Tag Archives: #Information Support Force

#collaborative warfare, #cross-domain collaborative operations, #cyber #warfare, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, #mosaic #warfare

China’s Violence of War Shifts from Annihilation to Domination of the Enemy

Leave a comment

中國的戰爭暴力從殲滅戰轉向對敵方的征服戰

現代英語：Military Academy

Editor’s Note: In today’s world, war looms large, with open and covert conflicts erupting one after another, revealing new connotations of war. The theory of war discusses the superstructure of violence, taking conflict as its object of study, exploring the roots, purposes, forms, and methods of political, military, economic, and social conflicts; the theory of violence studies the means and behavioral basis of war, taking confrontation as its object of study, exploring the nature, forms, laws, and violence of weapons and their use in confrontation. The theory of war is supported by the theory of violence, and the theory of violence is guided by the theory of war; the two complement each other, driving the evolution of the art of war. On July 24th of this year, this journal published Professor Lin Dong’s article “Comprehensive War Changes the Form of Conflict,” proposing a new theory of war. Here, this journal has invited Professor Lin Dong to write another article, “War Violence: From Annihilating the Enemy to Dominating the Enemy,” elaborating on the new theory of violence corresponding to the new theory of war, for our readers.

War is the highest form of violence, and violence is its most essential characteristic. As humanity entered the 21st century, driven by both technological advancements and pressing needs, war and violence entered a more advanced stage—the era of dominant violence.

1. The inevitability of the shift in war violence from annihilating the enemy to dominating the enemy

In the 21st century, information and intelligent technologies are reshaping the space and means of violence in warfare, triggering a differentiation in the application of violence. While novice war players are still reveling in the ever-evolving violence of conquering cities and territories, skilled war players have already devised new forms of violence that allow them to manipulate the enemy without firing a single shot. Once the opponent falls into the trap of being controlled, no matter how many battles they win, it will all be in vain, ultimately returning them to square one, or even leading to utter ruin.

The purpose of dominating violence is to enable oneself to strike the enemy and render their strikes ineffective. The ultimate goal of victory, pursued by both sides in war throughout history—to subdue the enemy without being subdued—is characterized by the asymmetry of violent confrontation. Information and intelligent technologies have solved the complexities of controllable and coordinated warfare, making war no longer like it was during World War II, where “the war machine, once started, was difficult to stop.” Violence has become a political tool that can be manipulated and used with ease. Especially under informationized and intelligent conditions, the controllability and deprivation of violence in war provide the conditions for dominating violence. The side possessing advanced technology can dominate the battlefield and control the course of war through non-contact warfare, achieving its war objectives by deterring, dismantling, and dismantling the enemy’s tools of violence. Thus, violent confrontation manifests as the deprivation or restraint of the opponent’s violence, allowing oneself to successfully evade enemy attacks.

The essence of dominating violence lies in the shift from annihilating the enemy to dominating the enemy, a shift determined by the emphasis on economic objectives in modern warfare. Engels pointed out, “Violence is merely a means; on the contrary, economic interests are the ends. The ends are far more ‘fundamental’ than the means used to achieve them.” Fundamentally, modern warfare pursues social values ​​and economic interests, leading to the expansion of war violence from direct to indirect violence. Simply put, victory can be achieved without physically destroying the enemy. Firstly, it involves the precise use and control of violence. The controllability of violence is developing towards precision, which is not only a political necessity to reduce collateral damage but also an economic necessity to lower the cost of war. It is also a requirement for quickly controlling the battlefield, effectively dominating the enemy, and seizing victory—a distinctive feature of modern warfare. Secondly, it has evolved from inflicting violence to deterring violence. Traditional violent confrontation emphasizes victory through battlefield combat, while dominating violence seeks to deter and dismantle the effectiveness of enemy violence. By displaying force and refusing the enemy’s use of force, it instills fear of war or renders the war machine inoperable, thereby achieving war objectives with minimal use of violence. Currently, the US military’s concepts of deterrence warfare and decapitation strikes are based on this idea. Thirdly, bloodless violence is comparable to bloody violence. The greatest advantage of bloodless violence is that it not only significantly reduces the cost of using violence but also increases the asymmetry of its use, leading to unexpected changes in the course of battle.

The dominant principle governing violence has shifted from the traditional greater use of violence to the optimal use of violence, leading to a decrease in the brutality of war. Since the end of the Cold War, casualties in modern warfare have decreased dramatically. From the Gulf War to the Iraq War, the total number of deaths on both sides dropped from less than 100,000 to less than 20,000, while the Vietnam War saw nearly 1.7 million deaths. However, the driving force behind this sharp decline in war casualties is not a decrease in the lethality of war, but rather strategic needs, primarily economic needs, as the economy has always been the root of war. Taking the Iraq War as an example, the United States sought oil resources; therefore, its purpose in launching the war was to establish an Iraq that aligned with American interests. “Destroying” Iraq or plunging it into chaos would only exacerbate the destructive nature of the war, increase the cost of post-war reconstruction, and amplify hostility, making post-war stability maintenance more difficult. Simultaneously, the overall decline in the brutality of war is also attributed to the progress in the world’s moral views on war since World War II, resulting in restrictions on the use of violence in war, with media playing a role in public opinion oversight. Thus, the violence of war was precisely used and released after precise planning and design. Unprecedented high-intensity military strikes could be carried out under the principle of minimizing (sufficient) collateral damage and not causing large-scale casualties. Instead of causing mass casualties among the enemy, the strikes quickly rendered the enemy unable to resist, which is equivalent to turning surgical strikes into minimally invasive surgery to reduce the aftereffects of war.

2. Dominating the enemy’s thinking is becoming the direct course of war.

Dominating the enemy evolved from deterring the enemy, but it is not a new concept. From Sun Tzu’s “the best strategy is to subdue the enemy by their plans” to the tactics of “leading the enemy by the nose,” there is a wealth of ideas about domination. However, in the past, due to a lack of weapons and technology, dominating the enemy was indirect. Today, the informatization and intelligentization of weapons are transforming the idea of ​​dominating the enemy into a direct approach to warfare.

Lethal violence plays a dominant role in military force, exhibiting a dual-track pattern of bloodshed and non-bloodshed in manned combat spaces, moving from physically eliminating the enemy to dominating them physiologically and psychologically. From cold weapons to firearms, all are physical violence that injures the body, belonging to the category of bloodshed violence. After carpet bombing reached its peak, it was constrained by the laws of war, shifting towards precision strikes to reduce unnecessary casualties. At the same time, demonstrating force remains an effective political tool; nuclear deterrence acts as a strategic stabilizer, and precision strikes enhance the effectiveness of conventional deterrence. However, precision violence is not “merciful violence,” and battlefield pressure is greater than ever before.

During World War I, biological and chemical weapons emerged, with bacteriological and chemical warfare entering the battlefield, causing massive casualties and ecological damage, and were banned by the Hague Convention. However, since the beginning of the 21st century, hegemonic powers have continued to pursue biological and chemical warfare, and terrorism has used these weapons as the best tool of violence against humanity. Therefore, some scholars consider the 21st century the century of biological warfare. With technological advancements, the controllability of the lethality of biological agents has greatly increased. In 2002, Russia used biogas for the first time in the anti-terrorism battlefield during a hostage crisis, marking the entry of non-lethal weapons into conventional warfare. With the rapid development of non-lethal weapons, the focus has shifted from gunpowder-based killings to controlling and destroying biological (physiological) systems, thereby disabling combat effectiveness. In particular, non-lethal weapons are more cost-effective compared to lethal weapons such as aircraft, warships, and tanks. With simplified manufacturing techniques, olfactory weapons, rubber bullets, traps, biological reagents, stun grenades, and laser blinding weapons have been deployed, driving lethal violence towards a soft-kill approach. Modern deterrence warfare and effects-based operations demonstrate that making the enemy afraid to use weapons or unable to use weapons on the battlefield can lead to easier victories. During the Iraq War, the United States successfully used deterrence warfare to intimidate and deceive Saddam Hussein, preventing him from using the Scud missiles that posed a threat to U.S. forces.

Intelligent warfare is shifting from force-intensive to weapon-intensive battlefields. Higher-dimensional spaces such as cyberspace, outer space, and electromagnetic spectrum are replacing land, sea, and air as the dominant operational spaces. These spaces are nearly unmanned, and with massive political, economic, and military critical infrastructure such as oil pipelines, storage facilities, and transportation hubs becoming the focus of attack, weapons of mass destruction are breaking free from the constraints of manned battlefields and turning towards destroying weapon systems and combat platforms. This shift from lethal violence to destructive violence has led to an unlimited increase in war violence. From the Gulf War to the Iraq War, the US military used cluster bombs and depleted uranium munitions to strike Iraqi military and political infrastructure and armored convoys, breaking the nuclear threshold to some extent and opening a new direction for the development of weapons of mass destruction. From the US military’s use of graphite bombs to attack urban power systems in the Kosovo War to the damage and paralysis of Iranian nuclear facilities by a virus attack, electromagnetic pulse weapons, space weapons, and cyber weapons have demonstrated enormous power. Although destructive weapons are strictly controlled and do not directly target humans, they aim to destroy operational systems, infrastructure, and even the enemy’s survival environment, thereby forcing the enemy to submit. What warrants particular attention is that nuclear strikes, restricted by the laws of war, are moving away from cities and civilians, and even densely populated manned battlefields, but are shifting towards sparsely populated unmanned battlefields, such as space, the deep sea, and isolated islands.

