳播、社交傳播、智慧傳播。元宇宙新型媒介的到來將使得智慧傳播時代訊息傳播的手段更為豐富，「全像傳播」成為可能。

元宇宙是認知域作戰的未來戰場。傳播媒介實質就是傳播平台和管道，是認知域作戰中認知敘事的物質基礎和主要武器。 2022年的俄烏衝突以無數「第一視角」的方式向全球報道，俄烏雙方都在網路媒體和社群平台發聲，爭奪國際傳播認知敘事主導權。元宇宙作為新型全像媒介，其傳導認知的方式是全維度、全系統和沈浸式的，能夠更全面、更深入、更持久地塑造人的思維認知，具有不可估量的認知戰應用價值。另外，元宇宙提供了一個將現實作戰場景數位孿生的平行認知空間，在這裡認知戰得以高效率推進和全景式呈現。

二、元宇宙在軍事傳播領域的應用初探

和其他新技術的產生一樣，元宇宙也很快被應用於軍事傳播領域。解放軍新聞傳播中心進行了大膽嘗試，連續3年在全國兩會期間推出的“全息軍報”，運用擴展現實、數字構建等技術，展示了一份充滿未來氣息的報紙：可以佩戴VR眼鏡沉浸式體驗“全息軍報”，也可以透過手機觀看。 「全像軍報」是國內報紙出版業的首創，入選了中國報業深度融合發展創新案例。 2021年全國兩會期間，該中心還推出軍媒智慧卡通虛擬人“小軍”，實現了3D卡通與現實人物的同屏互動。 2022年，該中心和解放軍文化藝術中心文藝部共同推出的“2022年元宇宙軍營網絡春晚”，利用元宇宙技術搭建虛擬空間和互動平台。網友觀眾化身虛擬人即可進入立體虛擬空間，參觀演出現場，並自行選擇喜好的座位觀看春晚，還可以跟著周圍的觀眾進行語言和手勢互動。有網友評價：「太震撼了！文藝輕騎以元宇宙的形式表現，真是科技在進步！」另外，該中心網絡部還率先推出了公益性NFT數字藏品《星星伴我守邊防》。

目前，軍隊相關權威媒體正在組織團隊推進元宇宙編輯部的前期研究和設計。縱觀傳統新聞編輯部到智慧編輯部的發展歷程，結合元宇宙先進技術和未來發展，專家提出了「元宇宙編輯部」的概念，即「元宇宙編輯部」使多點位的編輯記者在同一虛擬空間、同一指揮鏈、同一工作體系裡「面對面」有效率地完成規劃、訪談、編輯、發布等工作。這將是未來新聞編輯部的進化形態，每個編輯記者都擁有各自的虛擬工作空間，當有會議討論需求時，可以瞬間穿越到虛擬會議室進行「面對面」交流。

三、如何在元宇宙中打贏認知戰的思考

2022年俄烏衝突的一個主要特徵，是社群媒體的深度參與。行動互聯網成了這次衝突關聯資訊的主要來源。如前所述，元宇宙的特殊功能決定了其廣闊的發展前景。如何在元宇宙中打贏認知戰，迫切需要我們做前瞻性思考。

努力實現未來元宇宙核心技術的自主可控。元宇宙作為開拓性和創新性的前沿領域，前期研發成本龐大，需要長期且持續的高額投資，以實現大量標準規範的對接統一、超大規模用戶的連結互動。這也導致了元宇宙具有內在壟斷基因。目前，Facebook、Google、微軟等美國公司在其政府和軍方的支持下，深入佈局元宇宙，極大可能成為未來元宇宙的技術壟斷者和統治者，就像現在互聯網的情況一樣。在這次俄烏衝突中，上述這些科技巨頭「一邊倒」地將矛頭對準俄羅斯，限制甚至禁止俄羅斯使用其科技產品，為美國實施全面製裁施壓提供了支撐。這警告我們，為了將來在技術上不被掣肘，應該集中軍地優勢力量，瞄準元宇宙技術，協力攻關，努力實現未來元宇宙核心技術的自主可控。

