Tag Archives: #cyber #warfare

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, #quantum computing warfare, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Combat Planning, Information Support Force

Studying military affairs, studying war, studying combat | A brief analysis of the intrinsic mechanism by which work style empowers combat effectiveness

Leave a comment

學軍事、學戰爭、學戰鬥|淺析作風賦能戰鬥力的內在機制

現代英語：

President Xi Jinping pointed out, “For our military to become strong, its conduct must be impeccable.” Conduct is the intrinsic support and important source of combat effectiveness; excellent conduct can forge heroic troops, while lax conduct can destroy a victorious army. From an internal mechanism perspective, conduct is deeply rooted in all aspects of troop building and runs through the entire process of preparing for and fighting wars, profoundly influencing the generation and improvement of combat effectiveness. We must deeply grasp this ironclad rule that “excellent conduct is essential for forging heroic troops,” clarify the mechanism by which superior conduct is transformed into a winning advantage, and forge an invincible combat capability.

As an armed group carrying out political tasks, the military forms a powerful combat capability by following the mechanism of “excellent conduct—obedience to command—cohesive force.”

Political nature is an essential attribute of the military. Military conduct is the concrete manifestation of political requirements in the military’s behavioral patterns. The powerful combat capability it generates stems from the integrative role of politics: through the shaping of unified values, it solidifies individual will into a highly consistent collective will; through strict discipline, it ensures the military possesses the organizational and disciplined nature to obey orders; and through establishing common goals, it provides a tenacious fighting will and psychological foundation for charging into battle. The political nature’s requirements on military conduct forge the military into a politically unified whole, ensuring that the military possesses combat capabilities commensurate with the performance of its fundamental functions.

The generation of military combat effectiveness relies on the integration of individual strength under political guidance, and the principle of “excellent conduct—obedience to command—cohesive force” is precisely the logical manifestation of this principle. Excellent conduct is the “soft power” and spiritual foundation of military combat effectiveness. Firm political beliefs, unified value pursuits, and tenacious fighting spirit shape the collective character of soldiers, laying the ideological and political foundation for building a unified will. Furthermore, obedience to command becomes a conscious behavior, and the command system transforms spiritual power into orderly action through strict adherence to orders, transforming the troops from a “scattered” to a “formation,” and from “disorganized” to “organized.” When political beliefs are internalized and political and military orders are externalized, all members can form a coordinated and synergistic force under a common goal. This deep integration of will, wisdom, and action forms a complete chain from individual political cultivation to the collective combat power of the army, reflecting the general law of the army moving from “governance” to “strength”, and ultimately achieving an increase in overall combat effectiveness.

In informationized and intelligent warfare, the influence and constraints of political factors on war are becoming increasingly prominent, while autonomous operations and intelligent command and decision-making will be applied at an accelerated pace. The more emphasis is placed on autonomous decision-making at the tactical level, the more necessary it is to solidify the “guiding star” of political leadership and strictly prevent technological logic from diluting political logic. Strict political and organizational discipline must be enforced to internalize obedience to command as a sacred belief, imbuing intelligent command systems with a political soul, and maximizing concerted efforts to gain the initiative on the future battlefield.

The military’s primary responsibility is preparing for and fighting wars, and it forges its core combat capabilities by following the mechanism of “excellent conduct—diligent training—combat readiness.”

The military is born of war and exists for war; preparing for and fighting war is the ultimate manifestation of its fundamental function and value. The brutality, uncertainty, and coordination of combat demand that the military cultivate a disciplined and unwavering style of discipline through rigorous, realistic training, ensuring precise implementation of orders and a high degree of uniformity in action. It must maintain a spirit of courage and fearlessness, breaking through battlefield limits with the will to face life and death, and resisting the erosion of combat effectiveness by fear and retreat. It must adhere to a pragmatic approach, strictly yet flexibly implementing tactical norms, avoiding the damage to combat effectiveness caused by dogmatism and formalism. When the style of conduct is deeply aligned with the needs of combat in real-world training, it can open up the transformation channel from preparation for war to victory, and forge an elite force that is deterred from war and capable of fighting and winning.

Through systematic training, the military organically integrates the subjective initiative of soldiers with the objective performance of weapons and equipment, achieving the accumulation and release of energy. The “excellent conduct—diligent training—combat readiness” chain represents a hierarchical development of this process. Excellent conduct is the cornerstone, providing the intrinsic motivation and spiritual support for high-intensity, high-difficulty training through soldiers’ disciplined self-discipline, obedience to orders, and unwavering willpower. On this foundation, diligent training is effectively implemented, cultivating tactical awareness, coordination capabilities, and battlefield adaptability, transforming abstract advantages in conduct into concrete combat capabilities. At the same time, high-intensity training refines work style in reverse, forming a virtuous cycle of “work style promoting training, and training strengthening work style,” which further fosters the overall combat capability of the military. This progressive chain from work style to training to victory constitutes an important practical path for generating military combat effectiveness.

Looking towards the future training grounds, the profound evolution of technological and military revolutions is driving military training towards a comprehensive transformation towards multi-dimensional integrated training encompassing land, sea, air, space, cyberspace, and electronic warfare. Training is increasingly reliant on big data, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence technologies. Correspondingly, the development of work style must keep pace with these changes in training, shifting from traditionally focusing on discipline and attendance to emphasizing learning, research, combat readiness, and innovation. We must resolutely guard against formalism and empiricism, eliminating superficial practices such as “performing for show,” “training for show,” and “testing for show,” and strengthening problem-oriented approaches and practical effectiveness. The improvement of work style should focus on the primary responsibility of preparing for war and combat, ensure the implementation of systematic and technological training with a rigorous training style, promote the integration of combat and training with a pragmatic spirit, and ensure that the troops are strong and capable of winning in the generation of new combat capabilities.

The military is known for its tight organization and high degree of centralization and unity, and its strong combat effectiveness is fostered by the mechanism of “excellent conduct – internal purification – cohesion of morale”.

The military’s organizational advantages resonate with its superior work style, providing solid support for the generation and enhancement of combat effectiveness. The military’s rigorous hierarchical structure, centralized and unified command system, and rigid discipline create a seamless execution chain that ensures that the standards for work style development are precisely reflected in every unit and every soldier, avoiding the inefficiencies caused by fragmentation and decentralization. Based on this characteristic, work style development can quickly eliminate ideological impurities and behavioral malpractices, promoting a purified and improved internal environment. This work style advantage, transformed from organizational superiority, can rapidly build consensus and synergy, laying a solid foundation for boosting combat effectiveness.

The construction of a positive work style, through a chain of “excellent work style—internal purification—military morale cohesion,” eliminates deep-seated problems that erode the organization, enhances organizational effectiveness and combat potential, and broadens the channels for improving combat capabilities. Strict discipline and regulations provide value guidance and behavioral benchmarks for internal purification within the military. Leveraging the highly organized nature of the military, excellent work style can be transmitted from top to bottom within a tight organizational system, incorporating individual behavior into the framework of collective will. This organizational tightness leaves no room for bad practices and lax habits to hide, thereby achieving a deep cleansing and reshaping of the organizational structure. As internal purification deepens, the military will rid itself of the hidden dangers of internal friction and eliminate factors that could cause disunity. Officers and soldiers will form emotional resonance and trust bonds through shared values ​​and behavioral norms, thereby achieving deep cohesion of morale. Under the constraints of shared values ​​and strict discipline, the troops will become an unbreakable fighting collective, completing the transformation from shaping conduct to uniting strength.

The future military organizational structure will exhibit new trends of modular reorganization, networked collaboration, and intelligent empowerment, breaking down traditional hierarchical barriers and forming a flat, efficient, and cross-domain collaborative operating model. This not only improves combat response speed but also poses new challenges to work style development, requiring adaptive reforms to strengthen internal purification. Work style development should closely align with structural transformation. On the one hand, it is necessary to build a full-cycle intelligent supervision system, relying on data-driven methods to accurately identify work style risks across modules and fields, achieving early intervention and prevention. On the other hand, it is necessary to deepen the governance model that emphasizes both rigid discipline and flexible guidance, continuously purifying the internal ecosystem and enabling modular units to coalesce into a seamless fighting collective.

The military is rooted in the overall system of economic and social development, and forges inexhaustible combat power by following the mechanism of “excellent conduct—winning the hearts of the people—overall victory”.

The nation is the solid foundation of the military, and the overall economic and social development system contains enormous strategic resources and war potential, which constitute the material basis of the military’s hard power. However, this potential combat capability does not automatically transform into actual winning advantages; its effective activation and exploitation are inseparable from the military’s own spirit and conduct. A disciplined and exemplary military can win the heartfelt support of the people with its image as a just and civilized force. When the military’s excellent conduct translates into the trust and support of the people, the potential resources can be rapidly transformed into actual combat power through an efficient mobilization system, forming a powerful force of unity between the military and the people to jointly resist foreign aggression.

The ultimate logic of victory or defeat in modern warfare has shifted from single-service confrontations to systemic competition based on the overall strength of a nation. Excellent conduct, as an intangible asset and spiritual symbol of the military, is the key to unlocking popular support, forming a progressive mechanism of “excellent conduct—winning popular support—overall victory.” Excellent conduct is a prerequisite for winning popular support. A disciplined, incorruptible, and self-sacrificing military can effectively cultivate a just and reliable collective personality, thereby establishing a high degree of trust in the hearts of the people. Popular support is the key to overall victory. Public trust translates into human and material support for the war effort and psychological deterrence against the enemy, consolidating scattered social resources into a powerful force to support the war. Overall victory is the concentrated manifestation of integrated national defense. When the soft power of popular support is deeply integrated with the hard power of a nation’s economy and technology, the optimal allocation and efficient transformation of national strategic resources can be achieved, forming an overwhelming advantage across all dimensions and securing victory in systemic confrontation.

We must be keenly aware that the advancement of the times is propelling the military towards greater specialization. This resulting territorial divisions can weaken previously close ties due to differences in professional contexts and operational scenarios. We must break down professional barriers with a people-oriented approach, transforming professional capabilities into concrete actions serving the public, and leveraging our expertise in emergency rescue, public welfare, and other scenarios. Simultaneously, we must focus on establishing regular communication and joint construction mechanisms between the military and civilians, allowing military-civilian ties to continuously deepen through two-way interaction. Furthermore, a civilized army should demonstrate its qualities through strict discipline and a clean and honest work style, meeting the public’s expectations of the military, thereby winning the people’s heartfelt recognition and support, and obtaining the inexhaustible source of strength for building a strong army and winning battles.

現代國語：

淺析作風賦能戰斗力的內在機理

■張聰 劉軍民 劉光明

引言

習主席指出，“我軍要強起來，作風必須過硬”。作風是戰斗力生成的內在支撐與重要源泉，作風優良才能塑造英雄部隊，作風松散可以搞垮常勝之師。從內在機理看，作風深植於部隊建設各環節、貫穿於備戰打仗全過程，深刻影響著戰斗力的生成與提升。要深刻把握“作風優良才能塑造英雄部隊”這一鐵律，釐清作風優勢轉化為制勝優勢的機理，鍛造出無堅不摧的戰斗力。

軍隊作為執行政治任務的武裝集團，遵循“作風優良—聽從指揮—同向聚力”的機理形成強大戰斗力

政治性是軍隊本質屬性。作風是政治要求在軍隊行為模式中的具象化呈現，所催生的強大戰斗力，源於政治內在的整合作用：它通過統一的價值塑造，將個體意志凝聚為高度一致的集體意志；通過嚴明的紀律約束，確保軍隊具有令行禁止的組織性與紀律性；通過確立共同的目標指向，使沖鋒陷陣具備堅韌的戰斗意志和心理基礎。政治性對軍隊作風的要求，將軍隊鍛造為政治上的一塊整鋼，確保軍隊具備與履行根本職能相適應的戰斗力。

軍隊戰斗力的生成依賴於政治引領下個體力量的整合，而“作風優良—聽從指揮—同向聚力”正是這一原理的邏輯呈現。作風優良是軍隊戰斗力的“軟實力”與精神底色，堅定的政治信仰、同一的價值追求、頑強的戰斗精神，塑造了軍人的集體品格，為凝聚統一意志奠定了思想政治基礎。進而，聽從指揮成為自覺行為，指揮系統則通過令行禁止將精神力量轉化為有序行動，使部隊由“眾”成“陣”、由“散”趨“整”。當政治信念內化於心、政令軍令外化於行，全體成員便能在共同目標下形成步調協同的同向聚力。這種意志、智慧與行動的深度融合，構成從個體的政治修養到部隊的集體戰力的完整鏈條，體現出軍隊由“治”而“強”的普遍規律，最終實現整體作戰效能的增長。

在信息化智能化戰爭中，政治因素對戰爭的影響和制約愈發突出，而自主作戰與智能指揮決策也將同步加速應用。越是強調戰術層面的自主決斷，越需築牢政治引領的“定盤星”，嚴防技術邏輯沖淡政治邏輯。要通過嚴明的政治紀律與組織紀律，將聽從指揮內化為神聖信念，使智能化指揮系統擁有政治靈魂，以最大限度的同向聚力贏得未來戰場主動。