With the development of informatization and intelligentization, the information and cognitive domains have become new battlegrounds for penetrating the economy and society. Information tools and cognitive tools have naturally become new tools of violence, mainly manifested in the forms of cyber violence, economic violence, and cultural violence, which have emerged rapidly and forcibly altered the judgments, positions, and decisions of adversaries at the strategic and social levels. Cyber ​​warfare involves artificially creating false data or tampering with big data to induce adversaries to make incorrect judgments and decisions; economic violence has evolved into economic sanctions, financial warfare, and technological decoupling warfare, attacking adversaries’ stock markets and banking systems, disrupting adversaries’ supply chains through legal and coercive commercial means, and hindering adversaries’ development and innovation; cultural violence leverages digital networks to push traditional public opinion warfare into public diplomacy and global media warfare, thereby influencing the positions of the international community and the global public.

In short, in the era of dominant violence, the violence of war has shifted, expanding from lethal violence to destructive and coercive violence.

3. Just wars and unjust wars follow different paths of dominant violence.

In the 21st century, the violent nature of war has not changed; violence remains the primary act of war, and without violence, there can be no war. In the era of cold weapons, violence manifested as the clash of swords; in the era of firearms, it evolved into the smoke of gunpowder; and in the nuclear age, the violence of war has expanded infinitely. To this day, humanity as a whole still lives in a relatively peaceful era of insecurity under the threat of nuclear weapons.

Marx’s assertion that “violence is the midwife of every old society that gives birth to a new one” remains a tenet of just war. However, advancements in warfare and the globalization of warfare have elevated the structural transformation of violence in just war from a natural process to a conscious one. First, we must not allow the pursuit of efficiency in war to obscure our historical perspective, recognizing that only just war can achieve complete victory. Wars are always categorized as just or unjust, and informationized and intelligent warfare is no exception. Second, modern warfare practice has provided both tactical and technical lessons for promoting the development of just war theory and negative examples for political and strategic critique. A profound realization is that the US military’s promotion of low-casualty, low-cost warfare efficiency has given the world a strong impression of swift military victories. However, the US spent trillions of dollars on post-war reconstruction in Afghanistan and Iraq, yet still could not avoid the eventual withdrawal. Such lessons are ancient, and modern warfare continues to repeat them. The secret it reveals is that the pursuit of efficiency in informationized and intelligent warfare has not changed the fundamental principle that only just war can win peace. The U.S. military achieved military dominance through its superior combat power and, to some extent, economic dominance from before the start of the war until the end of the major combat operations. However, without just political leadership, its rapid victories based on information superiority were still short-lived, unsustainable, and politically unsuccessful military victories. Therefore, developing informationized and intelligent warfare along a just path is both determined by the political nature of the just side and a prerequisite for the just side to win.

Just wars differ from unjust wars, which are frequently waged for hegemonic gain. Just wars are typically acts of self-defense, driven by necessity, aiming to deter further and larger conflicts through a single act of violence, thus serving an educational purpose against violence. In 1958, the People’s Liberation Army’s shelling of Kinmen, evolving from all-weather attacks aimed at eliminating enemy manpower to shelling every other day, then to shelling without targeting individuals, and finally to notifying the enemy before shelling, represents a transformation from lethal violence to destructive violence, and finally to coercive violence. This served the war’s objectives of deterring, educating, and uniting the enemy, fully demonstrating the wisdom and courage of just wars. The view of violence in just wars can be summarized by “one central principle and two basic points”—the central principle is using just violence to curb unjust violence. This is fundamentally different from the pursuit of maximizing violence and the inhumane tendencies of unjust wars. One fundamental point is the development of self-defense violence, advocating the development of weapons to destroy weapons. Dominating the enemy requires emphasizing the development of violence capable of stopping violence itself, expanding military force in a direction where lethality and destructiveness are controllable, moving from lethal to non-lethal, and from environmentally destructive to environmentally minimal. Another fundamental point is the forceful, justified, and restrained use of force, not seeking to maximize its use, but rather selecting the methods of its application to dominate the enemy, and defining the laws of force in its specific application.

A just war advocates using lethal and destructive violence supplemented by coercive violence, moving from focusing on destroying the enemy’s tools of violence to deterring and preventing the enemy from using them, demonstrating a higher level of dominance over violence. Fundamentally, a just war is about defending one’s own territory and maritime borders, and highly values ​​the need for post-war environmental and social governance. It should be recognized that the US military dropped large quantities of depleted uranium, thermobaric, and graphite bombs in cities in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Iraq, and established virus laboratories in other countries, causing long-term damage to urban environments and people’s livelihoods; its invisible destruction is enormous. Unjust wars, under the guise of reducing “bloodshed politics,” expand from inflicting external wounds to inflicting irreparable internal damage, abusing non-lethal violence, such as using audio weapons beyond reasonable limits, rupturing eardrums and causing hearing loss—more cruel than gunpowder-based killings, bringing terror rather than deterrence. Compared to the destructive and lethal nature of unjust wars, the violent structure of a just war is centered on coercion. First, we must strive to deter the enemy from launching its war machine, based on large-scale military declarations and pressure, demonstrating invincible strength and the determination to not withdraw until the objective is achieved. This will advance the deterrence strategy to a new level of dominance, showcasing the effectiveness of war preparations and deterring the enemy from taking desperate measures. Second, we must use limited lethal and destructive violence to prevent the enemy from operating its war machine, forcing it to abandon violent resistance. This method of depriving or hindering the enemy from using weapons is far less costly than destroying their weapons, more effective than destroying their troops and equipment, and more suitable for just wars. Third, we must use coercive violence as the main force, based on a protracted approach, and win an overwhelming strategic posture through flexible economic warfare, cyber warfare, and cognitive warfare.

Looking to the future, only just wars can bring about progress in the civilization of warfare. This is because the progress of the civilization of warfare depends on the warring parties’ understanding and choice of violence. History has proven that the dominant role of absolute violence in unjust wars is temporary and unreliable. While it provides conditions for the inevitable victory of just wars, the excessive abuse of violence simultaneously creates asymmetrical pressure on the just warring parties to exercise restraint. Therefore, just wars need to combine violence and non-violence to exert a dominant role, giving new support to the “inevitable victory of just wars” in the era of intelligent globalization. Just wars employ relative violence to achieve victory, aiming to create conditions for a political solution through limited but long-term military and economic control. This involves mobilizing the people of both sides and the international community to prevent the enemy from using the war machine, winning through containment, and containing through victory. It seeks to use violence efficiently and at low cost, achieving political victory with minimal casualties, minimal damage, and minimal cost.

(Author: Lin Dong, Professor at the National Defense University)

現代國語：

【講武堂】

編者按：當今世界，戰爭風雲籠罩，明戰暗戰此起彼伏，蘊藏戰爭新內涵。戰爭論講暴力之上層建筑，以沖突為研究對象，探究政治軍事經濟社會沖突的根源、目的、形態和方式﹔暴力論則研究戰爭之手段與行為基礎，以對抗為研究對象，探究武器和運用武器進行對抗的性質、形式、法則和暴烈程度。戰爭論以暴力論為支撐，暴力論則以戰爭論為指導，二者相輔相成，推動戰爭藝術的演化。今年7月24日，本刊發表了林東教授的文章《綜合戰爭改變沖突形態》提出了一種新戰爭論，這裡，本刊再請林東教授撰寫《戰爭暴力從消滅敵人走向支配敵人》一文，闡述與新戰爭論相對應的新暴力論，以饗讀者。

戰爭是暴力的最高形式，暴力是戰爭的最本質特征。人類進入21世紀，在技術推動和需求牽引雙雙作用之下，戰爭暴力進入了一個高級階段——支配暴力時代。

1、戰爭暴力從消滅敵人向支配敵人轉變的必然性

21世紀，信息化智能化技術正在刷新戰爭暴力的空間和手段，觸發暴力應用層次分化。當初級戰爭玩家還陶醉於攻城克地的暴力日新月異之中，高明的戰爭玩家已經布局不費一兵一卒而調動敵人於股掌之中的全新暴力，而對手一旦掉入受支配的陷阱，無論打贏多少場戰役戰斗，都是做無用功，終回原點，甚至萬劫不復。