發展適應認知戰的元宇宙平台。開發自主可控、覆蓋範圍廣、影響力大的元宇宙平台，是未來在認知域戰場上取得勝利的關鍵。回到俄烏衝突中，為了從輿論上打壓俄羅斯，YouTube、Twitter和Facebook等美國的社群平台在美國官方的授意下，直接限制了俄羅斯媒體的曝光率，可以說在認知戰層面佔盡了平台優勢。這就需要我們主動思考未來軍隊傳播平台型態，開發適應認知戰的元宇宙平台，努力打造爆款產品。例如，推出軍隊新媒體平台的元宇宙版本等。

抓緊生產與累積適合元宇宙時代的沉浸式內容。元宇宙時代的內容創作除了傳統可見的內容類型外，還大量增加了三維內容，包括全景拍攝、真實世界的數位孿生、虛擬空間的人工構建、虛擬數位人的展示等等。抓緊生產和累積適合元宇宙時代的沉浸式內容，是當前需要重點考慮的問題。例如，製作數位史館、打造英雄虛擬人、復現經典戰例等等，真正實現讓歷史「可感知」、讓文物「會說話」。另外，內容創作工具的自主研發也很關鍵。

（作者單位：解放軍新聞傳播中心網絡部）

中國軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/rmjz_203219/jsjz/2022nd5q_242715/tbch_242721/10193529.html

Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Future Wars, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Dissipative Warfare, Intelligent Warfare, Mosaic Warfare, 中國的情報戰, 中國認知戰和領域作戰, 中國軍事認知戰, 認知域戰, 認知戰

Chinese Military to Emphasize Technical Cognition as The Foundation for Victory

Leave a comment

中國軍隊強調技術認知是勝利的基礎

現代英文音譯：

Never before has scientific and technological power had such a profound impact on the future of the military and the outcome of wars, and never before has it been such a powerful support for a strong military to win wars.

The so-called technological cognition is the ability to recognize and grasp the performance, value and development trend of technology with the goal of promoting scientific and technological innovation and application, which is prominently reflected in the sensitivity, understanding, discrimination and control of technology. In today’s era, science and technology are becoming the core combat power of modern warfare, and the technological content has become a key indicator for measuring the quality of military construction. Faced with unprecedented opportunities and challenges, if technological cognition cannot adapt to the new requirements of the development of the times, it will be difficult to inject momentum into the generation and improvement of combat power, and it will be difficult to win the important weight to win the future.

Improving technical cognition is not only a “question to be answered” for professional and technical personnel, but also a “must-choose question” for every officer and soldier. From the perspective of the realization process of technical value and effectiveness, if the invention and creation of technology is “primary value”, then the effective use of technology is “secondary value”. Accelerating the pace of scientific and technological innovation depends on the broadening of the knowledge horizons of professional and technical personnel, keeping a close eye on the forefront of science and technology, and constantly making new breakthroughs in the research and development of forward-looking, strategic, and disruptive technologies. With more new inventions and creations in the field of military science and technology, we can increase our contribution to the construction of the army and the growth of combat effectiveness, and actively seize the commanding heights of military technology competition. The transformation and application of scientific and technological achievements depends on the officers and soldiers, especially the leading cadres at all levels, to speed up the updating of knowledge and improve their scientific and technological literacy, so as to enhance and tap the application value of technology with scientific cognition and thorough understanding of science and technology, ensure that scientific and technological achievements are transformed into real combat effectiveness, and improve the ability to prepare for war at a higher starting point and level. Obviously, from scientific and technological innovation to scientific and technological application, it is a “value-added” process that is closely connected, mutually promoted, and focused. It is a process of seeking to win through science and technology and releasing the combat effectiveness of technology to a greater extent. Technical cognition is the internal support that runs through it and demonstrates people’s active role and creative talent. We must take improving the scientific and technological literacy of officers and soldiers as a basic task. We must have political and military minds as well as scientific and technological minds. Scientific and technological literacy and scientific and technological thinking are based on and built on technological cognition. The higher the technological cognition, the stronger the innovation and creativity in the use of science and technology, and the greater the effect of promoting the growth of combat effectiveness.