軍隊以備戰打仗為主責主業，遵循“作風優良—刻苦訓練—能征善戰”的機理錘煉硬核戰斗力

軍隊因戰而生、為戰而存，備戰打仗是其根本職能與存在價值的終極體現。作戰的殘酷性、不確定性與協同性，要求軍隊必須在實戰化的刻苦訓練中形成令行禁止的作風，確保指令精准落地、行動高度統一。必須永葆英勇無畏的戰斗精神，以直面生死的意志突破戰場極限，抵御恐懼與退縮對作戰效能的消解。必須堅守求真務實的作風，嚴格而又靈動地執行戰術規范，避免教條主義、形式主義對戰斗力的破壞。當作風在真打實訓中與作戰需求深度契合，便能打通從備戰到制勝的轉化通道，鍛造出懾戰止戰、敢戰能勝的精兵勁旅。

部隊通過系統性訓練將軍人的主觀能動性與武器裝備的客觀性能有機融合，實現能量的積蓄與釋放，而“作風優良—刻苦訓練—能征善戰”正是這一鏈路的層級式展開。優良作風是基石，能以軍人服從命令、令行禁止的紀律自覺與不畏艱險、堅韌不拔的意志品質，為高強度、高難度的訓練提供內在驅動與精神支撐。在此基礎上，刻苦訓練得以有效展開，使戰術意識、協同能力與戰場應變能力得到培育，將抽象的作風優勢轉化為具體的作戰能力。同時，在高強度訓練中反向淬煉作風，形成“作風促訓練、訓練強作風”的良性循環，進一步催生出軍隊整體的能征善戰特質。這一由作風到訓練再到制勝的遞進鏈條，構成了軍隊戰斗力生成的重要實踐路徑。

前瞻未來訓練場，科技革命和軍事革命的深度演進，驅動軍事訓練向陸、海、空、天、網、電等全維融合訓練深刻轉型，訓練愈發依托大數據、虛擬現實與人工智能技術。相應地，作風建設必須緊跟訓練之變，由傳統抓紀律、抓出勤，向抓學風、抓研戰、抓創新拓展。要力戒形式主義與經驗主義，杜絕“演為看”“練為看”“考為看”等虛假之風，強化問題導向與實戰實效。作風建設應聚焦備戰打仗主責主業，以嚴實訓風保障體系練兵、科技練兵落地，以求真務實精神推動戰訓耦合，確保部隊在新質戰斗力生成中過得硬、打得贏。

軍隊以組織嚴密和高度集中統一著稱，遵循“作風優良—內部淨化—軍心凝聚”的機理催生強韌戰斗力

軍隊的組織優勢能與作風優勢形成共振，為戰斗力的生成和提升提供堅實支撐。部隊嚴密的層級架構、集中統一的指揮體系和剛性的紀律約束，形成上下貫通、令行禁止的執行鏈路，使得作風建設的標准要求能夠精准體現到每一個單元、每一名官兵，避免分散化、碎片化帶來的低效問題。依托這一特點，作風建設可快速清除思想雜質和行為陋弊，推動內部生態淨化提質。這種由組織優勢轉化而來的作風優勢，能迅速凝聚起思想共識與行動合力，為提振戰斗力築牢堅實基礎。

作風建設通過“作風優良—內部淨化—軍心凝聚”的鏈環，清除侵蝕肌體的沉痾積弊，提升強大的組織效能與戰斗潛能，拓寬戰斗力提升的通道。嚴明的紀律與規范，能夠為部隊內部淨化提供價值導向與行為標尺。依托軍隊高度組織化的特點，優良作風得以在嚴密的組織體系中自上而下傳導，將個體行為納入集體意志的軌道。這種組織嚴密性使不良風氣與散漫習氣無處遁形，從而實現對組織肌體的深度清理與重塑。當內部淨化持續深化，軍隊將擺脫內耗隱患、消除離心因素，官兵在共同的價值追求與行為規范中形成情感共鳴與信任聯結，進而實現軍心的深度凝聚。在共同的價值追求與嚴明的紀律約束下，部隊成為牢不可破的戰斗集體，完成從作風塑造到力量聚合的升華。

未來軍隊組織結構將呈現模塊化重組、網絡化聯動、智能化賦能的新趨勢，打破傳統層級壁壘，形成扁平高效、跨域協同的運行模式，這既提升了作戰響應速度，也對作風建設提出新的挑戰，更需以適應性變革強化內部淨化。作風建設應緊扣結構轉型，一方面要構建全周期智能監督體系，依托數據化手段精准排查跨模塊、跨領域的作風隱患，實現抓早抓小、防微杜漸；另一方面要深化剛性紀律與柔性引領並重的治理模式，持續淨化內部生態，讓模塊化單元凝聚成無縫鏈接的戰斗集體。

軍隊植根於經濟社會發展大體系，遵循“作風優良—贏得民心—整體制勝”的機理鑄就不竭戰斗力

國家是軍隊的堅實依托，經濟社會發展大體系蘊藏著巨大的戰略資源和戰爭潛力，這是構成軍隊硬實力的物質基礎。然而，這種潛在的戰斗力並不會自動轉化為現實的制勝優勢，其有效激發與挖掘，離不開軍隊自身的精神面貌與作風形象。一支紀律嚴明、作風優良的軍隊，能夠以其正義之師、文明之師的形象獲得人民的衷心擁戴。當軍隊的優良作風化為民眾的信任與支持，潛在的資源便能通過高效的動員體系迅速轉化為現實的戰斗力，形成軍民一體、共御外侮的磅礴力量。

現代戰爭勝負的終極邏輯，已從單一軍種對抗轉向以國家整體實力為依托的體系較量。優良作風作為軍隊的無形資產與精神標識，是開啟民力之門的密鑰，構成“作風優良—贏得民心—整體制勝”的遞進機理。作風優良是贏得民心的前提，一支紀律嚴明、秋毫無犯且具備犧牲精神的軍隊，能有效塑造正義與可靠的集體人格，從而在民眾心中建立高度的信任。民心匯聚是整體制勝的樞紐，民眾的信任轉化為對戰爭的人力、物資支援及對敵方的心理威懾，將分散的社會資源凝聚為支撐戰爭的強大力量。整體制勝是一體化國防的集中體現，當民心所向的軟實力與國家經濟、科技等硬實力深度融合，便能實現國家戰略資源的最優配置與高效轉化，形成全維度壓倒性優勢，在體系對抗中鎖定勝局。

要清醒看到，時代發展推動軍隊建設向專業化深度邁進，由此帶來的領域區隔易讓原本緊密的聯系可能因專業語境的差異、行動場景的分野而被弱化。必須以親民作風打破專業壁壘，將專業能力轉化為服務群眾的實際行動，在應急救援、民生保障等場景發揮專業優勢。同時，注重建立軍民常態化溝通、共建機制，讓軍民聯系在雙向互動中持續深化。還應以嚴明的紀律、清廉的風氣彰顯文明之師的素養，契合民眾對軍隊的期待，由此贏得人民發自內心的認可與支持，獲得強軍勝戰生生不息的力量之源。

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/

來源：中國軍網-解放軍報 作者：張聰 劉軍民 劉光明 責任編輯：趙梓晴 發布：2026-04-23

#Artificial #Intelligence, #cross-domain collaborative operations, #cyber #warfare, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, 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 Intelligentization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Information Support Force, Mosaic Warfare

A Glimpse into the Chinese Military’s Intelligent Warfare Landscape: A Closer Look at the Mechanisms of Intelligent Operational Coordination

Leave a comment

中國軍隊智慧戰爭格局一瞥：深入探討智慧作戰協調機制

現代英語：

Interconnection refers to the movement or change of one of several related entities, in which the others also move or change accordingly. Interconnection is the underlying logic of a combat system and the focus of its construction. Due to various factors, the degree of interconnection in traditional warfare is not deep or high-level, resulting in mismatched rhythms and unsatisfactory effects. Intelligent warfare is different. Relying on ubiquitous information networks and multiple relationship rules, each combat unit and functional node can maximize the release of system structural forces through multi-point synchronization, multi-domain hinge, multi-path coaxiality, and multi-layer resonant interconnection, using optimal interconnection to ensure optimal movement.

Mesh configuration, multi-point synchronous linkage

In intelligent warfare, various combat units and functional nodes dispersed throughout the battlefield aim to create nonlinear spatiotemporal relationships for combat operations. Relying on a massive battlefield information network that combines high throughput and high speed, low latency and agility, and high reliability and losslessness, these networks autonomously construct numerous fractal networks with similar characteristics through modular grouping and plug-and-play functionality. Based on predetermined joint operation rules, and leveraging “multiple algorithms + powerful computing power + superior data,” they can proactively predict battlefield situations and combat trends. This allows each combat unit and functional node to accurately grasp the timing of joint operations, flexibly adjust joint strategies, and autonomously negotiate joint actions. It transforms combat operations at various points, locations, and times into self-organized and self-coordinated actions anchored to key targets. This fundamentally changes the traditional model of concentrating combat power through the physical concentration of firepower and manpower. Instead, it relies on real-time information perception, on-demand data distribution, high-level situational awareness, and intelligent task assignment to achieve physical dispersion of forces and logical concentration of effectiveness.

Through organic, real-time, and coupled connections at multiple points, the rapid, agile, and efficient movement of the entire operational system is effectively guaranteed, thereby achieving the best systemic counter-offensive effect through mobile synergy. For example, for “window-like” missions with tight deadlines, high value, and high risk, forces at relevant points are concentrated in real time according to the principle of optimization, and actions are taken simultaneously through spatial cross-regional and temporal skipping methods. This multi-point synchronous linkage has transcended the traditional form of combat system energy release. It relies on the battlefield network to flexibly integrate and configure combat units and functional nodes in different spaces throughout the entire battlefield, effectively coordinating combat resources to achieve instantaneous breakthroughs and all-directional assaults on key targets in the main directions. It can form a significant asymmetric advantage over the enemy in a short period of time, leaving the enemy unable to defend, control, or resist, and may even produce a system collapse effect, greatly reducing its combat capabilities, thereby achieving the ideal combat effect.

Full-dimensional deployment, multi-domain articulated linkage

In intelligent warfare, the combat space covers the entire domain, including the physical, information, and social domains, exhibiting distinct characteristics of cross-domain connectivity, multi-domain integration, and mixed-domain combat. Therefore, the construction of an intelligent warfare system involves the aggregation of various resources beyond the military sphere, and the concentration of diverse elements distributed across all dimensions of the battlefield. Through aggregation and concentration, combat functions are progressively superimposed and accumulated to generate systemic combat capabilities. Simultaneously, the outcome of confrontations in any domain and their interactions can have uncertain impacts on the progress and outcome of intelligent warfare. Therefore, it is necessary and only possible to rely on the overall strength of the nation, conducting powerful overall coordination and organization from a strategic, joint, and holistic perspective to continuously generate and improve comprehensive strategic capabilities.

Through precise docking, fine coordination, and accurate dispatching of various military and civilian systems, structural barriers that may exist in cross-military-civilian operations can be gradually eliminated, effectively filling the “gaps” and “gaps” that originally existed in the joint combat system. This will accelerate the transformation from loose cooperation among multiple domains to close cooperation, forming a hinged linkage similar to a metal hinge, in order to generate the greatest degree of integration and cohesion. For example, camouflage has evolved from a combat support measure to a crucial operational activity that all branches of the armed forces must participate in. Its content, target, mission scope, technical means, engineering measures, and tactical requirements are significantly different from traditional camouflage. It has become an important aspect of battlefield confrontation, permeating all stages of intelligent warfare. Commanders at all levels and command organs need to strengthen the overall planning and meticulous deployment of camouflage in peacetime, promote deep cooperation and coordinated actions between military and civilian systems, and truly achieve “hiding deep underground” and “moving high in the sky,” thereby “protecting oneself and achieving complete victory.”

Task-driven, multi-axis coaxial linkage

In intelligent warfare, the opposing sides occupy multiple battlefields, including land, sea, air, space, cyber, and electronic warfare. In particular, intelligent combat platforms break through the physical limits and geographical separation of traditional combat platforms, enabling combat forces to reach extremely far, high, and deep areas. They can achieve real-time online presence, immediate response, and instantaneous action, greatly blurring the spatial and temporal boundaries of the battlefield. Traditional battlefield contact lines, troop concentration points, and front and rear divisions are gradually disappearing. The battlefield is rapidly developing in two directions: “infinitely expanding area” and “highly condensed combat space.” Offensive and defensive operations may no longer have fixed and unchanging “foci,” and the release of combat power is extremely rapid, with extremely frequent battle transitions. The “tentacles” of combat forces will be spread throughout the entire battlefield. As long as there is a mission requirement and a realistic possibility, the “tentacles” can be quickly extended to any tangible or intangible area of ​​the battlefield. Therefore, it is also difficult to clearly define the “areas of responsibility” for the actions of each combat force.