支配暴力目的是使自己能打擊敵人，並使敵人的打擊失靈。歷來戰爭雙方所追求的至高戰勝境界——致人而不致於人，其最大特點就是暴力對抗的不對等性。信息和智能技術解決了戰爭手段可控與協調等復雜性問題，使戰爭不再像二戰時期那樣“戰爭機器一經啟動就難以停止”，暴力手段成了可以駕馭並游刃有余的政治工具。尤其是在信息化智能化條件下，戰爭暴力的可控性、可剝奪性為支配暴力提供了條件，掌握高技術的一方通過實施非接觸作戰主宰戰場和主導戰爭進程，通過威懾、瓦解和解除敵人的暴力工具來達到戰爭目的，從而使暴力對抗呈現為剝奪或掣肘對手的暴力，並使自己成功避開敵人的打擊。

支配暴力本質是從消滅敵人向支配敵人轉移，是現代戰爭凸顯經濟目的所決定的。恩格斯指出：“暴力僅僅是手段，相反地，經濟利益是目的。目的比用來達到目的的手段要‘基礎性’得多。”從根本上講，現代戰爭追求社會價值和經濟利益，導致戰爭暴力從直接暴力向間接暴力拓展。簡單地說，不需要從肉體上毀滅敵人而贏得勝利，一是精確使用和控制暴力。暴力的可控性向精確化方向發展，這不僅是減少附帶損傷的政治需要，也是降低戰爭成本的經濟需要，還是快速控制戰局，有效支配敵人，奪取戰爭勝利的效益需求，這已成為現代戰爭發展的鮮明特點。二是從施與暴力發展到遏制暴力。傳統的暴力對抗強調通過戰場搏斗來取勝，而支配暴力則追求威懾、拆解敵人暴力的效力，通過顯示武力和拒止敵人使用武力的方式，使敵人畏懼戰爭或無法運作戰爭機器，從而以最少量地施與暴力，來達到戰爭目的。目前看，美軍發明的震懾戰、斬首戰都是基於這樣的觀念產生的。三是不流血的暴力與流血的暴力相媲美。不流血的暴力的最大優勢是不僅能大幅度減輕暴力運用的成本，而且能提高暴力運用的非對稱性，使戰局發生奇變。

支配暴力的法則從傳統更多地使用暴力變為最佳使用暴力，從而導致戰爭暴烈性有所下降。冷戰結束以來，現代化戰爭造成的傷亡驟然減少了。從海灣戰爭到伊拉克戰爭，戰爭雙方死亡總數從不到10萬人下降到不足2萬人，而越南戰爭死亡總數則是近170萬人。但導致戰爭傷亡銳減的動因並不是戰爭殺傷力在減小，而是戰略上的需要，首先是經濟上的需要，經濟歷來是戰爭的本源。以伊拉克戰爭為例，美國要獲得的是石油資源，因此它發起戰爭的目的是建立符合美國利益的伊拉克，“打爛”伊拉克或者伊拉克陷入混亂隻能加劇戰爭的破壞程度，增加戰后重建的成本，並擴大敵對情緒增加戰后維穩的困難。同時，戰爭暴烈性的總體下降還歸因於二戰以來世界人民在戰爭道義觀上的進步，產生了對戰爭暴力使用的限制，其中媒體傳播起到了輿論監督作用。由此，戰爭暴力在精確規劃和計劃之后被精確地使用了、被精確地釋放了，前所未有的高強度軍事打擊，能夠在最少（足夠）並不導致大面積附帶損傷的原則下進行，不再使敵人大量死去，而是使敵人快速失去抵抗意志和抵抗能力，相當於外科手術式打擊轉向微創手術，以減小戰爭后遺症。

2、支配敵人的思想正在變成直接的戰爭路線

支配敵人是從威懾敵人發展而來的，但並非新概念。從孫子的“上兵伐謀”到“牽著敵人鼻子走”的戰略戰術，都蘊含著豐富的支配思想，但過去缺乏武器和技術條件，支配敵人的方式是間接的。而今，武器的信息化智能化，正在把支配敵人的思想變成直接的戰爭路線。

殺傷性暴力發揮武力支配作用，在有人作戰空間呈現流血和不流血雙軌模式，從肉體上消滅敵人邁向從生理和心理上支配敵人。從冷兵器到火器，都是物理暴力殺傷肌體，屬於流血的暴力，當地毯式轟炸發展到頂峰后受到戰爭法制約，轉向精確殺傷，減少不必要的殺傷。同時，顯示武力仍是有效的政治工具，核威懾起著戰略穩定器作用，精確殺傷提升常規威懾效力。但精確暴力並非“仁慈的暴力”，戰場壓力超過以往任何時期。

在第一次世界大戰期間，生化武器興起，細菌戰、毒氣戰進入戰場，導致大規模傷亡並破壞生態環境，被《海牙公約》禁止。但進入21世紀以來，霸權主義仍在謀求生化戰爭，而恐怖主義更是把生化武器作為反人類的最佳暴力工具，因此，21世紀被一些學者認為是生物戰的世紀。隨著科技的進步，生物戰劑殺傷力可控性大大增強，2002年俄羅斯在處置人質危機事件中首次將生物氣體用於反恐戰場，標志著非致命性武器走進了常規戰爭。隨著非致命性武器大發展，從火藥殺傷肌體邁向控制、破壞生物（生理）系統，從而使戰斗力失能。尤其是非致命性武器的造價與飛機、軍艦、坦克等致命性武器相比具有高性價比，隨著制造技術簡易化，嗅覺武器、橡皮子彈、捕捉器、生物試劑、眩暈彈、激光致盲武器列裝，它們帶動殺傷性暴力朝著軟殺傷方向發展。現代震懾戰和基於效果作戰實踐表明，戰場上使敵人不敢使用武器和使用不了武器，可以贏得更容易。伊拉克戰爭期間，美國成功地運用震懾戰來恫嚇和欺騙薩達姆，使其一直未能啟用對美軍有威脅的飛毛腿導彈。

智能化戰爭從兵力密集型戰場轉向武器密集型戰場，網絡、太空、電磁空間等高維度空間取代陸海空成為主導性作戰空間，這些空間近乎無人化，加上輸油管道、倉儲、交通樞紐等體積龐大的政治經濟軍事關鍵基礎設施成為打擊重心，推動大規模殺傷性武器突破有人戰場的羈絆，轉向破壞武器系統和作戰平台。殺傷性暴力轉向破壞性暴力，導致戰爭暴力仍在無限增長。從海灣戰爭到伊拉克戰爭，美軍使用集束炸彈、貧鈾彈打擊伊拉克軍政基礎設施和裝甲車隊，一定程度上打破了核門檻的禁忌，開啟了大規模殺傷性武器發展的新方向。自美軍科索沃戰爭使用石墨炸彈攻擊城市供電系統起，到伊朗核設施受到病毒攻擊而毀傷癱瘓，電磁脈沖武器、太空武器、網絡武器顯示出巨大威力。破壞性武器雖然嚴格控制，不直接針對人體，但卻力圖破壞作戰體系、基礎設施甚至是敵人的生存環境，從而迫使敵人屈服。尤需警惕的是，核打擊因戰爭法限制而遠離城市和平民，甚至兵力密集的有人戰場，但轉向人員稀少的無人戰場，太空、深海和孤立的島嶼。

隨信息化智能化發展，信息域認知域成為深入經濟社會的新戰場，信息工具和認知工具也自然成為新暴力工具，其主要以網絡暴力、經濟暴力、文化暴力等形式展現出來並異軍突起，強制性改變對手戰略層和社會層的判斷、立場和決策。網絡戰人為制造假數據或篡改大數據，誘導對手做出錯誤判斷和決策﹔經濟暴力演化出經濟制裁、金融戰、科技脫鉤戰，打擊對手股市和銀行系統，以法律和強制性商業手段中斷對手供應鏈，遲滯對手發展創新﹔文化暴力借助數字網絡推動傳統輿論戰邁向公共外交戰和全球傳媒戰，從而影響國際社會和全球公眾的立場。

總之，在支配暴力時代，戰爭的暴烈性發生了轉移，即從殺傷性暴力向破壞性暴力、強制性暴力拓展。

3、正義戰爭與非正義戰爭走不同的支配暴力路線

21世紀，戰爭的暴力本質並未改變，暴力仍是戰爭的主要行為，沒有暴力就談不上戰爭。在冷兵器時代暴力表現為刀光劍影，在火器時代發展成硝煙彌漫，到了核時代戰爭暴力走向無限擴大，至今，人類總體上仍處於核威脅下不安全的相對和平年代。

馬克思關於“暴力是每一個孕育著新社會的舊社會的助產婆”的論斷，至今仍是正義戰爭信條。但戰爭手段的進步和戰爭時空全球化的展開，使正義戰爭的暴力結構性轉變從自然過程上升到自覺過程中來。首先，不為戰爭的效益觀掩蓋戰爭的歷史觀，認清隻有正義的支配才能取得戰爭的徹底勝利。戰爭總是分正義和非正義兩類，信息化智能化戰爭也不例外。其次，現代戰爭實踐既為我們推動發展正義戰爭理論提供了戰術技術上的經驗借鑒，同時也提供了政治和戰略上批判的反面教材。一個深刻認識是，美軍宣揚的小傷亡、低成本戰爭效益觀，給世界帶來了軍事速勝的深刻印象。但美國在阿富汗、伊拉克這兩個國家花上萬億美元來搞戰后重建，還是無法避免最終撤軍走人的結局。這樣的教訓古已有之，現代戰爭又繼續重演，它揭示的奧秘是，信息化智能化戰爭的效益觀並沒有改變隻有正義戰爭才能贏得和平的規律。美軍憑借強大的戰斗力做到了軍事上的支配，從戰爭發起前到主要戰事結束期間也在一定程度做到經濟支配，但沒有正義的政治統領，其信息優勢下的快速制勝仍然是短暫的、不能維持的、政治失敗的武力勝利。因此，開辟信息化智能化戰爭在正義方向上的發展路線，既是正義方政治性質所決定，同時也是決定正義方打贏的前提條件。