Improving technical cognition is not only the key to mastering modern weapons and equipment, but also the move to accelerate the innovation of military theory and combat theory. With the rapid development of military technology, especially emerging technologies such as information, intelligence, stealth, and unmanned, the high-tech content of weapons and equipment is getting higher and higher, the replacement cycle is getting shorter and shorter, and the correlation and coupling between various types of weapons and equipment are getting stronger and stronger, and the system application characteristics are becoming more and more prominent. From a realistic perspective, insufficient technical cognition is a prominent shortcoming that restricts the mastery and use of weapons and equipment, and there is even a phenomenon that troops cannot “play” without the accompanying support of manufacturer technical personnel in exercises. Facing the new development trend of weapons and equipment, from mastering skills to exploring potential, from enhancing the effectiveness of systematic application to improving the ability of actual combat application, it is inseparable from improving technical cognition, thereby realizing the organic combination of people and weapons and equipment and obtaining a new “growth pole” in combat capability. It should also be noted that modern technology is penetrating into the military field with unprecedented strength, depth and breadth. The new military technology form accelerates the reconstruction of military theory and military system form, bringing about the deep interaction and deep integration of military technology and military theory, making technical cognition the “catalyst” of new combat theory. Practice has shown that without a thorough understanding of aviation technology, there will be no air combat theories such as air superiority; without a thorough understanding of information technology, there will be no information combat theories such as information superiority; without a thorough understanding of space technology, there will be no space combat theories such as “high frontier”. Similarly, if there is a lack of thorough understanding of the new features of artificial intelligence such as data-driven, human-machine collaboration, cross-border integration, and autonomous control, it will be impossible to create new theories and tactics such as intelligent combat and unmanned combat. Only with a technological cognitive advantage can we truly transform the military technology advantage into a theoretical leadership advantage and even a battlefield victory advantage.

Improving technology awareness is not only a way to distinguish the authenticity of technology and guard against technology fraud, but also a need to keenly perceive the development trend of military science and technology. It is worth being highly vigilant that Western media often promote and hype some so-called new technologies and new concepts, playing specious tricks. If you lack the ability to discern, cannot distinguish the true from the false, and believe everything you hear, you will inevitably fall into the technology trap set by others and become passive. Back then, the Soviet Union was led by the nose by the “Star Wars Plan” of the United States, and was confused by the Americans’ hype and deliberate fraud, which ultimately affected the entire military combat capability construction and the lesson was extremely painful. In the face of new opportunities and challenges brought about by the new round of scientific and technological revolution, we must maintain a high degree of technical acumen and insight, recognize the dominant direction and characteristics of the times in the development of military science and technology, and accurately grasp the trend of weapons and equipment developing in the direction of long-range precision, intelligence, stealth, and unmanned. The continuous emergence of disruptive technologies is profoundly changing the mode of generating combat power. Trend: new breakthroughs in high-tech will accelerate the development of new combat forces. Those military technologies that “change the rules of the game” will accelerate the evolution of war forms and combat methods. The integration of military technology and civilian technology is becoming deeper and deeper. We will strive to plan according to the situation, act according to the situation, and follow the trend, and make greater efforts to promote the development of the military through science and technology. Only by deepening the research on war and combat issues from the perspective of technological change, recognizing and grasping the characteristics, laws and winning mechanisms of informationized warfare from the influence of scientific and technological factors, and seeking breakthroughs in the innovation of combat theories and tactics by tapping into the effectiveness of technology, can we promote the precise and effective implementation of the strategy of developing the military through science and technology, lay a solid foundation and increase confidence for our military to remain invincible in future wars.

國語 中文:

●科技力量從未像今天這樣深刻影響軍隊未來和戰爭勝負，從未像今天這樣成為強軍勝戰的強力支撐。

所謂技術認知力，是以推動科技創新和運用為指向，對技術的性能功效、價值作用及發展趨勢的認識和把握能力，突出體現為對技術的敏銳度、理解力、甄別力、駕馭力。在當今時代，科技正成為現代戰爭的核心戰鬥力，科技含量成為衡量軍隊建設品質的關鍵指標。面對前所未有的機會與挑戰，如果技術認知力無法適應時代發展的新要求，就難以為戰鬥力的生成與提升注入動力，也難以贏得制勝未來的重要砝碼。