Taking firepower strike operations as an example, once there is an “order” mission, it must come from a multi-dimensional, multi-directional, and multi-path manned/unmanned collaborative strike force. It is no longer confined to the traditional long-term combat loop of “discovery-guidance-strike-evaluation”. Instead, it is based on the empowerment support of intelligent kill networks, giving full play to its own advantages of large scale, high dispersion, and strong saturation, and carrying out “coaxial” linkage energy release. In the “movement”, it selects and determines the strike direction, target, order, method, and intensity of each strike platform in real time, as well as the task allocation, combination form, and path planning among multiple platforms, etc., to achieve the optimal strike capability of “whoever discovers, strikes; whoever is discovered, strikes” on the basis of intelligent interconnection. In this way, combat forces originally belonging to multiple combat spaces need to undergo spatial deconstruction, transfer, or transformation, focusing combat energy into a relatively small spatial area, thereby forming new spatial relationships and combat structures, and decoupling themselves after completing the mission. Therefore, the entire combat space is always in a state of dynamic drift. In addition, if this “coaxial” operation is aimed at multiple targets, it can not only enhance the effectiveness of strikes and make up for the unnecessary consumption of traditional strike methods, but also “dilute” the density of its system defenses, increasing the difficulty of the enemy’s “unpredictable” confrontation, thus taking the art of target selection and strike to its extreme: “achieving the desired effect with the least risk, the least time, and the least resource consumption.”

Bidirectional through-flow, multi-layer resonant linkage

In intelligent warfare, the battlefield situation changes rapidly and the combat process enters the “countdown” era. The time process of battlefield perception, situation analysis, planning, effect evaluation, and feedback adjustment is compressed to the extreme. In addition, the number of combat units and functional nodes is growing exponentially, resulting in a very complicated procedural hierarchy and extremely complex interaction relationships in combat command. Leveraging the evolution and penetration of intelligent technology in the military field, and relying on the integrated intelligent command and control network of “data network + computing network + brain network”, commanders at all levels and command organs can be flexibly authorized to conduct analysis, judgment and decision-making remotely and synchronously. In addition, the development of intelligent technology promotes the accelerated extension of autonomous intelligent decision-making to the tactical terminal of individual soldiers and equipment, making it a reality to achieve a high degree of shared cognition from top to bottom and bottom to top. Simultaneously, relying on a high-capacity, multi-functional battlefield communication network with an integrated trunk communication network as its core, various operational units and functional nodes can communicate vertically, horizontally, and omnidirectionally. Communication is possible not only at the adjacent level but also across several levels, gradually making true information exchange from top to bottom and bottom to top a reality. This enables a highly responsive, almost resonant, response to changes in the battlefield situation, demonstrating formidable combat capabilities.

This restructuring of operational command means relying on intelligent command and control systems to deeply integrate command chains, flexibly implement parallel operations, and drive the transformation from traditional vertical serial to two-way parallel, and from original periodic business processing to online real-time intelligent processing. This significantly eliminates non-value-added tasks in the traditional command process, while making the various types of business activities and their combinations in the new operational command process more rational and seamless. Based on this, commanders at all levels and command organs can proactively take a high-level perspective, comprehensively consider problems, and strategize countermeasures. For example, as a crucial component of the joint operations support system, operational engineering support can explore establishing a command and control approach that combines top-down, multi-dimensional, and hierarchical methods. This ensures that, in any mission scenario, command relationships can be rapidly established vertically among subordinate support units, focusing on support needs at key targets, directions, locations, and times, thus providing timely and efficient engineering support to all operational forces. Simultaneously, engineering support command organizations at all levels can autonomously assess and adjust their operations based on the operational situation and support effectiveness, achieving alignment with the supported targets and cooperating units. This move moves beyond purely top-down command-based control, leveraging self-organization, self-adaptation, and self-coordination to achieve precise and efficient engineering support, ensuring the sustained operational capabilities of key supported targets.

現代國語：

聯動，即若干相關聯的事物，一個運動或變化時，其他的也跟著運動或變化。聯動是作戰體系運轉的底層邏輯，也是作戰體系構建的著眼點。受制於各種因素，傳統作戰中聯動“聯”的程度不深、層次不高，導致“動”的節奏難合拍、效果不理想。智能化作戰則不同，各作戰單元和功能節點依靠泛在的信息網絡和多重的關系規則，通過多點同步、多域鉸合、多路共軸、多層諧振式聯動，能夠最大限度地釋放體系結構力，用最佳的“聯”來保證最優的“動”。

網狀配置，多點同步式聯動

智能化作戰中，分散在戰場全域的各作戰單元和功能節點，著眼創建非線性的作戰行動時空關系，依托高通量與高速率、低時延與敏捷性、高可靠與無損性兼備的超大規模戰場信息網絡，通過模塊編組、即插即用，自主組建具備相似性特征的無數個分形網絡，並依據預定的聯動運行規則，借助“多算法+強算力+優算據”，超前預判戰場態勢和作戰走勢，便於各作戰單元和功能節點精准把握聯動時機、靈活調整聯動策略、自主協商聯動行動，使各點位、各區位、各時位的作戰行動轉變為錨定關鍵目標的自組織自協同行為，從根本上改變傳統靠火力、兵力的物理集中實現戰斗力集中的模式，而是依靠信息實時感知、數據按需分發、態勢高度共享、任務智能指派，實現力量上的物理分散、效能上的邏輯集中。

通過多點位的有機聯、實時聯、耦合聯，有效保證作戰全體系的快速動、靈敏動、高效動，從而達成機動聚優的最佳體系對抗效果。比如，對時限緊、價值高、風險大的“窗口性”任務，按照最優化原則，即時集中相關點位力量，采取空間跨區、時間跳序的方式同步動作。這種多點同步式聯動，已經跳脫出傳統意義上的作戰體系釋能形式，是在戰場全域內，依托戰場網絡靈活集成配置於不同空間的作戰單元和功能節點，有效統合作戰資源，實現對主要方向、要害目標的瞬時突防和全向突擊，可在短時間內形成與敵的顯著不對稱優勢，使敵來不及防、沒辦法控、無能力抗，甚至能夠產生體系崩塌效應，大幅降低其作戰能力，從而實現理想的作戰效果。

全維布勢，多域鉸合式聯動

智能化作戰中，作戰空間覆蓋物理域、信息域、社會域等全域，呈現出跨域連接、多域融合、混域交戰的鮮明特點。因而，智能化作戰體系的構建，是超越了軍事范疇的各類資源的大聚合，是廣布在戰場全維的各種要素的大集中，並通過聚合和集中，實現作戰功能的逐級疊加並累積生成體系作戰能力，同時，任何領域的對抗結果及其相互作用都可能對智能化作戰的進程和結果造成不確定影響。因此，必須也只能依靠國家的整體力量，從戰略高度、聯合層面、全局角度進行強有力的統籌組織，從而不斷生成和提高綜合博弈實力。

可通過軍地各系統的精確對接、精細協調和精准調度，逐步消除跨軍地行動可能存在的結構壁壘等，有效填補彌合作戰體系原本存在的“缺口”和“縫隙”，推動實現多域間的松散協作向緊密協同加速轉變，形成類似於金屬合頁的鉸合式聯動，以產生最大的融合度和黏合力。比如，偽裝已經從過去的戰斗保障措施，上升到目前各軍兵種部隊都須共同參與實施的重要作戰行動，其內容對象、任務空間、技術手段、工程措施以及戰術技術要求，都與傳統的偽裝有著重大區別，已經成為戰場對抗的重要內容，貫穿於智能化作戰的各環節全過程，需要各級指揮員及指揮機關在平時就加強偽裝的統籌規劃和精心布局，推動軍地各系統間的深度配合和協同動作，真正實現“藏於九地之下”“動於九天之上”，從而“自保而全勝也”。

任務牽引，多路共軸式聯動

智能化作戰中，對抗雙方身處的陸、海、空、天、網、電等多維戰場，尤其是智能化作戰平台突破了傳統作戰平台的物理極限和地理分隔，使得作戰力量的觸及范圍極遠、極高、極深，並能夠實現全時在線、即時響應、瞬時行動，致使戰場的時空邊界被大大模糊，傳統的戰場接觸線、兵力集結點及前後方劃分逐步消失，戰場朝著“幅域范圍無限擴大”和“交戰空間高度濃縮”兩個方向急速發展，攻防作戰將可能不再存在固定不變的所謂“焦點”，戰力聚釋極其快速，戰斗轉換極為頻繁。作戰力量的“觸角”將布滿戰場全域，只要有任務需求、具現實可能，就能夠將“觸角”快速遍及戰場任何有形或無形的區位，因此也很難界限分明地劃定各作戰力量行動的“責任區”。

以火力打擊行動為例，一旦有“訂單”任務，必定是來自於多維、多向、多徑的有人/無人協同打擊力量，其不再拘泥於傳統的“發現—引導—打擊—評估”的長時作戰環路，而是基於智能化殺傷網的賦能支撐，充分發揮自身規模大、高分散、強飽和的優勢，進行“共軸式”聯動釋能，並在“動”中實時優選確定各打擊平台的打擊方向、目標、次序、方式、強度，以及多平台之間的任務分配、組合形式、路徑規劃等，實現智能互聯基礎上“誰發現即誰打、發現誰即打誰”的最優打擊能力。這樣，原本分屬於多個作戰空間的作戰力量，就需要進行空間的解構、轉移或變換，將作戰能量聚焦到相對較小的空間區域，並由此形成新的空間關系和作戰結構，完成任務後即自行解耦。因此，整個作戰空間也始終處於動態漂移狀態。此外，如果這種“共軸式”行動是針對多個目標的，則既可以增強打擊實效，彌補傳統打擊方式“得不償失”的無謂消耗，也可以“稀釋”其體系防御密度，增大敵“防不勝防”的對抗難度，從而將“以最小的風險、最少的時間和最少的資源消耗，實現所期望的效果”的目標選擇與打擊藝術演繹到極致。

雙向貫通，多層諧振式聯動

智能化作戰中，戰場態勢瞬息萬變、戰斗進程進入“讀秒”時代，戰場感知、情況分析、計劃制訂、效果評估、反饋調整的時間歷程被極限壓縮，再加上作戰單元和功能節點的數量呈指數級增長，導致作戰指揮的程序層級非常繁瑣、交互關系極為復雜。借力於智能科技在軍事領域的演進滲透，依靠“數網+算網+腦網”一體的智能化指揮控制網絡，可靈活授權各級指揮員及指揮機關異地同步進行分析、判斷和決策，再加上智能技術的發展，推動自主智能決策加速向單兵單裝的戰術末端延伸，使得自上而下和自下而上實現高度的共享認知逐步成為現實。同時，依托以綜合干線通信網為主體的大容量、多功能戰場通信網絡，各作戰單元和功能節點之間既能夠縱向聯絡，也能夠橫向聯系，還能夠全向聯通；不僅鄰近級別可聯系，跨越若干級別還可聯系，使得自上而下和自下而上實現真正的信息互通逐步成為現實。如此，就能夠對戰場態勢各種幅度的變化產生類似於諧振般的極大響應，表現出強大作戰能力。

這種作戰指揮方式的重構，意味著依托智能化指揮控制系統，深度打通指揮鏈路、靈活實施並行作業，撬動傳統的縱向串行向雙向並行轉變、原有的周期性業務處理向在線實時智能處理轉變，使得傳統指揮流程中的非增值業務被大幅剔除，新型的作戰指揮流程中的各類型業務活動及其組合銜接則更為合理順暢。基於此，各級指揮員及指揮機關便能夠主動站上全局高位，通盤考慮問題、整體思謀對策。比如，作戰工程保障作為聯合作戰保障體系的重要組成部分，可探索建立由上到下、多維到端、逐級和越級相結合的工程保障指揮方式，確保在任何任務情境下，都能夠從縱向上對所屬保障單元快速構成指揮關系，鉚住重要目標、方向、地段和時節的保障需求發力，確保為各作戰力量提供及時高效的工程保障。同時，各級工程保障指揮機構還能夠根據作戰態勢和保障效果，自主判斷、臨機調控，實現與保障對象、協同單元的步調一致，不再單純依靠自上而下的指令式控制，而是通過自組織、自適應、自協同的效果來換取工程保障的精准高效，確保重點保障對象的持續作戰能力。

李民 來源：中國軍網-解放軍報 作者：李民 責任編輯：孫智英 發布：2025-06-17

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/

#collaborative warfare, #cross-domain collaborative operations, #cyber #warfare, #Information Support Force, #mosaic #warfare, China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Hacker Methodology 中國黑客, Chinese Military - Network & Space Forces, Chinese Military Characteristics & Development Trends of Cognitive Domain Operations and Warfare, Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations, Chinese military cognitive warfare, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Intelligentization, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Dimensionality Reduction Strikes, Information Support Force, Mosaic Warfare

Chinese Military From “Cyber ​​Wars” to “Mosaic Wars”

Leave a comment

中國軍隊從“網路戰爭”到“馬賽克戰爭”

現代英語：

Theory guides action. Strengthening innovation in operational concepts and promoting innovation in operational guidance have always been important ways for militaries around the world to cultivate military superiority. In recent years, the U.S. military has successively proposed cutting-edge operational theories such as “cyber warfare” and “mosaic warfare” in order to make the “relationship of production” of operational modes more adaptable to the development of “productivity” of operational capabilities. By comparing and analyzing these two operational theories, the world can gain insight into the changes in the U.S. military’s approach to building operational capabilities, especially to understand the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare,” and thus find effective countermeasures.