正義戰爭與非正義戰爭牟取霸權利益而頻繁發動戰爭不同，通常是被迫採取戰爭自衛行動，並力爭通過一次性暴力的釋放來阻止更多更大的戰爭，從而達成反暴力的教育作用。1958年，中國人民解放軍炮擊金門，從消滅敵人有生力量的全天候打擊轉向隔日炮擊，再轉向不打人的炮擊，再轉向炮擊前通知敵人，就是從殺傷性暴力到破壞性暴力，再到強制性暴力的轉換過程，起到震懾敵人、教育敵人、團結敵人的戰爭目的，充分展示了正義戰爭的大智大勇。正義戰爭的暴力觀可以用“一個中心兩個基本點”來概括——以正義暴力遏制非正義暴力是中心，這與非正義戰爭追求暴力最大化及其反人類傾向有本質區別。一個基本點是發展自衛的暴力，主張發展消滅武器的武器，支配敵人更要強調發展那些能夠制止暴力的暴力，立足朝殺傷力、破壞力可控的方向拓展武力，從致命性向非致命性方向拓展，從環境破壞大向環境破壞小方向拓展。另一個基本點是有力有理有節地使用武力，不求最大化地使用武力，而是圍繞支配敵人選擇武力的運用方式，並在具體運用中界定武力法則。

正義戰爭主張以殺傷性暴力、破壞性暴力輔助強制性暴力，從重在摧毀敵人暴力工具邁向遏制和拒止敵人使用暴力工具，展示更高的支配暴力境界。從根本上講，正義戰爭是保衛自己的國土、海疆，高度重視戰后環境和社會治理需要。應看到美軍在南聯盟、阿富汗和伊拉克城市扔下了大量貧鈾彈、溫壓彈和石墨彈，在他國建立病毒實驗室，對城市環境和民生的傷害是長遠的，其隱形的破壞是巨大的。這種非正義戰爭以降低“流血的政治”為名，從制造外傷向制造不可修復的內傷拓展，濫用非致命性暴力，如音頻武器超過合理的度，震裂耳膜，導致聽覺喪失，比火藥殺傷更殘忍，帶來的不是威懾而是恐怖。相比於非正義戰爭突出破壞性和殺傷性，正義戰爭暴力結構則以強制性為中心。一是力求遏制敵人啟動戰爭機器，立足大規模的武力宣示和施壓，顯示不可戰勝的實力和不達目的不收兵的決心，將威懾戰略推進到支配戰略的新思路，把戰爭准備的實效顯示出來，懾止敵人鋌而走險﹔二是以有限殺傷性暴力、破壞性暴力釋放拒止敵人運行戰爭機器，使敵人放棄暴力抵抗，這種用剝奪或掣肘敵人使用武器的方式比摧毀敵人武器代價要小得多，比摧毀敵人兵力兵器更有效，更適用於正義戰爭。三是以強制性暴力為主體，立足持久，以富有彈性的經濟戰、網絡戰、認知戰贏得壓倒性戰略態勢。

展望未來，隻有正義戰爭才能帶來戰爭文明的進步。因為，戰爭文明是否進步取決於戰爭方對暴力的認知和選擇。歷史証明，非正義戰爭奉行絕對暴力的支配作用是暫時的、不可靠的，為正義戰爭必勝提供了條件，但同時超限濫用暴力對正義戰爭方的克制暴力構成非對稱的犧牲壓力。為此，正義戰爭有必要把暴力和非暴力綜合起來發揮支配作用，使“正義戰爭必勝”在智能化全球化時代獲得新支撐。正義戰爭施展相對暴力制勝，立足以有限但長期的軍事和經濟扼控為政治解決創造條件，發動敵我雙方的人民和國際社會，制止敵人使用戰爭機器，在遏制中打贏，在打贏中遏制，追求高效益、低代價的暴力運用，以最小傷亡、最小破壞、最小成本達成政治勝利。

（作者：林東，系國防大學教授）

中國原創軍事資源：https://military.people.com.cn/

#Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Military Informatization, Dissipative Warfare, Information Support Force, 中國解放軍敘事戰爭

Chinese Military’s Dissipation Warfare: Typical Method of China’s Intelligent Warfare

Leave a comment

中國軍隊的消散戰：中國情報戰的典型方法

現代英語：

With the rapid development of intelligent technologies and their widespread application in the military, intelligent warfare is becoming a new form of warfare following information warfare, and dissipation warfare is becoming a typical mode of intelligent warfare. Dissipation warfare refers to a combat method in which an intelligent warfare system, through internal enrichment and integration and external sudden emergence, achieves a comprehensive combat capability integrating material consumption, energy dissipation, and information diffusion. Strengthening research on dissipation warfare will help us to deeply reveal the winning mechanisms of intelligent warfare and gain the initiative in future war games.

Dissipation warfare is an inevitable result of the development of the times.

Dissipative warfare manifests as a comprehensive confrontation in the physical, information, and cognitive domains in the era of intelligence. It is characterized by a high degree of unity in forms such as political contests, economic competition, military offense and defense, cultural conflicts, and diplomatic checks and balances, reflecting the openness, complexity, and emergent nature of intelligent warfare systems.

Adapting to the security requirements of the intelligent era. In the intelligent era, technologies such as broadband networks, big data, large-scale models, cloud computing, and deep learning are developing rapidly, leading to broader connections between political groups, nations, and ethnic groups. Under the influence of multiple factors including political pluralism, economic integration, social openness, and technological revolution, non-traditional security is emerging and intertwined with traditional threats. The subjects and scope of intelligent warfare are constantly expanding, and the time and space of warfare are continuously extending. War and peace are inextricably linked, and the warfare system will further transcend local geographical limitations, moving from relative closure to greater openness, forming a higher level and wider-ranging confrontation. Dissipative warfare emphasizes the comprehensive exertion of intelligent warfare systems in the physical, information, and cognitive domains, highly unifying political contests, economic competition, military offense and defense, cultural conflicts, and diplomatic checks and balances within the scope of adversarial confrontation, thus adapting to the demands of the evolving global security landscape.

This aligns with the objective laws governing the evolution of warfare. The dissipative phenomenon in warfare has existed since the inception of war; however, before the emergence of intelligent warfare, due to technological limitations, it remained in a relatively rudimentary and simple state, with warfare manifesting only in one of the following forms: material consumption, energy dissipation, or information diffusion. In the agricultural era, warfare was primarily characterized by material-driven, human-centered cold weapon warfare. In the industrial era, warfare was primarily characterized by energy-driven, platform-centered thermonuclear and mechanized warfare. In the information age, warfare is primarily characterized by information-driven, network-based information warfare. Entering the intelligent era, intelligent technology highly unifies the cognitive, decision-making, and operational advantages in adversarial confrontation. Essentially, it highly unifies matter, energy, and information, forming an intelligent warfare model dominated by intelligent elements and centered on intelligent algorithms through intelligent empowerment, intelligent energy aggregation, and intelligent energy release. Its main manifestation is dissipative warfare, reflecting the complex systemic confrontation of intelligent warfare.

It possesses a solid philosophical theoretical foundation. Social forms are the matrix of war forms. Exploring and understanding intelligent warfare must be based on the fundamental principles of historical materialism and dialectical materialism, comprehensively examining the evolution of war forms and the social forms in which intelligent warfare exists, and constructing a new concept and contextual system of warfare. From a philosophical perspective, matter, energy, and information are the three major elements constituting the world. Matter embodies the existence of origin, energy embodies the existence of motion, and information embodies the existence of connection. These three progressively and alternately dominate the evolution and operation of social and war forms. According to the principle of negation of negation in dialectical materialism, in the intelligent era following the information age, the dominant element of society will once again be matter, after matter, energy, and information. However, this matter will be a new type of matter formed through a spiral ascent after high informatization, and its main characteristic is the possession of intelligent technological attributes. Therefore, in essence, dissipative warfare is the high degree of unification of the characteristic advantages of matter, energy, and information in previous low-level war forms by intelligent elements, and the high degree of unification of the forms of material consumption, energy dissipation, and information diffusion that are common in warfare, reflecting the typical characteristics of intelligent warfare.

Deeply grasp the intrinsic essence of dissipation warfare

Dissipation warfare is based on the real world but encompasses the virtual world. It adapts to the rapid development of intelligent technology, the rise of non-traditional security threats, and the continuous expansion of the subjects and scope of warfare, thus exhibiting many new characteristics.