提高技術認知力，不僅是專業技術人員的“應答題”，更是每位官兵的“必選題”。從技術價值效能的實現過程來看，如果說技術的發明創造是“一次賦值”，那麼技術的有效運用就是“二次賦值”。加速科技創新步伐，有賴於廣大專業技術人員拓寬知識視野、緊盯科技前沿，不斷在前瞻性、戰略性、顛覆性技術的研發上取得新突破，以更多軍事科技領域的新發明新創造，提高對軍隊建設和戰鬥力成長的貢獻率，積極搶佔軍事技術競爭的製高點。實現科技成果的轉化應用，有賴於廣大官兵特別是各級領導幹部加快知識更新、提高科技素養，以對科技的科學認知、透徹理解，去提升和挖掘技術的應用價值，確保科技成果轉化為實實在在的戰鬥力，在更高起點和層次上提升備戰打仗能力。顯然，從科技創新到科技運用，是一個緊密銜接、相互促進、聚向發力的「賦值」過程，是一個謀求科技制勝、更大程度釋放技術作戰效能的過程，而技術認知力是貫穿其中彰顯人的能動作用、創造才能的內在支撐。要把提高官兵科技素養當作基礎性工作來抓。我們既要有政治頭腦、軍事頭腦，也要有科技頭腦。科技素養、科技頭腦以技術認知力為基礎和底蘊，技術認知力越高，運用科技的創新創造力就越強，促進戰鬥力增長的效應就越大。

提陞技術認知力，不僅是駕馭現代化武器裝備之要，更是加速推進軍事理論及作戰理論創新之舉。隨著軍事技術特別是資訊、智慧、隱形、無人等新興技術的快速發展，武器裝備高新技術含量越來越高，更新換代週期越來越短，且各型武器裝備之間的關聯度、耦合度越來越強，體系運用特點越來越突出。從現實來看，技術認知力不足是製約武器裝備掌握與運用的突出短板，甚至會出現部隊演訓離開廠家技術人員伴隨保障就「玩不轉」的現象。面對武器裝備發展的新態勢，從熟練技能到發掘潛能，從增強體系化運用效能到提升實戰化運用能力，都離不開通過提高技術認知力，進而實現人與武器裝備有機結合併獲得作戰能力新的「增長極」。也應看到，現代科技正以前所未有的力度、深度和廣度向軍事領域滲透，新的軍事技術形態加速推動軍事理論和軍事制度形態的重構，帶來軍事科技與軍事理論的深層互動、深度融合，使技術認知力成為新的作戰理論的「催生劑」。實踐表明，如果沒有對航空技術的透徹認知力，便不會有製空權等空戰理論的產生；如果沒有對信息技術的透徹認知力，便不會有製信息權等信息作戰理論的產生；如果沒有對空間技術的透徹認知力，便不會有「高邊疆」等太空作戰理論的產生。同樣，當下如果對人工智慧具有的數據驅動、人機協同、跨界融合、自主操控等新特徵缺乏透徹認知，就創造不出智慧作戰、無人作戰等新理論新戰法。有了技術認知優勢，才能真正把軍事技術優勢轉化為理論引領優勢，直到戰場制勝優勢。

提陞技術認知力，不僅是甄別技術真偽、謹防技術欺詐之策，更是敏銳洞察軍事科技發展趨向走勢之需。值得高度警覺的是，西方媒體常常宣傳炒作一些所謂的新技術新概念，玩弄似是而非的障眼法，如果缺乏甄別力，辨不清真偽，聽風就是雨，就難免落入他人設置的技術陷阱，造成被動局面。當年，蘇聯被美國搞的「星球大戰計畫」牽著鼻子走，被美國人的大肆渲染、故意欺詐弄得暈頭轉向，最後影響了整個軍事作戰能力建設，教訓極為慘痛。面對新一輪科技革命帶來的新機遇、新挑戰，必須保持高度的技術敏銳度和洞察力，認清軍事科技發展的主導方向和時代特徵，準確把握武器裝備向遠程精確化、智能化、隱身化、無人化方向發展的趨勢，不斷湧現的顛覆性技術正深刻改變戰鬥力生成模式的趨勢，高新技術的新突破將加快推進新型作戰力量發展的趨勢，那些「改變遊戲規則」的軍事技術將加速戰爭形態和作戰方式嬗變的趨勢，軍用技術和民用技術的融合度越來越深的趨勢，努力做到因勢而謀、應勢而動、順勢而為，下更大氣力推動科技興軍。惟有善於從技術變革視角去深化戰爭和作戰問題研究，從科技因素影響去認識和把握資訊化戰爭的特點規律、制勝機理，從挖掘技術效能去尋求作戰理論和戰法創新的突破，才能推動科技興軍精準落地、有效落實，為我軍在未來戰爭中立於不敗之地夯實基礎、增添底氣。

中國軍事資料來源： http://www.mod.gov.cn/gfbw/jmsd/4845888.html