● From threat response to war design—

Actively shape and guide the improvement of combat capabilities

“Threat-based” or “capability-based” are two fundamental approaches to building military combat capabilities. “Threat-based” is driven by needs, focusing on resolving near- and medium-term practical problems, and is a fundamental principle that military combat capability development should follow. “Capability-based” is driven by objectives, targeting future strategic missions and supporting strategic concepts with new combat theories, and is the only way for military combat capabilities to innovate and surpass. The development from “cyber warfare” to “mosaic warfare” reflects the differences and evolution of the inherent laws governing these two approaches, and also reflects the changes in the U.S. military’s approach to combat capability development in recent years.

A New Evolution in Concept Origins. Cyberspace, initially created to address humanity’s communication needs, has gradually evolved into a new operational domain independent of land, sea, air, and space, giving rise to “cyber warfare,” centered on the struggle for control of cyberspace. In contrast, “Mosaic Warfare” is a new operational concept proactively developed by the US military to maintain its strategic advantage, directly targeting competitors. Its formation process reflects a fusion of demand-driven and capability-driven approaches, with a greater emphasis on strategy, initiative, and influence.

A New Approach to Technology Application. “Cyber ​​Warfare” emphasizes developing next-generation technologies to support the transformation and implementation of operational concepts. “Mosaic Warfare,” however, departs from this model. It doesn’t overemphasize the development of next-generation equipment technologies, but rather focuses on the rapid transformation of military-civilian compatible technologies and the incremental iteration of mature technologies. Its basic idea is to leverage existing equipment, following the operational concepts of service platforms such as ride-hailing and crowdfunding development. Through modular upgrades and intelligent transformation, various operational system units are “mosaicized” into functionally singular, flexibly assembled, and easily replaceable “building blocks” or “pixels,” constructing a dynamically coordinated, highly autonomous, and seamlessly integrated operational system, embodying a new technology-driven approach.

A new design for path development. “Cyber ​​warfare,” as a concept accompanying cyberspace, follows the development of cyberspace, generally prioritizing “objective” material conditions before “subjective” conceptual design, resulting in a strong dependence on cyberspace in its path development. “Mosaic warfare,” on the other hand, proceeds from “subjective” to “objective,” developing a force design model with dynamically adjustable functional structures to adapt to different operational needs and battlefield environmental changes.

This demonstrates that, compared to previous operational concepts such as “cyber warfare,” “mosaic warfare” has clearer objectives, more mature technology, and more reliable paths, reflecting a shift in the US military’s proactive approach to shaping its operations.

● From Network Center to Decision Center—

Collective intelligence enables optimal energy release in systems.

Artificial intelligence technology is a key variable in the information age and a core incremental factor in the development of the “Mosaic Warfare” system. While “cyber warfare” emphasizes “network-centricity,” “mosaic warfare” focuses on artificial intelligence technology as its core, shifting the key to victory from “network-centricity” to “decision-making-centricity.” It transforms the operational system architecture from system-level and platform-level collaboration to function-level and element-level integration, aiming to achieve optimal system energy release through collective intelligence technology under the premise of fully leveraging network capabilities, thus giving new meaning to the winning mechanism of warfare in the intelligent era.

Using speed to overcome slowness and seize the initiative in cognition. In future wars, the battlefield situation will change rapidly, and the weight of the time element will continue to rise. “Fast” against “slow” can create a near-dimensional reduction effect in combat. “Mosaic Warfare” utilizes data information technology and artificial intelligence technology to improve the decision-making speed of one’s own “OODA” loop, expand the breadth of parallel decision-making, reduce the granularity of group-loop decision-making, and accelerate the progress of system operations. Overall, it aims to create a “first-mover advantage” situation that is always one step ahead, and firmly control the dominance of battlefield cognitive decision-making.

Using “low” to overcome “high,” accumulating cost advantages. Unlike traditional combat concepts that pursue high-end weapon platforms, “Mosaic Warfare” emphasizes leveraging artificial intelligence technology to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of existing weapon platforms and combat resources. By loading and running intelligent algorithms and specific functional modules on numerous low- and mid-range weapon platforms, it achieves combat performance comparable to high-end weapon platforms, thereby improving the overall cost-effectiveness of weapon platform inputs and outputs, and thus accumulating cost advantages.

By employing a strategy of “dispersion” to counter “concentration,” the aim is to ensure sustainable survival. “Mosaic Warfare” emphasizes a decentralized approach that breaks down large forces into smaller units, utilizing an open system architecture to distribute reconnaissance, location, communication, and strike capabilities across various manned and unmanned platforms, achieving a distributed deployment of forces. Simultaneously, intelligent algorithms enhance the self-organization, self-coordination, and autonomous attack capabilities of each platform, achieving a dispersed yet cohesive force with concentrated firepower. Even after some combat platforms are destroyed, disrupted, or isolated, the entire combat system can still function normally, thereby enhancing the battlefield survivability of the force cluster.

Using “movement” to control “staticity” enhances system flexibility. “Mosaic Warfare” emphasizes further breaking down barriers in various operational domains. By transforming fixed “kill chains” in different operational domains into dynamically reconfigurable “kill networks,” the large “OODA” loop is broken down into smaller loops, and single loops are differentiated into multiple loops. Based on changes in the operational process and requirements, intelligent networking enables the dynamic splitting, deployment, and combination of combat forces. This enhances the flexibility and adaptability of the operational system while also counteracting the node aggregation effect of complex networks, making it difficult for the adversary to find key nodes to breach the system.

“Mosaic warfare” provides a reference prototype for intelligent warfare. However, as an idealized framework for force design and application, “Mosaic warfare” still requires close support from related technologies, doctrines, and policies. There is still a long way to go before it is fully realized, and the situation of coexistence with traditional combat systems will exist for a long time.

● From Element Integration to System Restructuring—

Dynamic structure enhances the flexibility of the combat system.

Structure and relationships often determine function and nature. “Cyber ​​warfare” and “mosaic warfare” are built on the common material foundation of the information age and follow the same evolutionary paradigm, but their system construction principles and effects differ. The system structure formed by “cyber warfare” is statically deconstructable, while “mosaic warfare” dynamically combines functional units according to certain construction rules, forming a flexible system structure with self-organizing and adaptive characteristics, similar to a “dynamic black box,” which is difficult to track and predict using conventional methods. This flexible structure often “emerges” new capabilities, empowering and enhancing the combat system.

The convergence of the network and cloud makes the operational space-time more dynamic and malleable. The network and cloud are the fundamental environment for the operation of information-based combat systems, reshaping the process elements of intelligence, command and control, strike, and support in traditional warfare, while also giving rise to new operational spaces-time. “Cyber ​​warfare” mainly focuses on the cyberspace, and its operational space-time is relatively static. “Mosaic warfare,” on the other hand, is not limited to a single operational space. With the development trend of information infrastructure networks moving with the cloud and cloud-network integration, it can further deeply link tangible and intangible spaces, making the boundaries of operational space-time more flexible, the allocation of operational resources more flexible, and the structure of operational systems more dynamic.

Cross-domain data transfer enables more seamless operational control. In the command and control phase, “cyber warfare” focuses on the joint operations command’s control over operational units, with cross-domain data exchange and transfer mainly concentrated in the theater of operations. “Mosaic warfare” further decentralizes the level of joint operations to the tactical end, enabling the autonomous cross-domain exchange and seamless transfer of data at the tactical level. This allows various data silos to be aggregated into data clusters on demand, generating a significant “spillover” effect. This makes the dynamic, decentralized, agile, and parallel characteristics of the operational command and control loop more pronounced, and is more conducive to enabling on-demand agile connection and efficient coordination among operational units.

Algorithms permeate all dimensions, making system operation more autonomous and efficient. Algorithms are a mapping of human consciousness in cyberspace, forming two basic forms: compiled code transformed from intent and neural networks transformed from knowledge. In the “cyberwar,” compiled code was widely used, while neural networks were only used locally. In the “mosaic war,” algorithms have expanded to include two key functions: shaping rules and providing the engine, demonstrating a greater breadth and depth of application. The rules are primarily based on compiled code, supplemented by neural networks, to construct the process framework and operational logic of the “Mosaic Warfare” system, laying the structural foundation for its uncertainty, adaptability, and capability “emergence.” The engine mainly distributes intelligent algorithm models to edge elements for operation, forming a knowledge diffusion effect, thereby comprehensively enhancing the intelligent autonomous combat capability of the “Mosaic Warfare” system.

The autonomous release of power at the edge enables more flexible and diverse combat styles. The edge is an abstract model of various manned/unmanned combat functional units and the direct source of the “emergence” of system capabilities. In the “Cyber ​​Warfare” system, edge elements are tightly coupled with the command and control processes at higher and lower levels, and are in a state of precise control. In the “Mosaic Warfare” system, the perception, interaction, reasoning, and decision-making capabilities of edge elements are greatly enhanced. Their “OODA” loop does not need to link back to the higher command organization, which is conducive to supporting the formation of a decentralized combat cluster with high and low configurations and a combination of manned and unmanned elements. Edge elements can be given more self-organizing authority, which significantly enhances the battlefield confrontation advantage.

It is evident that if “cyber warfare” is a sophisticated war machine, then “mosaic warfare” can be viewed as a complex “ecosystem” capable of stimulating the dynamic growth of combat capabilities. The new changes generated by the cloud, data, algorithms, and edge computing have fostered the formation of a dynamic and complex “system structure.” This structure, in turn, controls elements, platforms, and systems, constantly generating new capabilities and playing a crucial role in enhancing and evolving combat systems.

● From systemic destruction to complex confrontation——

Distinguish between advantages and disadvantages, and seek effective checks and balances.

“Mosaic warfare” to some extent represents a possible direction for the development of future joint operations. We should fully analyze and grasp the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare,” shaping the information and communication field as a new domain that breaks through the traditional spatial and temporal boundaries of warfare. We should create a new concept of cloud-enabled warfare, strengthen the support and guarantee capabilities of national defense information infrastructure, emphasize the security and defense capabilities of military information networks, enhance the basic support capabilities for the operation of strategic and operational command institutions, and continuously improve the network information system.

On the other hand, the emergence of the “Mosaic Warfare” theory makes it difficult for traditional combat methods that target and control limited nodes to achieve the system-breaking effect of destroying nodes and disrupting chains. However, it should be noted that every system has its inherent contradictions, and the seemingly “flawless” decentralized structure of “Mosaic Warfare” can still be effectively countered. For example, by grasping the complexity of its system and utilizing its interrelationships and dependencies, we can focus on suppressing the functions of communication networks, constructing a combined network and electronic attack path, and achieving the dismantling and isolation of each unit of the combat system; by grasping the dissipative nature of its structure and utilizing its dependence on external information, we can focus on disguising and misleading information data, prompting the combat system to transform into abnormal states such as information closure and information overload; by grasping the collective autonomy of its group and utilizing its dependence on key technologies, we can focus on countering and reducing the effectiveness of intelligent algorithms, suppressing the intelligent internal drive of each combat unit; by grasping the nonlinear nature of its functions and utilizing its unknown vulnerabilities, we can focus on battlefield differentiated strike assessment, probing and discovering the imbalance points of the combat system with higher efficiency and faster speed, and finding the key weaknesses for system destruction.