Comprehensive Game of Confrontation. As intelligent warfare accelerates its development to greater depth and breadth, the interconnections and influences across political, economic, cultural, and diplomatic fields are becoming more extensive. The focus of war is shifting from the military system to the social system. The confrontation between stakeholders will manifest as a comprehensive game involving political contests, economic competition, military offense and defense, cultural conflicts, and diplomatic checks and balances. The pursuit of war advantage is no longer limited to the realm of military confrontation. The victorious side must adapt to the openness, complexity, and emergent nature of the war system, shifting from the extensive consumption and application of single materials, energy, and information to a dissipative approach dominated by intelligent advantages, striving to gain the initiative and advantage in comprehensive games across multiple domains.

The actors in intelligent warfare are becoming increasingly diverse and multi-domain. The potential forces mobilized in traditional warfare will be in a state of constant confrontation. Political forces, various institutions and personnel, along with the troops and soldiers who fight on the battlefield in the traditional sense, constitute the main actors in war. This diversified range of actors will transcend the real and virtual domains, appearing in multiple spatial domains such as land, sea, air, space, cyberspace, and psychology, encompassing the physical, information, and cognitive domains, and covering various social domains including politics, economics, culture, and diplomacy. For example, civilians can use smartphones to collect information from the military battlefield and transmit it to stakeholders, causing the dissemination of key war information and thus influencing war decisions or the outcome of a campaign or battle.

Power integration and aggregation. Virtual and virtual forces are integrated. Around the war’s objectives, all potentially usable real and virtual forces will be integrated with intelligent technology, performing their duties and acting according to regulations on parallel battlefields; unmanned and manned forces are integrated. After undergoing stages of manual operation, authorization, and supervision, unmanned combat forces will achieve a high degree of autonomy and can be deployed and combined with various manned forces as needed, effectively coordinating and coexisting under common war rules; multiple forces are integrated. Based on extensive connections across various fields and the common objectives of the war system, various forces, including the Party, government, military, police, and civilians, will closely coordinate military operations with political, economic, diplomatic, public opinion, and legal struggles, forming comprehensive combat power. In short, under the unified planning of a nation or political group, although the diverse participating forces in intelligent warfare are physically dispersed, they can achieve logical concentration, immediate aggregation, complementary advantages, and integrated strengths around a common war objective.

The cumulative effect of warfare is emerging. While advanced warfare features new technological characteristics, it still retains the advantages and characteristics of lower-level warfare. Dissipative warfare emphasizes continuous, comprehensive confrontation across multiple domains. This includes the depletion of ammunition, supplies, equipment, and even personnel at the material level; the continuous accumulation and release of energy at the energy level; and the immeasurable impact on human thinking, values, moral concepts, emotions, and behavioral patterns through the diffusion and integration of data, knowledge, and algorithms at the information level. Under the constant deterrence of nuclear weapons, intelligent warfare is showing a decrease in brutality, but political isolation, economic blockade, cultural conflict, and diplomatic suppression will become more severe and intense. When the various systems—military, political, economic, cultural, and diplomatic—continue to function effectively, and the cumulative effect reaches a certain level, the warfare system will increase its negative entropy, leading to a sudden leap in combat power and the emergence of systemic effectiveness, thereby gaining a wartime advantage.

Choose the right focus of the battle and wage a war of attrition.

Intelligent warfare systems achieve maximum system combat effectiveness through internal enrichment and integration, external emergence of sudden changes, cross-domain efficiency enhancement, and intelligent dissipation. This is the winning mechanism inherent in dissipation warfare. To gain the upper hand in intelligent warfare, it is essential to clarify the operational focus of dissipation warfare, target the weaknesses and shortcomings of the opponent’s system, and accurately identify the key points for war preparation.

Focusing on the openness of the system, the strategy aims to isolate and close off the opponent’s war system. This involves cutting off the material, energy, and information exchange between the opponent’s war system and the external battlefield environment, depriving it of these sources of resources and gradually leading it towards isolation, closure, and weakness. At the strategic level, political isolation can be employed to isolate the opponent’s war system, causing an increase in system entropy. At the operational level, methods such as cutting off data sources, destroying data backups, falsifying data, and altering information can be used, employing a combination of hard and soft tactics to force its war system towards a closed state, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the opponent’s system.

Focusing on the complexity of the system, attacks can be launched at different domains to disrupt the opponent’s war system. The more interconnected and tightly linked the elements of an intelligent warfare system, the lower its structural reliability. By applying the principle that each layer in a complex system is relatively independent, strategic, operational, and tactical action plans can be formulated to achieve layered and domain-specific disruption of the enemy’s war system. For example, at the strategic level, economic blockade can be used to significantly weaken the opponent’s war power and development potential. At the operational level, the vulnerability of the combat system’s communication network can be exploited, using a combination of cyber and electronic warfare attacks as the basic path and means, employing methods such as “destroying endpoints, attacking elements, isolating clusters, disabling networks, and breaking through cloud infrastructure” to disrupt the opponent’s combat system structure and cause its war system to “collapse.”

Focusing on systemic emergent effects, the goal is to dismantle and disperse the adversary’s war system. Intelligent warfare systems can only rapidly form and exert their systemic effectiveness, gaining a dissipative advantage, if only individual components or elements function. It is impossible for an advantage to emerge if only a single component or element is active. It is foreseeable that emerging technologies such as ChatGPT, and more advanced intelligent technologies in the future, will provide new ways of thinking about understanding and discovering the complex operational behavior, states, and patterns of war systems, as well as new means of exploring objective laws and transforming nature and society. The dominant party in a war confrontation will reduce the coupling degree of the adversary’s war system through a combination of virtual and real, parallel and integrated confrontation methods, achieving the goal of dismantling and dispersing the enemy’s war system.

現代國語：

隨著智慧科技的快速發展及其在軍事領域的廣泛應用，繼資訊戰之後，智慧戰正成為一種新型戰爭形式，而耗散戰則成為智慧戰的典型模式。耗散戰是指智慧戰系統透過內部的強化整合和外在的突現，實現物質消耗、能量耗散和資訊擴散三者融合的綜合作戰能力。加強耗散戰的研究，有助於我們深入揭示智慧戰的勝利機制，並在未來的戰爭賽局中掌握主動權。

耗散戰是時代發展的必然產物。

在智慧時代，耗散戰表現為在物質、資訊和認知領域展開的全面對抗。它具有高度統一性的特點，涵蓋政治博弈、經濟競爭、軍事攻防、文化衝突、外交制衡等多個面向，體現了智慧戰系統的開放性、複雜性和湧現性。

適應智慧時代的安全需求。在智慧時代，寬頻網路、大數據、大規模模式、雲端運算、深度學習等技術快速發展，使得政治群體、國家和民族之間的聯繫日益緊密。在政治多元化、經濟整合、社會開放和技術革命等多重因素的影響下，非傳統安全正在興起，並與傳統威脅交織在一起。智能戰的主體和範圍不斷擴大，戰爭的時空也不斷延伸。戰爭與和平密不可分，戰爭體系將進一步超越地域限制，從相對封閉走向更開放，形成更高層次、更廣泛範圍的對抗。耗散型戰爭強調智慧戰系統在物理、資訊和認知領域的綜合運用，將政治博弈、經濟競爭、軍事攻防、文化衝突以及外交制衡等因素高度整合到對抗的範疇內，從而適應不斷演變的全球安全格局。

這與支配戰爭演化的客觀法則相符。戰爭中的耗散現象自戰爭誕生之初便已存在；然而，在智能戰爭出現之前，由於技術限制，戰爭仍處於相對原始和簡單的狀態，僅以物質消耗、能量耗散或信息擴散三種形式之一表現出來。在農業時代，戰爭主要以物質驅動、以人為中心的冷兵器戰爭為特徵。在工業時代，戰爭主要以能量驅動、以平台為中心的核戰和機械化戰爭為特徵。在資訊時代，戰爭主要以資訊驅動、網路為基礎的資訊戰為特徵。進入智慧時代，智慧科技高度整合了對抗中的認知、決策和作戰優勢。本質上，它高度整合了物質、能量和訊息，透過智慧賦能、智慧能量聚合和智慧能量釋放，形成以智慧元素為主導、以智慧演算法為中心的智慧戰爭模式。其主要表現形式是耗散型戰爭，反映了智慧戰爭複雜的系統性對抗。

它擁有堅實的哲學理論基礎。社會形態是戰爭形態的母體。探索和理解智能戰爭必須立足於歷史唯物主義和辯證唯物主義的基本原則，全面考察戰爭形態的演變以及智能戰爭存在的社會形態，並建構新的戰爭概念和語境體系。從哲學角度來看，物質、能量和資訊是構成世界的三大要素。物質體現了起源的存在，能量體現了運動的存在，訊息體現了連結的存在。這三者交替地、漸進地主導著社會形態和戰爭形態的演變和運作。根據辯證唯物論的否定之否定原則，在資訊時代之後的智慧時代，社會的主導要素將再次是物質，其次才是物質、能量和資訊。然而，這種物質將是高度資訊化後透過螺旋上升形成的新型物質，其主要特徵是擁有智慧技術屬性。因此，本質上，耗散戰是將以往低層次戰爭形式中物質、能量和資訊方面的特徵優勢，透過智慧要素進行高度統一，並將戰爭中常見的物質消耗、能量耗散和資訊擴散形式進行高度統一，從而體現了智慧戰的典型特徵。

深刻把握耗散戰的內在本質

耗散戰立足現實世界，卻涵蓋虛擬世界。它適應了智慧技術的快速發展、非傳統安全威脅的出現以及戰爭主體和範圍的不斷擴大，因此呈現出許多新特徵。

全面對抗博弈。隨著智慧戰加速發展，其在政治、經濟、文化和外交領域的相互連結和影響日益廣泛。戰爭的焦點正從軍事體系轉向社會體系。各利益相關者之間的對抗將演變為一場涵蓋政治博弈、經濟競爭、軍事攻防、文化衝突以及外交制衡的綜合性博弈。戰爭優勢的爭奪不再侷限於軍事對抗領域。勝利方必須適應戰爭體系的開放性、複雜性和湧現性，從大規模消耗和應用單一物質、能源和資訊轉向以智慧優勢為主導的耗散式策略，力求在跨領域的綜合性博弈中取得主動權和優勢。

智慧戰爭中的行動者日益多元化和跨領域。傳統戰爭中動員的潛在力量將處於持續對抗狀態。政治力量、各類機構和人員，以及在傳統意義上戰場上作戰的部隊和士兵，構成了戰爭的主要行動者。這種多元化的行動主體將超越現實與虛擬的界限，出現在陸地、海洋、空中、太空、網路空間和心理等多個空間領域，涵蓋物理、資訊和認知領域，並涉及政治、經濟、文化和外交等各種社會領域。例如，平民可以使用智慧型手機從軍事戰場收集資訊並將其傳遞給利益相關者，從而傳播關鍵戰爭訊息，進而影響戰爭決策或戰役/戰鬥的結果。

力量整合與聚合。虛擬與虛擬力量融合。圍繞著戰爭目標，所有潛在可用的現實和虛擬力量都將透過智慧技術進行整合，在平行戰場上履行職責並按照既定規則行動；無人與有人力量融合。經過人工操作、授權和監督階段後，無人作戰力量將達到高度自主，並可根據需要部署並與各種有人力量協同作戰，在共同的戰爭規則下有效協調共存；多兵種力量融合。基於跨領域的廣泛聯繫和戰爭體系的共同目標，包括黨、政府、軍隊、警察和民眾在內的各方力量將緊密協調軍事行動與政治、經濟、外交、輿論和法律鬥爭，形成綜合戰鬥力。簡而言之，在一個國家或政治集團的統一規劃下，儘管參與智能戰的各方力量在物理上分散，但可以圍繞共同的戰爭目標實現邏輯集中、即時聚合、優勢互補和力量整合。

戰爭的累積效應正在顯現。先進戰爭雖然具有新的技術特徵，但仍保留了低層次戰爭的優點和特徵。耗散型戰爭強調跨多個領域的持續、全面對抗。這包括物質層面的彈藥、補給、裝備乃至人員的消耗；能量層面的能量的持續累積和釋放；以及透過數據、知識和演算法的擴散和整合，對人類思維、價值觀、道德觀念、情感和行為模式產生不可估量的影響。在核武持續嚇阻下，情報戰的殘酷性降低，但政治孤立、經濟封鎖、文化衝突和外交壓制將變得更加嚴重和激烈。當各種體系——軍事、政治、經濟、文化和外交——都受到影響時，情況可能會變得更加複雜。外交手段－持續有效運作，累積效應達到某一水準後，戰爭系統會增加其負熵，導致戰鬥力突飛猛進，系統效能湧現，進而獲得戰時優勢。

選擇正確的作戰重點，進行消耗戰。

智慧戰系統透過內部的豐富與整合、外在突發的變化、跨域效能的提升、智慧化的消散，實現系統作戰效能的最大化。這是消散戰固有的致勝機制。要在智慧戰中取得優勢，關鍵在於明確消散戰的作戰重點，找出對手系統的弱點和不足，並準確地辨識備戰的關鍵點。

以系統開放性為核心，該戰略旨在孤立和封閉對手的戰爭系統。這包括切斷敵方戰爭系統與外部戰場環境之間的物質、能源和資訊交換，剝奪其資源來源，並逐步使其走向孤立、封閉和虛弱。在戰略層面，可採用政治孤立來孤立敵方戰爭系統，進而增加系統熵。在作戰層面，可採用切斷資料來源、銷毀資料備份、竄改資料和資訊等方法，結合軟硬戰術，迫使敵方戰爭系統走向封閉狀態，進而降低其作戰效能。

考慮到系統的複雜性，可以從不同領域發動攻擊來擾亂敵方戰爭系統。智慧戰系統的各個組成部分之間的聯繫越緊密，其結構可靠性就越低。基於複雜系統中每一層相對獨立的原則，可以製定戰略、作戰和戰術行動計劃，實現對敵方戰爭系統的分層和領域性破壞。例如，在戰略層面，經濟封鎖可以顯著削弱對手的戰爭力量和發展潛力。在作戰層面，可以利用作戰系統通訊網路的脆弱性，以網路戰和電子戰結合的方式作為基本路徑和手段，採用「摧毀終端、攻擊單元、隔離集群、癱瘓網路、突破雲端基礎設施」等方法，破壞對手的作戰系統結構，使其戰爭系統「崩潰」。

著眼於系統性湧現效應，目標是瓦解和分散對手的戰爭系統。智慧戰系統只有在各個組成部分或單元發揮作用時，才能迅速形成並發揮其係統效能，獲得分散優勢。如果只有單一組成部分或單元處於活動狀態，則不可能產生優勢。可以預見，諸如ChatGPT等新興技術以及未來更先進的智慧技術，將為理解和發現戰爭系統複雜的運作行為、狀態和模式提供新的思路，並為探索客觀規律、改造自然和社會提供新的途徑。戰爭對抗中的主導者將透過虛擬與現實、並行與一體化對抗方式，降低敵方戰爭系統的耦合度，從而達到瓦解和瓦解敵方戰爭系統的目標。

資料來源： 中國軍網-解放軍報 作者：王榮輝 責任編輯：郭妍菲
2023-05-09 07:xx:xx

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/ll_20854883/1622287889.html

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Chinese #Quantum #technology, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, #quantum computing warfare, 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 Informatization, Chinese Military Intelligentization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Command information Systems, Information Support Force, Intelligent Warfare, quantum computing warfare, 量子計算戰爭

Chinese Military Grasping Pulse of Information and Intelligent Warfare Development

Leave a comment

中國軍方掌握資訊戰和智慧戰發展的脈搏

現代英語：

Currently, the deep penetration and integrated application of cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence in the military field are profoundly reshaping the form of warfare and driving the evolution of informationized and intelligent warfare to a higher and more complex level. This process brings new challenges, such as the full-dimensional expansion of the operational space, but also contains the enduring underlying logic of the essential laws of warfare. We must deeply analyze the evolutionary mechanism of informationized and intelligent warfare, understand and clarify the specific manifestations of the new challenges and underlying logic, and continuously explore the practical paths and winning principles for strategizing future warfare.

Recognizing the new challenges that information technology and intelligent technology bring to warfare

Technological iteration and upgrading have driven profound changes in combat styles, which in turn bring new challenges. Currently, with the accelerated development of information and intelligent technologies, the form of warfare is showing significant changes such as cross-domain integration, system confrontation, and intelligent dominance, thereby giving rise to new challenges such as mixed-domain nature, intelligence, and all-personnel involvement.

The Challenges of Multi-Domain Operations. In future warfare, the physical boundaries of traditional operational domains will be broken, with information and social domains deeply nested, forming a new type of battlefield characterized by multi-domain coordination. This multi-dimensional battlefield environment presents two challenges to current combat systems. First, system compatibility is difficult. In a multi-domain operational environment, combat operations “span” multiple physical and virtual spaces, while traditional combat systems are often built based on specific operational domains, making seamless compatibility of their technical standards and information interfaces difficult. Second, command and control are highly complex. In informationized and intelligent warfare, combat operations unfold simultaneously or alternately across multiple dimensions, with various demands exhibiting non-linear, explosive, and multi-domain characteristics. Traditional, hierarchical, tree-like command structures are ill-suited to handle this complex multi-domain coordination situation.