(Author’s affiliation: Unit 61001)

現代國語：

理論是行動的先導。加強作戰概念創新、推動作戰指導革新，歷來是世界各國軍隊培塑軍事優勢的重要途徑。近年來，美軍先後提出「賽博戰」「馬賽克戰」等前線作戰理論，以期實現作戰模式這一「生產關系」能夠更加適應作戰能力這一「生產力」的發展。透過對比分析這兩種作戰理論，世人可以一窺美軍作戰能力建設思路的變化，特別是認清「馬賽克戰」的製勝機理，從而有的放矢，找到有效制衡之策。

●從威脅應對到戰爭設計——

主動塑造，牽引作戰能力提升

「基於威脅」或「基於能力」是軍隊作戰能力建設的兩條基本途徑。 「基於威脅」體現需求牽引，聚焦解決近中期現實問題，是軍隊作戰能力建設應遵循的基本規律；「基於能力」體現目標牽引，瞄準未來戰略使命，以新作戰理論支撐戰略構想，是軍隊作戰能力創新超越的必由之路。從「賽博戰」向「馬賽克戰」的發展，體現了上述兩種途徑內在規律的差異與演進，也反映出美軍近年來推進作戰能力建設思維理念的變化。

概念發端新變化。網絡空間，最初為解決人類的通訊需求而生，後來逐漸演變為一個獨立於陸、海、空、天之外的新作戰域，由此衍生出以爭奪網絡空間制權為核心的「賽博戰」。與之相比，「馬賽克戰」是美軍為繼續保持戰略優勢地位，直接瞄準競爭對手而主動開發設計的新作戰概念，其形成過程體現了需求牽引與能力牽引的融合，戰略性、主動性、牽引性更加突顯。

技術運用新思路。 「賽博戰」強調，透過研發新世代技術支撐作戰概念轉化落地。 「馬賽克戰」則跳出這個模式，不過分強調研發新一代裝備技術，更加關注對軍民通用技術的快速轉化，對成熟技術的漸進迭代。其基本想法是立足現有裝備，按照類似網約車、眾籌開發等服務類平台的運用理念，通過模塊升級和智能化改造，將各類作戰系統單元“馬賽克化”為功能單一、靈活拼裝、便於替換的“積木”或“像素”，構建形成動態協調、高度自主、無縫融合的作戰體系，體現了新的技術驅動。

路徑發展新設計。 「賽博戰」作為網電空間的伴生概念，網電空間發展到哪裡，「賽博戰」就跟進到哪裡，總體上先考慮「客觀」的物質條件，再進行「主觀」的概念設計，在路徑發展上具有較強的依附性。 「馬賽克戰」則先由「主觀」再到「客觀」，透過開發可動態調整功能結構的兵力設計模型，使其能夠適應不同作戰需求及戰場環境變化。

由此可見，「馬賽克戰」相比「賽博戰」等過去作戰概念，其目標更加明確、技術更加成熟、路徑更加可靠，體現出美軍主動塑造的思路轉變。

●從網絡中心到決策中心—

群體智能，實現體系最優釋能

人工智慧技術是資訊時代的關鍵變量，也是「馬賽克戰」體系發展的核心增量。 《賽博戰》強調“網絡中心”，“馬賽克戰”則緊緊扭住人工智能技術這一核心，將製勝關鍵從“網絡中心”調整為“決策中心”，將作戰體系架構由系統級、平台級聯合轉變為功能級、要素級融合，謀求在網絡充分聚能的前提下，以群體性智能技術實現體系最優釋能，為勝理的戰爭賦予新涵機時代。

以“快”制“慢”，奪取認知先手。未來戰爭，戰場形勢瞬息萬變，時間要素的權重不斷上升，「快」對「慢」可以形成近似降維的作戰打擊效果。 「馬賽克戰」透過運用數據資訊技術與人工智慧技術，提升己方「OODA」環的單環決策速度，拓展並行決策廣度，降低組環決策粒度，加快體係作戰進度，在整體上塑造始終快人一步的「先手棋」態勢，旨在牢牢控制戰場認知決策的主導權。

以“低”制“高”，積累成本優勢。與追求高端武器平台的傳統作戰概念不同，「馬賽克戰」著重於利用人工智慧技術對現有武器平台及作戰資源的挖潛增效。透過在眾多中低階武器平台上加載運行智慧演算法和特定功能模塊，使其達到媲美高端武器平台的作戰性能，整體上提高了武器平台投入產出的效費比，進而積累形成成本優勢。

以“散”制“聚”，謀求持續生存。 「馬賽克戰」強調採用化整為零的去中心化思路和非對稱制衡理念，使用開放系統架構，在各類有人/無人平台上分散配置偵察、定位、通信、打擊等各類功能，實現力量的分佈式部署。同時，依托智能演算法提升各平台的自組織、自協同、自主攻擊能力，實現形散神聚、火力集中。當部分作戰平台被消滅、幹擾或剝離後，整個作戰體系仍能正常運轉，從而增強兵力集群的戰場持續生存能力。

以“動”制“靜”，提升體系彈性。 「馬賽克戰」強調進一步突破各作戰域壁壘。通過把不同作戰域中固定的“殺傷鏈”變成可動態重構的“殺傷網”，將“OODA”大環拆解為小環，單環分化為多環。根據作戰進程和作戰需求的變化，依托智能組網實現作戰力量的動中拆分、動中調用、動中組合。如此，一方面可增強作戰體系的靈活性、適應性；另一方面還可對沖抵消複雜網絡的節點聚集效應，使對手難以找到破擊己方體系的關鍵節點。

「馬賽克戰」為智慧化作戰提供了一種可藉鑑的參考原型。但同時，作為一種理想化的兵力設計和運用框架，「馬賽克戰」還需要與之緊密相關的技術、條令、政策等配套支持，距離完全實現還有很長的路要走，與傳統作戰體系共存的局面將長期存在。

●從要素整合到體系重組—

動態結構，增強作戰體係彈性

結構和關系往往決定功能和性質。 「賽博戰」與「馬賽克戰」建構於資訊時代共同的物質基礎，遵循相同的演進範式，但體系建構的原理和效果有所不同。 「賽博戰」形成的體系結構靜態可解構，而「馬賽克戰」則按照一定構建規則動態組合功能單元，形成具有自組織、自適應特徵的彈性體系結構，類似一種“動態黑箱”，常規手段難以跟踪預測。而這一彈性結構常會「湧現」出新的能力，為作戰體系賦能增效。

網雲融合發展，使作戰時空更動態可塑。網和雲是資訊化作戰體系運作的基礎環境，重塑了傳統作戰中情報、指控、打擊、保障的流程要素，同時衍生出新的作戰時空。 「賽博戰」主要聚焦網電空間，其作戰時空相對靜態。 「馬賽克戰」則不限於單一作戰空間，在資訊基礎設施網隨雲動、雲網一體的發展趨勢下，可進一步深度鉸鏈有形無形空間，作戰時空邊界更有彈性，作戰資源配置更加靈活，作戰體系結構更具動態。

數據跨域流轉，使作戰控制更加無縫協同。在指揮控制環節，「賽博戰」關注的重點是聯合作戰指揮機構對作戰單元的指揮控制，數據跨域交換流轉主要集中在戰區戰場。 「馬賽克戰」則進一步將聯合作戰的層級下沉至戰術末端，通過數據在戰術層面的自主跨域交換和無縫流轉，實現各類數據孤島按需集聚為數據集群，進而產生顯著的「溢出」效應，讓作戰指揮控制環路動態、離散、敏捷、並行的特徵更為明顯，更加有利於實現各作戰單元按需銜接、高效協同行動。

演算法全維滲透，使體系運作更加自主高效。演算法是人的意識在網絡空間的映射，形成了由意圖轉化的編譯代碼和由知識轉化的神經網絡兩種基本形態。在「賽博戰」中，編譯代碼大量應用，神經網絡只在局部應用。在「馬賽克戰」中，演算法擴展出塑造規則、提供引擎兩項關鍵職能，運用的廣度深度更加突出。塑造規則以編譯代碼為主，輔以神經網絡，構造「馬賽克戰」體系的流程框架和運行邏輯，為其不確定性、適應性和能力「湧現」性奠定結構基礎；提供引擎則主要將智能演算法模型分發至邊端要素運行，形成知識擴散效應，從而全面提升「馬賽克戰」體系的智能自主作戰能力。

邊端自主釋能，使作戰樣式更靈活多態。邊端是各類有人/無人作戰功能單元的抽像模型，也是體系能力「湧現」的直接來源。 「賽博戰」體系中，邊端要素與上下級指控流程緊密耦合，處於精確受控狀態。 「馬賽克戰」體系中，邊端要素的感知、交互、推理、決策能力大大提升，其「OODA」環不必回鏈至上級指揮機構，有利於支撐形成高低搭配、有人/無人結合的去中心化作戰集群形態，可以賦予邊端要素更多自組織權限，明顯增強了戰場對抗優勢。

可見，如果稱“賽博戰”為精密的戰爭機器，“馬賽克戰”則可以視為一種能夠激發作戰能力動態生長的復雜“生態”，網雲、數據、算法、邊端所產生的新變化，促進形成了動態復雜的“體系結構”。這一結構又反向調控要素、平台和系統，不斷湧現新的能力，為作戰體系增能、演變發揮重要作用。

●從體系破擊到復合對抗——

辨析優劣，尋求有效制衡之策

「馬賽克戰」某種程度上代表著未來聯合作戰形態發展的可能方向。應當充分研析把握「馬賽克戰」的製勝機理，將資訊通信領域作為打破傳統戰爭時空界限的新質新域加以塑造，打造網雲賦能作戰新概念，建強國防資訊基礎設施支撐保障能力，突顯軍事資訊網絡安全防禦能力，增強戰略戰役指揮機構運行的保底支撐能力，不斷完善網絡資訊體系。

另一方面，「馬賽克戰」理論的出現，使得打擊奪控有限目標節點的傳統作戰手段，難以達成毀點斷鏈的體系破擊效果。但應當看到，任何體係都有其固有矛盾，「馬賽克戰」看似「無懈可擊」的去中心化結構，仍可以找到有效破解的方法路徑。例如，掌握其體系複雜性特徵，利用其關聯關係依賴性，突出針對通信網絡的功能抑制，構建網電復合攻擊路徑，實現對作戰體系各單元的拆解孤立；把握其結構耗散性特徵，利用其外部信息依賴性，突出針對信息數據的偽裝誤導，促使作戰體係向信息封閉、信息過載等非正常狀態轉化；掌握其群體自主性特徵，利用其關鍵技術依賴性，突出針對智能算法的對抗降效，抑制各作戰單元的智能內驅力；把握其功能非線性特徵，利用其未知脆弱性，突出戰場差異化打擊評估，以更高的效率和更快的速度失衡、發現作戰體系擊點，尋找體系破擊的關鍵弱點。

（作者單位：61001部隊）

來源：解放軍報 作者：楊存銀 責任編輯：劉上靖 2021-09-14

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.mod.gov.cn/

#Artificial #Intelligence, #cyber #warfare, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, #網路戰爭, #認知戰, Asymmetric Warfare, China Cyber Dilemma in the 21st Century, China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Artificial 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 Intelligentization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Chinese Military Views - 中國軍事觀, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Combat Planning, Cross-domain attacks, Dissipative Warfare, Information Support Force, Intelligent Warfare, Mosaic Warfare, Strategic Support Forces, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭, 中國軍隊做好戰爭準備, 中國軍隊對耗散戰的戰術運用, 以認知為中心的戰爭：應對複雜戰爭的作戰概念, 認知域戰, 認知戰

Chinese Military Intelligence Drives Accelerated Development of Cyberspace Warfare

Leave a comment

中國軍事情報推動網絡空間戰爭加速發展

現代英語：

The report to the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China pointed out that it is necessary to “accelerate the development of military intelligence and improve joint operational capabilities and all-domain operational capabilities based on network information systems.” Today’s *PLA Daily* published an article stating that military intelligence is a new trend and direction in the development of the military field after mechanization and informatization. We must develop intelligence on the basis of existing mechanization and informatization, while using intelligence to drive mechanization and informatization to a higher level and a higher standard. Cyberspace, as a new operational domain, is a new field with high technological content and the greatest innovative vitality. Under the impetus of military intelligence, it is ushering in a period of rapid development opportunities.Illustration: Lei Yu

Military intelligence is driving the accelerated development of cyberspace operations.

■ Respected soldiers Zhou Dewang Huang Anwei

Three key technologies support the intelligentization of cyberspace weapons.

Intelligence is a kind of wisdom and capability; it is the perception, cognition, and application of laws by all systems with life cycles. Intelligentization is the solidification of this wisdom and capability into a state. Cyberspace weapons are weapons used to carry out combat missions in cyberspace. Their form is primarily software and code, essentially a piece of data. The intelligence of cyberspace weapons is mainly reflected in the following three aspects:

First, there’s intelligent vulnerability discovery. Vulnerabilities are the foundation of cyber weapon design. The ransomware that spread globally this May exploited a vulnerability in the Microsoft operating system, causing a huge shock in the cybersecurity community. Vulnerabilities are expensive, with a single zero-day vulnerability costing tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Previously, vulnerability discovery relied mainly on experienced hackers using software tools to inspect and analyze code. However, at the International Cybersecurity Technology Competition finals held during this year’s China Internet Security Conference, participants demonstrated how intelligent robots could discover vulnerabilities on-site, then use these vulnerabilities to write network code, creating cyber weapons to breach target systems and capture the flag. This change signifies that vulnerability discovery has entered the era of intelligent technology.

Second, intelligent signal analysis and cryptography. Signals are the carriers of network data transmission, and cryptography is the last line of defense for network data security. Signal analysis and cryptography are core technologies for cyberspace warfare. Breaking through signals and cryptography is the fundamental path to entering cyberspace and a primary target of cyber weapons attacks. Intelligent signal analysis solves problems such as signal protocol analysis, modulation identification, and individual identification through technologies such as big data, cloud computing, and deep learning. Cryptography is the “crown jewel” of computational science. Intelligent cryptography, through the accumulation of cryptographic data samples, continuously learns and searches for patterns to find the key to decryption, thereby opening the last door of the network data “safe” and solving the critical links of network intrusion and access.

Thirdly, there is the design of intelligent weapon platforms. In 2009, the U.S. military proposed the “Cyber ​​Aircraft” project, providing platforms similar to armored vehicles, ships, and aircraft for cyberspace operations. These platforms can automatically conduct reconnaissance, load cyber weapons, autonomously coordinate, and autonomously attack in cyberspace. When threatened, they can self-destruct and erase traces, exhibiting a certain degree of intelligence. In the future, the weapons loaded onto “Cyber ​​Aircraft” will not be pre-written code by software engineers, but rather intelligent cyber weapons will be designed in real-time based on discovered vulnerabilities, enabling “order-based” development and significantly improving the targeting of cyberspace operations.

The trend of intelligentization in network-controlled weapons is becoming increasingly prominent.

Weapons controlled by cyberspace, or cyber-controlled weapons, are weapons that connect to a network, receive commands from cyberspace, execute cross-domain missions, and achieve combat effects in physical space. Most future combat weapon platforms will be networked, making military information networks essentially the Internet of Things (IoT). These networks connect to satellites, radars, drones, and other network entities, enabling control from perception and detection to tracking, positioning, and strike. The intelligence of cyber-controlled weapons is rapidly developing across land, sea, air, space, and cyber domains.

In 2015, Syria used a Russian robotic force to defeat militants. The operation employed six tracked robots, four wheeled robots, an automated artillery corps, several drones, and a command system. Commanders used the command system to direct drones to locate militants, and the robots then charged, supported by artillery and drone fire, inflicting heavy casualties. This small-scale battle marked the beginning of robotic “team” operations.

Network-controlled intelligent weapons for naval and air battlefields are under extensive research and development and verification. In 2014, the U.S. Navy used 13 unmanned surface vessels to demonstrate and verify the interception of enemy ships by unmanned surface vessel swarms, mainly by exchanging sensor data, and achieved good results. When tested again in 2016, functions such as collaborative task allocation and tactical coordination were added, and “swarm awareness” became its prominent feature of intelligence.

The development of swarms of small, micro-sized drones for aerial combat is also rapid. In recent years, the U.S. Department of Defense has conducted multiple tests of the Partridge micro-drone, capable of deploying dozens or even hundreds at a time. By enhancing its coordination capabilities during reconnaissance missions, progress has been made in drone formation, command, control, and intelligent management.

Space-based cyber-control weapons are becoming increasingly “intelligent.” The space-based cyber-control domain primarily comprises two categories of weapons: reconnaissance and strike weapons. Satellites of various functions mainly perform reconnaissance missions and are typical reconnaissance sensors. With the emergence of various microsatellite constellations, satellites are exhibiting new characteristics: small size, rapid launch, large numbers, and greater intelligence. Microsatellite constellations offer greater flexibility and reliability in performing reconnaissance and communication missions, and currently, the world’s leading satellite powers are actively developing microsatellite constellation plans with broader coverage.

Various hypersonic strike weapons are cruising in the air, like a sword of Damocles hanging over people’s heads. The U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory stated that the “hypersonic strike weapon” will begin flight testing around 2018, and other countries are also actively developing similar weapons. The most prominent features of these weapons are their high speed, long range, and high level of intelligence.

Intelligent command information systems are changing traditional combat command methods.

Cyber ​​weapons and weapons controlled by cyberspace constitute the “fist” of intelligent warfare, while the command information systems that direct the use of these weapons are the “brain” of intelligent warfare. Cyberspace operational command information systems must keep pace with the process of intelligentization. Currently, almost all global command information systems face the challenge of “intelligent lag.” Future warfare requires rapid and autonomous decision-making, which places higher demands on intelligent support systems.

In 2007, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) launched the “Deep Green Program,” a research and development program for command and control systems, aiming to enable computer-aided commanders to make rapid decisions and gain a decisive advantage. This is a campaign-level command information system, developed to be embedded into the U.S. Army’s brigade-level C4ISR wartime command information system, enabling intelligent command by commanders. Even today, the U.S. military has not relaxed its development of intelligent command information systems.

In cyberspace warfare, network targets are represented by a single IP address accessing the network. Their sheer number makes efficient manual operation difficult, necessitating the support of intelligent command and information systems. Currently, intelligent command and information systems need to achieve functions such as intelligent intelligence analysis, intelligent sensing, intelligent navigation and positioning, intelligent decision support, intelligent collaboration, intelligent assessment, and intelligent unmanned combat. In particular, they must enable swarm operational control of unmanned network control systems. All of these requirements urgently demand intelligent command and information systems, necessitating accelerated research and development and application of relevant key technologies.

In conclusion, intelligent cyber weapons and network control weapons, coordinated through intelligent information systems, will form enormous combat capabilities, essentially enabling them to carry out all actions in current combat scenarios. Future warfare, from command force organization to target selection, action methods, and tactical applications, will all unfold within an intelligent context. The “gamification” of warfare will become more pronounced, and operational command methods will undergo significant changes.

In future battlefields, combat will require not only courage but also intelligence.

■ Yang Jian, Zhao Lu

Currently, artificial intelligence is entering a new stage of development and is rapidly penetrating various fields. Influenced by this process, military competition among nations surrounding intelligent technologies has begun. Our army has always been a brave and tenacious people’s army, determined to fight and win. On the future battlefield, we should continue to carry forward our glorious traditions while more broadly mastering and utilizing the latest technological achievements to develop more intelligent weapons and equipment, thereby gaining a decisive advantage on the future battlefield.

Intelligentization is a trend in human societal development, and intelligent warfare is rapidly approaching. The development of military intelligence has a solid foundation thanks to successful innovations that transcend existing computational models, the gradual popularization of nanotechnology, and breakthroughs in research on the mechanisms of the human brain. Consequently, intelligent weaponry is increasingly prominent, surpassing and even replacing human capabilities in areas such as intelligence analysis and combat response. Furthermore, intelligent weaponry offers significant advantages in terms of manpower requirements, comprehensive support, and operating costs, and is increasingly becoming the dominant force in warfare.

The development and application of intelligent weaponry have proven to expand the scope of military operations and significantly enhance the combat effectiveness of troops. In the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, drones have undertaken most of the reconnaissance, intelligence, and surveillance support missions, and have been responsible for approximately one-third of the air strike missions. In the past two years, Russia has also repeatedly used highly intelligent unmanned reconnaissance aircraft and combat robots in the Syrian theater. Intelligent weaponry is increasingly demonstrating its significant value, surpassing that of traditional weapons.

In future wars, the contest of intelligent combat systems will be the key to victory in high-level competition and ultimate showdowns. As the development of technology-supported military means becomes increasingly uneven, whoever first acquires the capability to conduct intelligent warfare will be better positioned to seize the initiative on the battlefield. Those with a technological advantage will minimize the costs of war, while the weaker will inevitably suffer enormous losses and pay a heavy price. We must not only accelerate innovation in core technologies and the development of weaponry, but also research and explore organizational structures, command methods, and operational models adapted to the development of intelligent military operations. Furthermore, we must cultivate a talent pool capable of promoting intelligent military development and forging intelligent combat capabilities, fully leveraging the overall effectiveness of our military’s combat system, and winning wars in a more “intelligent” manner against our adversaries.

現代國語：

党的十九大报告指出，要“加快军事智能化发展，提高基于网络信息体系的联合作战能力、全域作战能力”。今天的《解放军报》刊发文章指出，军事智能化是机械化、信息化之后军事领域发展的新趋势和新方向，我们要在现有机械化和信息化基础上发展智能化，同时用智能化牵引机械化和信息化向更高水平、更高层次发展。网络空间作为新型作战领域，是科技含量高、最具创新活力的新领域，在军事智能化的牵引下，正在迎来快速发展的机遇期。制图：雷 煜

军事智能化牵引网络空间作战加速发展

■敬兵 周德旺 皇安伟

三大技术支撑网络空间武器智能化

智能是一种智慧和能力，是一切有生命周期的系统对规律的感应、认知与运用，智能化就是把这种智慧和能力固化下来，成为一种状态。网络空间武器是网络空间遂行作战任务的武器，其形态以软件和代码为主，本质上是一段数据。网络空间武器的智能化主要体现在以下三个方面：

一是智能化漏洞挖掘。漏洞是网络武器设计的基础，今年5月在全球范围内传播的勒索病毒软件，就是利用了微软操作系统漏洞，给网络安全界带来了巨大震动。漏洞价格昂贵，一个零日漏洞价值几万到几十万美元不等。以往漏洞的发现，主要依靠有经验的黑客，利用软件工具对代码进行检查和分析。在今年中国互联网安全大会期间举办的国际网络安全技术对抗联赛总决赛中，参赛人员演示由智能机器人现场进行漏洞挖掘，然后通过漏洞编写网络代码，形成网络武器，攻破目标系统，夺取旗帜。这一变化，意味着漏洞挖掘进入了智能化时代。

二是智能化信号分析和密码破译。信号是网络数据传输的载体，密码是网络数据安全最后的屏障，信号分析和密码破译是网络空间作战的核心技术，突破信号和密码是进入网络空间的基本路径，是网络武器攻击的首要目标。智能化信号分析将信号的协议分析、调制识别、个体识别等问题，通过大数据、云计算、深度学习等技术进行解决。密码破译是计算科学“皇冠上的明珠”，智能化密码破译通过对密码数据样本的积累，不断学习、寻找规律，能找到破译的钥匙，从而打开网络数据“保险柜”的最后一道门，解决网络入侵和接入的关键环节。

三是智能化武器平台设计。美军在2009年提出“网络飞行器”项目，为网络空间作战提供像战车、舰艇、飞机这样的平台，可以实现在网络空间里自动侦察、加载网络武器、自主协同、自主攻击，受到威胁时自我销毁、清除痕迹，具备了一定的智能化特征。未来“网络飞行器”加载的武器，不是软件人员编好的代码，而是根据侦察结果直接对发现的漏洞，现场实时进行智能化网络武器设计，实现“订购式”开发，从而极大地提高网络空间作战的针对性。

网控武器的智能化趋势愈加凸显

受网络空间控制的武器简称网控武器，是通过网络连接，接受网络空间指令，执行跨域任务，在物理空间达成作战效果的武器。未来的各种作战武器平台，大多是联网的武器平台，这样军事信息网本质上就是物联网，上联卫星、雷达、无人机等网络实体，从感知到发现、跟踪、定位、打击都可通过网络空间控制，网控武器的智能化已在陆海空天电等战场蓬勃发展。

2015年，叙利亚利用俄罗斯机器人军团击溃武装分子，行动采用了包括6个履带式机器人、4个轮式机器人、1个自动化火炮群、数架无人机和1套指挥系统。指挥员通过指挥系统调度无人机侦察发现武装分子，机器人向武装分子发起冲锋，同时伴随火炮和无人机攻击力量支援，对武装分子进行了致命打击。这仅仅是一场小规模的战斗，却开启了机器人“组团”作战的先河。

海空战场网控智能武器正在大量研发验证。2014年，美国海军使用13艘无人水面艇，演示验证无人艇集群拦截敌方舰艇，主要通过交换传感器数据，取得了不错的效果。2016年再次试验时，新增了协同任务分配、战术配合等功能，“蜂群意识”成为其智能化的显著特点。

用于空中作战的小微型无人机蜂群也在快速发展。近年来，美国国防部多次试验“山鹑”微型无人机，可一次投放数十架乃至上百架，通过提升其执行侦察任务时的协同能力，在无人机编队、指挥、控制、智能化管理等方面都取得了进展。

空天网控武器越来越“聪明”。空天领域主要包含侦察和打击两类网控武器，各种功能的卫星主要执行侦察任务，是典型的侦察传感器。随着各种小微卫星群的出现，使卫星表现出新的特征：体积小、发射快、数量多、更加智能。小微卫星群在执行侦察和通信任务时，有了更大的灵活度和可靠性，目前世界卫星强国都在积极制定覆盖范围更广的小微卫星群计划。

各种高超音速打击武器在空天巡航，仿佛悬在人们头顶的利剑。美国空军研究室称“高速打击武器”将在2018年前后启动飞行试验，其它各国也正在积极研发类似武器。这类武器最大的特点是速度快、航程远、智能化程度高。

智能化指挥信息系统改变传统作战指挥方式

网络空间武器和受网络空间控制的武器，是智能化战争的“拳头”，而指挥这些武器运用的指挥信息系统是智能化战争的“大脑”，网络空间作战指挥信息系统要同步跟上智能化的进程。当前，几乎全球的指挥信息系统都面临着“智能滞后”的难题，未来战争需要快速决策、自主决策，这对智能辅助系统提出了更高要求。

2007年，美国国防部高级研究计划局启动关于指挥控制系统的研发计划——“深绿计划”，以期能实现计算机辅助指挥员快速决策赢得制胜先机。这是一个战役战术级的指挥信息系统，其研发目的是将该系统嵌入美国陆军旅级C4ISR战时指挥信息系统中去，实现指挥员的智能化指挥。直到今天，美军也没有放松对智能化指挥信息系统的开发。