The Challenges of Intelligence. The deep integration of technologies such as artificial intelligence into the war decision-making and action chain presents new challenges to traditional decision-making models and action logic. On the one hand, defining the boundaries and dominance of human-machine collaboration is challenging. Intelligent systems demonstrate superior capabilities in information processing, decision support, and even autonomous action, but over-reliance on algorithms can lead to a “decision black box”; excessive restrictions on machine intelligence may result in the loss of the speed and efficiency advantages of intelligent algorithms. Therefore, how to construct a human-machine symbiotic, human-led, and intelligence-assisted decision-making model has become an unavoidable “test” in winning informationized and intelligent warfare. On the other hand, the complexity and vulnerability of algorithmic warfare are becoming increasingly prominent. The higher the level of intelligence in warfare, the stronger the dependence on core algorithms. Adversaries may launch attacks through data pollution, model deception, and network intrusion, inducing intelligent systems to misjudge and fail. This kind of “bottom-up” attack based on algorithmic vulnerabilities is far more covert and destructive than traditional methods, placing higher demands on the construction and maintenance of defense systems.

A challenge affecting all personnel. Informationized and intelligent warfare blurs the lines between wartime and peacetime, front lines and rear areas. Combat operations are no longer confined to professional soldiers and traditional battlefields; non-military sectors such as economics, finance, and technology, along with related personnel, may all be integrated into modern combat systems to varying degrees, bringing entirely new challenges. Specifically, non-military sectors may become new focal points of offense and defense. In an information society, critical infrastructure such as energy networks, transportation hubs, and information platforms are highly interconnected and interdependent, with broad social coverage and significant influence, making them prime targets for attack or disruption in hybrid warfare, thus significantly increasing the difficulty of protection. The national defense mobilization system faces transformation pressure. The traditional “peacetime-wartime conversion” model is ill-suited to the demands of high-intensity, fast-paced, and high-consumption informationized and intelligent warfare. There is an urgent need to build a modern mobilization mechanism that is “integrated in peacetime and wartime, military-civilian integrated, precise, and efficient,” ensuring the rapid response and efficient transformation of core resources such as technological potential, industrial capabilities, and professional talent.

Clarifying the underlying logic of information-based and intelligent warfare

Although the development of information and intelligent technologies has profoundly reshaped the mode of force application, the inherent attributes of war have not been fundamentally shaken. Ensuring that strategy follows policy, adhering to the principle that people are the decisive factor, and recognizing that the “fog of war” will persist for a long time are still key measures for us to understand, plan, and respond to future wars.

Strategic subordination with political strategy is paramount. Currently, the proliferation of new technologies and attack methods easily fosters “technocentrism”—when algorithms and computing power are seen as the key to victory, and when technological superiority in equipment is considered an absolute advantage, military operations risk deviating from the political and strategic trajectory. This necessitates that we always integrate military operations within the overall national political framework, ensuring that technological advantages serve strategic objectives. Under informationized and intelligent conditions, strategic subordination with political strategy transcends the purely military level, requiring precise alignment with core national political goals such as diplomatic maneuvering and domestic development and stability. Therefore, it is essential to clearly define the boundaries, intensity, and scope of information and intelligent means of application, avoid significant political and strategic risks arising from the misuse of technology, and strive for a dynamic unity between political objectives and military means.

The decisive factor remains human. While intelligent technology can indeed endow weapons with superior autonomous perception and decision-making capabilities, the ultimate control and winning formula in war always firmly rests in human hands. Marxist warfare theory reveals that regardless of how warfare evolves, humans are always the main actors and the ultimate decisive force. Weapons, as tools, ultimately rely on human creativity in their effective use. Therefore, facing the wave of informationized and intelligent warfare, we must achieve deep integration and synchronous development of human-machine intelligence, building upon a foundation of human dominance. Specifically, intelligentization must not only “transform” things—improving equipment performance—but also “transform” people—enhancing human cognitive abilities, decision-making levels, and human-machine collaborative efficiency, ensuring that no matter how high the “kites” of intelligent equipment fly, humanity always firmly grasps the “control chain” that guides their development.

Recognizing the persistent nature of the “fog of war,” while information technology has significantly improved battlefield transparency, technological means can only reduce the density of the “fog,” not completely dispel it. The fundamental reason is that war is a dynamic game; the deception generated by the continuous strategic feints and other maneuvers employed by opposing sides transcends the scope of mere technological deconstruction, possessing an inherent unpredictability. Therefore, we must acknowledge the perpetual nature of the “fog of war” and employ appropriate measures to achieve the goal of “reducing our own fog and increasing the enemy’s confusion.” Regarding the former, we must strengthen our own reconnaissance advantages by integrating multi-source intelligence, including satellite reconnaissance, drone surveillance, and ground sensors, to achieve a real-time dynamic map of the battlefield situation. Regarding the latter, we must deepen the enemy’s decision-making dilemma by using techniques such as false signals and electronic camouflage to mislead their intelligence gathering, forcing them to expend resources in a state of confusion between truth and falsehood, directly weakening their situational awareness.

Exploring the winning factors of information-based and intelligent warfare

To plan for future wars, we must recognize the new challenges they bring, follow the underlying logic they contain, further explore the winning principles of informationized and intelligent warfare, and work hard to strengthen military theory, make good strategic plans, and innovate tactics and methods.

Strengthening theoretical development is crucial. Scientific military theory is combat power, and maintaining the advancement of military theory is essential for winning informationized and intelligent warfare. On the one hand, we must deepen the integration and innovation of military theory. We must systematically integrate modern scientific theories such as cybernetics, game theory, and information theory, focusing on new combat styles such as human-machine collaborative operations and cross-domain joint operations, to construct an advanced military theoretical system that is forward-looking, adaptable, and operable. On the other hand, we must adhere to practical testing and iterative updates. We must insist on linking theory with practice, keenly observing problems, systematically summarizing experiences, and accurately extracting patterns from the front lines of military struggle preparation and training, forming a virtuous cycle of “practice—understanding—re-practice—re-understanding,” ensuring that theory remains vibrant and effectively guides future warfare.

Strategic planning is crucial. Future-oriented strategic planning is essentially a proactive shaping process driven by technology, driven by demand, and guaranteed by dynamic adaptation. It requires a broad technological vision and flexible strategic thinking, striving to achieve a leap from “responding to war” to “designing war.” First, we must anticipate technological changes. We must maintain a high degree of sensitivity to disruptive technologies that may reshape the rules of war and deeply understand the profound impact of the cross-integration of various technologies. Second, we must focus on key areas. Emerging “high frontiers” such as cyberspace, outer space, the deep sea, and the polar regions should be the focus of strategic planning, concentrating on shaping the rules of operation and seizing advantages to ensure dominance in the invisible battlefield and emerging spaces. Third, we must dynamically adjust and adapt. The future battlefield is constantly changing and full of uncertainty. Strategic planning cannot be a static, definitive text, but rather a resilient, dynamic framework. We must assess the applicability, maturity, and potential risks of various solutions in conjunction with reality to ensure that the direction of military development is always precisely aligned with the needs of future warfare.

Promoting Tactical Innovation. Specific tactics serve as a bridge connecting technological innovation and combat operations. Faced with the profound changes brought about by informationized and intelligent warfare, it is imperative to vigorously promote tactical innovation and explore “intelligent strategies” adapted to the future battlefield. On the one hand, it is necessary to deeply explore the combat potential of emerging technologies. We should actively explore new winning paths such as “algorithms as combat power,” “data as firepower,” “networks as the battlefield,” and “intelligence as advantage,” transforming technological advantages into battlefield victories. On the other hand, it is necessary to innovatively design future combat processes. Various combat forces can be dispersed and deployed across multiple intelligent and networked nodes, constructing a more flattened, agile, and adaptive “observation-judgment-decision-action” cycle. Simultaneously, we must strengthen multi-domain linkage, breaking down inherent barriers between different services and combat domains, striving to achieve cross-domain collaboration, system-wide synergy, autonomous adaptation, and dynamic reorganization, promoting the overall emergence of combat effectiveness.

現代國語：

目前，人工智慧等尖端技術在軍事領域的深度滲透與融合應用，正深刻重塑戰爭形態，推動資訊化、智慧化戰爭朝向更高、更複雜的層面演進。這個過程帶來了作戰空間全方位擴展等新挑戰，同時也蘊含著戰爭基本法則的持久邏輯。我們必須深入分析資訊化、智慧化戰爭的演進機制，理解並釐清新挑戰的具體表現及其內在邏輯，不斷探索未來戰爭戰略的實踐路徑與勝利原則。

認識資訊科技和智慧科技為戰爭帶來的新挑戰

技術的迭代升級推動了作戰方式的深刻變革，進而帶來了新的挑戰。目前，隨著資訊科技與智慧科技的加速發展，戰爭形態呈現出跨域融合、系統對抗、智慧主導等顯著變化，由此產生了混合域作戰、智慧化作戰、全員參與等新挑戰。

多域作戰的挑戰。在未來的戰爭中，傳統作戰領域的物理邊界將被打破，資訊領域和社會領域將深度交織，形成以多域協同為特徵的新型戰場。這種多維戰場環境對現有作戰系統提出了兩大挑戰。首先，系統相容性面臨挑戰。在多域作戰環境中，作戰行動「跨越」多個實體和虛擬空間，而傳統作戰系統通常基於特定的作戰領域構建，難以實現技術標準和資訊介面的無縫相容。其次，指揮控制高度複雜。在資訊化和智慧化戰爭中，作戰行動在多個維度上同時或交替展開，各種需求呈現出非線性、爆發性和多域性的特徵。傳統的層級式、樹狀指揮結構難以應付這種複雜的多域協同局面。