在网络空间作战中，网络目标表现为一个接入网络的IP地址，数量众多导致人工难以高效操作，作战更需要智能化指挥信息系统的辅助支撑。当前，智能化指挥信息系统需要实现智能情报分析、智能感知、智能导航定位、智能辅助决策、智能协同、智能评估、智能化无人作战等功能，尤其是实现对无人网控系统的集群作战操控，这都对智能化指挥信息系统提出了迫切需求，需要加快相应关键技术的研发和运用。

综上所述，智能化的网络武器和网控武器，通过智能化的信息系统调度，将形成巨大的作战能力，基本能遂行现行作战样式中的所有行动。未来战争，从指挥力量编组、到目标选择、行动方式、战法运用等，都将在智能化的背景下展开，战争“游戏化”的特点将更显著，作战指挥方式也将发生重大变化。

未来战场 斗勇更需斗“智”

■杨建　赵璐

当前，人工智能发展进入崭新阶段，并开始向各个领域加速渗透。受这一进程的影响，各国围绕智能化的军事竞争已拉开帷幕。我军历来是一支英勇顽强、敢打必胜的人民军队，未来战场上应继续发扬光荣传统，同时要更加广泛地掌握和利用最新的科技成果，研制出更多智能化的武器装备，在未来战场上掌握制胜先机。

智能化是人类社会发展的趋势，智能化战争正在加速到来。正是由于超越原有体系结构计算模型的成功创新、纳米制造技术的逐步普及，以及对人脑机理研究的突破性进展，军事智能化发展才拥有了坚实的基础。因此，智能化武器装备的表现日益突出，并在情报分析、战斗反应等方面开始超越并替代人类。此外，在人力需求、综合保障、运行成本等方面，智能化武器装备也具有明显的优势，正在日益成为战争的主导力量。

事实证明，智能化武器装备的发展应用，拓展了军事行动的能力范围，大幅提升了部队的作战效能。在阿富汗和伊拉克战场上，无人机已承担了大部分侦察、情报、监视等作战保障任务，并担负了约三分之一的空中打击任务。近两年，俄罗斯在叙利亚战场上也多次使用具有较高智能化程度的无人侦察机、战斗机器人等装备。智能化武器装备正在愈来愈多地展现出超越传统武器的重要价值。

未来战争中，作战体系智能化的较量将是高手过招、巅峰对决的制胜关键。随着以科技为支撑的军事手段发展的不平衡性越来越大，谁先具备实施智能化作战的能力，谁就更能掌握战场的主动权，拥有技术代差优势的强者会尽可能将战争成本降到最低，而弱者必然遭受巨大损失，付出惨重代价。我们不仅要加紧核心技术创新、武器装备研制，还要研究探索适应军事智能化发展的组织结构、指挥方式和运用模式，更要培养一支能够担起推进军事智能化发展、锻造智能化作战能力的人才队伍，充分发挥我军作战体系的整体效能，在与对手的较量中，以更加“智慧”的方式赢得战争。

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/jwzl/2017-11/24/content_7841898885.htm

#cyber #warfare, #mosaic #warfare, #網路戰爭, #馬賽克 #戰爭

Chinese Military Operational Transition “Cyber Warfare” to “Mosaic Warfare”

Leave a comment

中國軍事行動從「網路戰」轉型為「馬賽克戰」

現代英語：

Theory is the precursor of action. Strengthening innovation in combat concepts and promoting innovation in combat guidance have always been important ways for militaries around the world to develop military advantages. In recent years, the U.S. military has successively proposed cutting-edge combat theories such as “cyber warfare”“ and mosaic warfare”, in order to realize that the combat model “production relationship” can be more adapted to the development of combat capabilities “productivity”. Through comparative analysis of these two combat theories, the world can get a glimpse of the changes in the thinking of building the US military’s combat capabilities, especially the understanding of the winning mechanism “mosaic warfare”, so as to find targeted and effective checks and balances.

● From threat response to war design——

Active shaping and improvement of traction combat capability

“Threat-based ”or “capability-based” are two basic ways to build military combat capabilities.“ Threat-based ”reflecting demand traction and focusing on solving real-life problems in the near and medium term are the basic rules that the military should follow in building combat capabilities; “based on capabilities” embodying goal traction, aiming at future strategic missions, and supporting strategic concepts with new combat theories are the key to military combat capabilities. The only way to innovate and surpass. The development from “cyber warfare” to “mosaic warfare” reflects the differences and evolution of the internal laws of the above two approaches, and also reflects the changes in the thinking and concepts of the US military in promoting combat capability construction in recent years.

New changes in concept origin. Cyberspace was originally born to solve human communication needs. Later, it gradually evolved into a new combat domain independent of land, sea, air, and space. From this, a “cyber war” with the struggle for cyberspace control as the core was derived. In comparison, “mosaic warfare” is a new combat concept actively developed and designed by the US military in order to continue to maintain its strategic advantage and directly target competitors. Its formation process reflects the integration of demand traction and capability traction, and its strategy, initiative, and traction Sex is more prominent.

New ideas for the use of technology.“ Cyber warfare ”emphasis on supporting the transformation and implementation of combat concepts through the development of new generation technologies.“ Mosaic Warfare” breaks out of this model and does not place too much emphasis on the development of a new generation of equipment technology. It pays more attention to the rapid transformation of general military and civilian technologies and the incremental iteration of mature technologies. The basic idea is to build on existing equipment and follow the application concepts of service platforms such as online ride-hailing and crowdfunding development. Through module upgrades and intelligent transformation, various combat system units “mosaicization” will be transformed into single-function, flexible Assemble and replaceable “building blocks” or “pixels” to build a dynamically coordinated, highly autonomous, and seamlessly integrated combat system Embodied new technology-driven ideas.

Path Development New Design.“ Cyber warfare ”as a companion concept to the network space, wherever the network space develops, “cyber warfare” will follow suit. Generally speaking, “objective” material conditions will be considered first, and then “subjective” conceptual design will be carried out. It has strong dependence on path development.“ Mosaic warfare ”first from “subjective” to “objective”, by developing a force design model that can dynamically adjust the functional structure, it can adapt to different combat needs and changes in the battlefield environment.

It can be seen that “mosaic warfare” has clearer goals, more mature technology, and more reliable paths than previous combat concepts such as “cyber warfare”, reflecting the change in thinking actively shaped by the US military.

● From network center to decision center——

Group intelligence to achieve optimal system energy release

AI technology is a key variable in the information age and a core increment in the development of the “mosaic warfare” system.“ Cyber warfare ”emphasis on “network center”, “mosaic warfare” closely focuses on the core of artificial intelligence technology, adjusts the key to victory from “network center” to “decision-making center”, and changes the combat system structure from system level and platform level Joint transformation to functional level and factor level integration, seeking to fully gather energy in the network The “group intelligence technology” realizes the optimal release of the system and gives new connotation to the war winning mechanism in the intelligent era.

Use “fast” to control “slow” to seize the cognitive lead. In future wars, the battlefield situation will change rapidly, and the weight of time factors will continue to increase. “Fast” versus “Slow” can form a combat strike effect that is approximately dimensionally reduced.“ Mosaic War ” By using data information technology and artificial intelligence technology, we can improve the single-ring decision-making speed of our own “OODA” ring, expand the breadth of parallel decision-making, reduce the granularity of group decision-making, accelerate the progress of system operations, and create an overall one-step faster “First move” situation, aiming to firmly control the dominance of cognitive decision-making on the battlefield.

With “low” system “high”, we accumulate cost advantages. Different from the traditional combat concept of pursuing high-end weapon platforms, “mosaic warfare” focuses on using artificial intelligence technology to tap the potential and increase efficiency of existing weapon platforms and combat resources. By loading and operating intelligent algorithms and specific functional modules on many mid-to-low-end weapon platforms, it can achieve combat performance comparable to high-end weapon platforms, overall improving the cost-effectiveness ratio of the input and output of the weapon platform, thereby accumulating cost advantages.

To “disperse” control “gather” and seek sustainable survival. “ Mosaic Warfare ” emphasizes the adoption of decentralized ideas and asymmetric checks and balances, using an open system architecture, and decentralized configuration of various functions such as reconnaissance, positioning, communication, and strike on various manned/unmanned platforms to achieve power. Distributed deployment. At the same time, relying on intelligent algorithms to improve the self-organization, self-coordination, and independent attack capabilities of each platform to achieve dispersion and concentration of firepower. When some combat platforms are eliminated, interfered with or stripped away, the entire combat system can still operate normally, thereby enhancing the continued viability of the battlefield of the force cluster.

Use “movement” to control “stillness” to improve system flexibility. “ Mosaic warfare ” emphasizes further breaking through the barriers of various combat areas. By turning the fixed “kill chain” in different combat domains into a dynamically reconfigurable “kill net”, the “OODA” large ring is disassembled into small rings, and the single ring is differentiated into multiple rings. According to changes in combat processes and combat requirements, intelligent networking is relied on to realize the split-in-movement, call-in-movement and combination of combat forces. In this way, on the one hand, it can enhance the flexibility and adaptability of the combat system; on the other hand, it can also hedge and offset the node aggregation effect of complex networks, making it difficult for opponents to find key nodes to defeat their own systems.

“Mosaic warfare” provides a reference prototype for intelligent operations. But at the same time, as an idealized force design and application framework, “mosaic warfare” still needs closely related technical, doctrinal, policy and other supporting support. There is still a long way to go before it is fully realized, and it is consistent with traditional combat systems. The coexistence situation will exist for a long time.

● From factor integration to system restructuring——

Dynamic structure to enhance combat system flexibility

Structure and relationships often determine function and nature.“ Cyber warfare ”and “mosaic warfare” are built on the common material foundation of the information age and follow the same evolutionary paradigm, but the principles and effects of system construction are different.“ The system structure formed by cyber warfare” is statically deconstructable, while “mosaic warfare” dynamically combines functional units according to certain construction rules to form a flexible system structure with self-organizing and adaptive characteristics, similar to a “dynamic black box”, which is difficult to follow with conventional means. predict. And this flexible structure often “emerges” new capabilities to empower and increase effectiveness in the combat system.

The integrated development of network and cloud makes combat time and space more dynamic and malleable. The Internet and the cloud are the basic environment for the operation of the information combat system. They reshape the process elements of intelligence, accusation, strike, and support in traditional operations, and at the same time derive new combat time and space.“ Cyber warfare ”mainly focusing on network space, its combat time and space are relatively static.“ Mosaic warfare ” is not limited to a single combat space. Under the development trend of information infrastructure network following cloud movement and cloud network integration, tangible and intangible spaces can be further deep-linked. The boundaries between combat time and space are more flexible, and the allocation of combat resources is more flexible, the combat system structure is more dynamic.

Data flows across domains, making operational control more seamlessly coordinated. In the “Command and Control” link, “cyber warfare” focuses on the command and control of combat units by joint combat command agencies. Cross-domain exchange and flow of data is mainly concentrated on the theater battlefield.“ Mosaic warfare ”further sinks the level of joint operations to the tactical end. Through the autonomous cross-domain exchange and seamless flow of data at the tactical level, various data islands can be clustered into data clusters on demand, thereby producing a significant “spillover” effect, making the dynamic, discrete, agile, and parallel characteristics of the combat command control loop more obvious, and more conducive to achieving agile connection of each combat unit on demand Efficiently act in concert.

Algorithm full-dimensional penetration makes system operation more autonomous and efficient. Algorithms are the mapping of human consciousness in cyberspace, forming two basic forms: compilation codes transformed by intention and neural networks transformed by knowledge. In “cyber warfare”, compiled code is widely used, and neural networks are only used locally. In “Mosaic Warfare”, the algorithm expands the two key functions of shaping rules and providing engines, and the breadth and depth of application are more prominent. Shaping rules is mainly based on compilation code, supplemented by neural networks, to construct the process framework and operating logic of the “mosaic warfare” system, laying a structural foundation for its uncertainty, adaptability and ability “emergence”; the provision engine mainly integrates intelligent algorithms The model is distributed to the edge elements to operate, forming a knowledge diffusion effect, thereby comprehensively improving the intelligent autonomous combat capabilities of the “mosaic warfare” system.

The side end releases energy independently, making the combat style more flexible and polymorphic. The edge is an abstract model of various manned/unmanned combat functional units and a direct source of systemic capabilities “emergence”.“ Cyber warfare ”in a system where edge elements are closely coupled with superior and subordinate accusation processes and are in a state of precise control.“ In the mosaic warfare” system, the perception, interaction, reasoning, and decision-making capabilities of edge-end elements are greatly improved. Its “OODA” ring does not need to be linked back to the superior command structure, which is conducive to supporting the formation of a decentralized combat cluster with high and low matching and manned/unmanned combination. form, which can give edge-end elements more self-organizing authority and significantly enhance the battlefield confrontation advantage.

It can be seen that if “cyber warfare” is called a sophisticated war machine, “mosaic warfare” can be regarded as a complex “ecology” that can stimulate the dynamic growth of combat capabilities. New changes in network clouds, data, algorithms, and edges have contributed to The formation of a dynamically complex “system structure”. This structure in turn reversely regulates elements, platforms and systems, and new capabilities continue to emerge, playing an important role in enhancing and evolving the combat system.

● From “system breaking to compound confrontation——”

To analyse the advantages and disadvantages and seek effective checks and balances

“Mosaic warfare” represents to a certain extent the possible direction of the future development of joint operations. It is necessary to fully analyze and grasp the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare”, shape the field of information and communication as a new quality and new domain that breaks the traditional boundaries of war time and space, create a new concept of network cloud-enabled combat, build and strengthen the support and support capabilities of national defense information infrastructure, and highlight military information network security defense capabilities, enhance the minimum support capabilities for the operation of strategic campaign command organizations, and continuously improve the network information system.

On the other hand, the emergence of the “mosaic warfare” theory makes it difficult for traditional combat methods to attack target nodes with limited capture and control to achieve the system-breaking effect of breaking points and breaking chains. But it should be noted that any system has its inherent contradictions, and the seemingly “impeccable” decentralized structure of “mosaic warfare” can still find ways to effectively crack it. For example, grasp its system complexity characteristics, use its correlation dependence, highlight the functional suppression of communication networks, construct network-electrical composite attack paths, and achieve disassembly and isolation of various units of the combat system; grasp its structural dissipation characteristics, and use Its external information dependence highlights the disguise and misleading of information data, prompting the combat system to transform into abnormal states such as information closure and information overload; Grasp its group autonomy characteristics, use its key technology dependence, highlight the confrontation and efficiency reduction of intelligent algorithms, and suppress the intelligent internal drive of each combat unit; grasp its functional non-linear characteristics, use its unknown vulnerabilities, and highlight battlefield differentiation Strike assessment, test and discover operational system imbalances with higher efficiency and faster speed, and find key weaknesses in system attack.

(Author’s unit: Unit 61001)

現代國語：

編者按

理論是行動的先導。加強作戰概念創新、推動作戰指導革新，歷來是世界各國軍隊培塑軍事優勢的重要途徑。近年來，美軍先後提出「賽博戰」「馬賽克戰」等前線作戰理論，以期實現作戰模式這一「生產關系」能夠更加適應作戰能力這一「生產力」的發展。透過對比分析這兩種作戰理論，世人可以一窺美軍作戰能力建設思路的變化，特別是認清「馬賽克戰」的製勝機理，從而有的放矢，找到有效制衡之策。

●從威脅應對到戰爭設計——

主動塑造，牽引作戰能力提升

「基於威脅」或「基於能力」是軍隊作戰能力建設的兩條基本途徑。 「基於威脅」體現需求牽引，聚焦解決近中期現實問題，是軍隊作戰能力建設應遵循的基本規律；「基於能力」體現目標牽引，瞄準未來戰略使命，以新作戰理論支撐戰略構想，是軍隊作戰能力創新超越的必由之路。從「賽博戰」向「馬賽克戰」的發展，體現了上述兩種途徑內在規律的差異與演進，也反映出美軍近年來推進作戰能力建設思維理念的變化。

概念發端新變化。網絡空間，最初為解決人類的通訊需求而生，後來逐漸演變為一個獨立於陸、海、空、天之外的新作戰域，由此衍生出以爭奪網絡空間制權為核心的「賽博戰」。與之相比，「馬賽克戰」是美軍為繼續保持戰略優勢地位，直接瞄準競爭對手而主動開發設計的新作戰概念，其形成過程體現了需求牽引與能力牽引的融合，戰略性、主動性、牽引性更加突顯。

技術運用新思路。 「賽博戰」強調，透過研發新世代技術支撐作戰概念轉化落地。 「馬賽克戰」則跳出這個模式，不過分強調研發新一代裝備技術，更加關注對軍民通用技術的快速轉化，對成熟技術的漸進迭代。其基本想法是立足現有裝備，按照類似網約車、眾籌開發等服務類平台的運用理念，通過模塊升級和智能化改造，將各類作戰系統單元“馬賽克化”為功能單一、靈活拼裝、便於替換的“積木”或“像素”，構建形成動態協調、高度自主、無縫融合的作戰體系，體現了新的技術驅動。

路徑發展新設計。 「賽博戰」作為網電空間的伴生概念，網電空間發展到哪裡，「賽博戰」就跟進到哪裡，總體上先考慮「客觀」的物質條件，再進行「主觀」的概念設計，在路徑發展上具有較強的依附性。 「馬賽克戰」則先由「主觀」再到「客觀」，透過開發可動態調整功能結構的兵力設計模型，使其能夠適應不同作戰需求及戰場環境變化。

由此可見，「馬賽克戰」相比「賽博戰」等過去作戰概念，其目標更加明確、技術更加成熟、路徑更加可靠，體現出美軍主動塑造的思路轉變。

●從網絡中心到決策中心—

群體智能，實現體系最優釋能

人工智慧技術是資訊時代的關鍵變量，也是「馬賽克戰」體系發展的核心增量。 《賽博戰》強調“網絡中心”，“馬賽克戰”則緊緊扭住人工智能技術這一核心，將製勝關鍵從“網絡中心”調整為“決策中心”，將作戰體系架構由系統級、平台級聯合轉變為功能級、要素級融合，謀求在網絡充分聚能的前提下，以群體性智能技術實現體系最優釋能，為勝理的戰爭賦予新涵機時代。

以“快”制“慢”，奪取認知先手。未來戰爭，戰場形勢瞬息萬變，時間要素的權重不斷上升，「快」對「慢」可以形成近似降維的作戰打擊效果。 「馬賽克戰」透過運用數據資訊技術與人工智慧技術，提升己方「OODA」環的單環決策速度，拓展並行決策廣度，降低組環決策粒度，加快體係作戰進度，在整體上塑造始終快人一步的「先手棋」態勢，旨在牢牢控制戰場認知決策的主導權。

以“低”制“高”，積累成本優勢。與追求高端武器平台的傳統作戰概念不同，「馬賽克戰」著重於利用人工智慧技術對現有武器平台及作戰資源的挖潛增效。透過在眾多中低階武器平台上加載運行智慧演算法和特定功能模塊，使其達到媲美高端武器平台的作戰性能，整體上提高了武器平台投入產出的效費比，進而積累形成成本優勢。

以“散”制“聚”，謀求持續生存。 「馬賽克戰」強調採用化整為零的去中心化思路和非對稱制衡理念，使用開放系統架構，在各類有人/無人平台上分散配置偵察、定位、通信、打擊等各類功能，實現力量的分佈式部署。同時，依托智能演算法提升各平台的自組織、自協同、自主攻擊能力，實現形散神聚、火力集中。當部分作戰平台被消滅、幹擾或剝離後，整個作戰體系仍能正常運轉，從而增強兵力集群的戰場持續生存能力。

以“動”制“靜”，提升體系彈性。 「馬賽克戰」強調進一步突破各作戰域壁壘。通過把不同作戰域中固定的“殺傷鏈”變成可動態重構的“殺傷網”，將“OODA”大環拆解為小環，單環分化為多環。根據作戰進程和作戰需求的變化，依托智能組網實現作戰力量的動中拆分、動中調用、動中組合。如此，一方面可增強作戰體系的靈活性、適應性；另一方面還可對沖抵消複雜網絡的節點聚集效應，使對手難以找到破擊己方體系的關鍵節點。

「馬賽克戰」為智慧化作戰提供了一種可藉鑑的參考原型。但同時，作為一種理想化的兵力設計和運用框架，「馬賽克戰」還需要與之緊密相關的技術、條令、政策等配套支持，距離完全實現還有很長的路要走，與傳統作戰體系共存的局面將長期存在。

●從要素整合到體系重組—

動態結構，增強作戰體係彈性

結構和關系往往決定功能和性質。 「賽博戰」與「馬賽克戰」建構於資訊時代共同的物質基礎，遵循相同的演進範式，但體系建構的原理和效果有所不同。 「賽博戰」形成的體系結構靜態可解構，而「馬賽克戰」則按照一定構建規則動態組合功能單元，形成具有自組織、自適應特徵的彈性體系結構，類似一種“動態黑箱”，常規手段難以跟踪預測。而這一彈性結構常會「湧現」出新的能力，為作戰體系賦能增效。

網雲融合發展，使作戰時空更動態可塑。網和雲是資訊化作戰體系運作的基礎環境，重塑了傳統作戰中情報、指控、打擊、保障的流程要素，同時衍生出新的作戰時空。 「賽博戰」主要聚焦網電空間，其作戰時空相對靜態。 「馬賽克戰」則不限於單一作戰空間，在資訊基礎設施網隨雲動、雲網一體的發展趨勢下，可進一步深度鉸鏈有形無形空間，作戰時空邊界更有彈性，作戰資源配置更加靈活，作戰體系結構更具動態。

數據跨域流轉，使作戰控制更加無縫協同。在指揮控制環節，「賽博戰」關注的重點是聯合作戰指揮機構對作戰單元的指揮控制，數據跨域交換流轉主要集中在戰區戰場。 「馬賽克戰」則進一步將聯合作戰的層級下沉至戰術末端，通過數據在戰術層面的自主跨域交換和無縫流轉，實現各類數據孤島按需集聚為數據集群，進而產生顯著的「溢出」效應，讓作戰指揮控制環路動態、離散、敏捷、並行的特徵更為明顯，更加有利於實現各作戰單元按需銜接、高效協同行動。

演算法全維滲透，使體系運作更加自主高效。演算法是人的意識在網絡空間的映射，形成了由意圖轉化的編譯代碼和由知識轉化的神經網絡兩種基本形態。在「賽博戰」中，編譯代碼大量應用，神經網絡只在局部應用。在「馬賽克戰」中，演算法擴展出塑造規則、提供引擎兩項關鍵職能，運用的廣度深度更加突出。塑造規則以編譯代碼為主，輔以神經網絡，構造「馬賽克戰」體系的流程框架和運行邏輯，為其不確定性、適應性和能力「湧現」性奠定結構基礎；提供引擎則主要將智能演算法模型分發至邊端要素運行，形成知識擴散效應，從而全面提升「馬賽克戰」體系的智能自主作戰能力。

邊端自主釋能，使作戰樣式更靈活多態。邊端是各類有人/無人作戰功能單元的抽像模型，也是體系能力「湧現」的直接來源。 「賽博戰」體系中，邊端要素與上下級指控流程緊密耦合，處於精確受控狀態。 「馬賽克戰」體系中，邊端要素的感知、交互、推理、決策能力大大提升，其「OODA」環不必回鏈至上級指揮機構，有利於支撐形成高低搭配、有人/無人結合的去中心化作戰集群形態，可以賦予邊端要素更多自組織權限，明顯增強了戰場對抗優勢。

可見，如果稱“賽博戰”為精密的戰爭機器，“馬賽克戰”則可以視為一種能夠激發作戰能力動態生長的復雜“生態”，網雲、數據、算法、邊端所產生的新變化，促進形成了動態復雜的“體系結構”。這一結構又反向調控要素、平台和系統，不斷湧現新的能力，為作戰體系增能、演變發揮重要作用。

●從體系破擊到復合對抗——

辨析優劣，尋求有效制衡之策

「馬賽克戰」某種程度上代表著未來聯合作戰形態發展的可能方向。應當充分研析把握「馬賽克戰」的製勝機理，將資訊通信領域作為打破傳統戰爭時空界限的新質新域加以塑造，打造網雲賦能作戰新概念，建強國防資訊基礎設施支撐保障能力，突顯軍事資訊網安全防禦能力，增強戰略戰役指揮機構運行的保底支撐能力，不斷完善網絡資訊體系。

另一方面，「馬賽克戰」理論的出現，使得打擊奪控有限目標節點的傳統作戰手段，難以達成毀點斷鏈的體系破擊效果。但應當看到，任何體係都有其固有矛盾，「馬賽克戰」看似「無懈可擊」的去中心化結構，仍可以找到有效破解的方法路徑。例如，掌握其體系複雜性特徵，利用其關聯關係依賴性，突出針對通信網絡的功能抑制，構建網電復合攻擊路徑，實現對作戰體系各單元的拆解孤立；把握其結構耗散性特徵，利用其外部信息依賴性，突出針對信息數據的偽裝誤導，促使作戰體係向信息封閉、信息過載等非正常狀態轉化；掌握其群體自主性特徵，利用其關鍵技術依賴性，突出針對智能算法的對抗降效，抑制各作戰單元的智能內驅力；把握其功能非線性特徵，利用其未知脆弱性，突出戰場差異化打擊評估，以更高的效率和更快的速度失衡、發現作戰體系擊點，尋找體系破擊的關鍵弱點。

（作者單位：61001部隊

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.mod.gov.cn/gfbw/jmsd/4894734888.html?big=fan