情報的挑戰。人工智慧等技術深度融入戰爭決策和行動鏈，對傳統的決策模型和行動邏輯提出了新的挑戰。一方面，界定人機協作的邊界和主導地位極具挑戰性。智慧型系統在資訊處理、決策支援乃至自主行動方面展現出卓越的能力，但過度依賴演算法可能導致「決策黑箱」；對機器智慧的過度限制則可能喪失智慧演算法的速度和效率優勢。因此，如何建構人機共生、人主導、智慧輔助的決策模型，已成為贏得資訊化和智慧化戰爭的必經「考驗」。另一方面，演算法戰的複雜性和脆弱性日益凸顯。戰爭智能化程度越高，對核心演算法的依賴性就越強。敵方可能透過資料污染、模型欺騙和網路入侵等手段發動攻擊，誘使智慧型系統誤判和失效。這種基於演算法漏洞的「自下而上」攻擊比傳統手段更加隱蔽和破壞性，對防禦系統的建構和維護提出了更高的要求。

這是一項影響全體人員的挑戰。資訊化與智慧化戰爭模糊了戰時與和平時期、前線與後方的界線。作戰行動不再侷限於職業軍人和傳統戰場；經濟、金融、科技等非軍事領域及其相關人員都可能在不同程度上融入現代作戰體系，帶來全新的挑戰。具體而言，非軍事領域可能成為攻防的新焦點。在資訊社會中，能源網路、交通樞紐、資訊平台等關鍵基礎設施高度互聯互通、相互依存，覆蓋範圍廣、影響力大，使其成為混合戰爭中攻擊或破壞的主要目標，大大增加了防禦難度。國防動員體系面臨轉型壓力。傳統的「和平時期向戰爭時期轉換」模式已無法滿足高強度、快節奏、高消耗的資訊化和智慧化戰爭的需求。迫切需要…建構「和平時期與戰爭時期一體化、軍民融合、精準高效」的現代化動員機制，確保技術潛力、產業能力、專業人才等核心資源的快速反應與高效轉換。

釐清資訊化與智慧化戰爭的內在邏輯

儘管資訊和智慧科技的發展深刻地重塑了兵力運用方式，但戰爭的固有屬性並未發生根本性改變。確保戰略服從政策，堅持以人為本的原則，並認識到「戰爭迷霧」將長期存在，仍然是我們理解、規劃和應對未來戰爭的關鍵。

戰略服從政治戰略至關重要。目前，新技術和新攻擊手段的湧現容易滋生「技術中心主義」——當演算法和運算能力被視為取勝的關鍵，裝備的技術優勢被視為絕對優勢時，軍事行動就有可能偏離政治戰略軌道。這就要求我們始終將軍事行動納入國家整體政治框架，確保技術優勢服務於戰略目標。在資訊化和智慧化條件下，戰略對政治戰略的服從超越了純粹的軍事層面，需要與外交斡旋、國內發展穩定等核心國家政治目標精準契合。因此，必須明確界定資訊和智慧手段應用的邊界、強度和範圍，避免因技術濫用而引發重大政治和戰略風險，並努力實現政治目標與軍事手段的動態統一。

決定性因素仍然是人。雖然智慧科技確實可以賦予武器卓越的自主感知和決策能力，但戰爭的最終控制權和勝利之道始終牢牢掌握在人手中。馬克思主義戰爭理論表明，無論戰爭如何演變，人類始終是主要行動者和最終的決定性力量。武器作為工具，其有效使用最終依賴於人的創造力。因此，面對資訊化、智慧化戰爭的浪潮，我們必須在人類主導的基礎上，實現人機智慧的深度融合與同步發展。具體而言，智慧化不僅要「改造」物——提升裝備性能——更要「改造」人——增強人類的認知能力、決策水平和人機協同效率，確保無論智慧裝備的「風箏」飛得多高，人類始終牢牢掌控著引導其發展的「控制鏈」。

認識到「戰爭迷霧」的持久性，儘管資訊技術顯著提升了戰場透明度，但技術手段只能降低「迷霧」的密度，而無法徹底驅散它。根本原因在於戰爭是一場動態賽局；交戰雙方不斷進行的戰略佯攻和其他戰術動作所產生的欺騙性，遠非簡單的技術解構所能及，具有固有的不可預測性。因此，我們必須正視「戰爭迷霧」的永恆性，並採取適當措施，實現「減少自身迷霧，增加敵方混亂」的目標。就前者而言，我們必須整合衛星偵察、無人機監視、地面感測器等多源情報，強化自身偵察優勢，以實現戰場態勢的即時動態測繪。就後者而言，我們必須運用假訊號、電子偽裝等手段，誤導敵方情報蒐集，使其在真假難辨的狀態下耗費資源，從而直接削弱其態勢感知能力，加深敵方決策困境。

探索資訊化、智慧化戰爭的勝利要素

為因應未來戰爭，我們必須體認到戰爭帶來的新挑戰，掌握其內在邏輯，進一步探索資訊化、智慧化戰爭的勝利原則，努力加強軍事理論建設，制定完善的戰略規劃，並創新戰術方法。

加強理論發展至關重要。科學的軍事理論就是戰鬥力，維持軍事理論的進步是贏得資訊化、智慧化戰爭的關鍵。一方面，我們必須深化軍事理論的整合與創新，有系統地將現代科學融入軍事理論。

運用控制論、博弈論、資訊理論等理論，著重研究人機協同作戰、跨域聯合作戰等新型作戰方式，建構前瞻性、適應性和可操作性的先進軍事理論體系。另一方面，必須堅持實戰檢驗、迭代更新。必須堅持理論與實踐結合，敏銳觀察問題，系統總結經驗，準確提煉軍事鬥爭前線備戰訓練中的規律，形成「實踐—理解—再實踐—再理解」的良性循環，確保理論保持活力，有效指導未來戰爭。

策略規劃至關重要。面向未來的策略規劃本質上是一個由技術驅動、需求驅動、動態調適保障的主動塑造過程。它需要廣闊的技術視野和靈活的戰略思維，力求實現從「應對戰爭」到「設計戰爭」的飛躍。首先，我們必須預見技術變革。我們必須對可能重塑戰爭規則的顛覆性技術保持高度敏感，並深刻理解各種技術交叉融合的深遠影響。其次，我們必須聚焦重點領域。網路空間、外太空、深海、極地等新興「高前沿」應成為戰略規劃的重點，著力塑造作戰規則，奪取優勢，確保在無形戰場和新興空間佔據主導地位。第三，我們必須動態調整與適應。未來的戰場瞬息萬變，充滿不確定性。策略規劃不能是一成不變的固定文本，而應是一個具有韌性的動態架構。我們必須結合實際情況，評估各種解決方案的適用性、成熟度和潛在風險，確保軍事發展方向始終與未來戰爭的需求精準契合。

推進戰術創新。具體戰術是連結技術創新與作戰行動的橋樑。面對資訊化、智慧化戰爭帶來的深刻變革，必須大力推動戰術創新，探索適應未來戰場的「智慧戰略」。一方面，要深入挖掘新興技術的作戰潛力，積極探索「演算法即戰力」、「數據即火力」、「網路即戰場」、「情報即優勢」等新的致勝路徑，將技術優勢轉化為戰場勝利。另一方面，要創新地設計未來作戰流程，使各類作戰力量分散部署於多個智慧化、網路化的節點，建構更扁平、更敏捷、適應性更強的「觀察-判斷-決策-行動」循環。同時，要加強多域連結，打破不同軍種、不同作戰域之間的固有壁壘，力爭實現跨域協同、系統協同、自主適應、動態重組，進而提升整體作戰效能。

（編：任嘉慧、彭靜）

李书吾 丁 盛

2026年01月27日0x:xx | 来源：解放军报

中國原創軍事資源：https://military.people.com.cn/n1/2026/08127/c10811-4808868538648.html

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Chinese #Quantum #technology, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Combat Planning, Command information Systems, Information Support Force

Analyzing the Forms of Chinese Military Intelligent Combat

Leave a comment

分析中國軍事情報作戰的形式

現代英語：

Operational form refers to the manifestation and state of combat under certain conditions, and is usually adapted to a certain form of warfare and combat method. With the development and widespread use of intelligent weapon systems, future intelligent warfare will inevitably present a completely different form from mechanized and informationized warfare.

　　Cloud-based combat system

　　The combat system is the fundamental basis for the aggregation and release of combat energy. An informationized combat system is based on a network information system, while an intelligent combat system is supported by a combat cloud. The combat cloud can organically reorganize dispersed combat resources into a flexible and dynamic combat resource pool. It features virtualization, connectivity, distribution, easy scalability, and on-demand services, enabling each combat unit to acquire resources on demand. It is a crucial support for achieving cross-domain collaboration and represents a new organizational form for intelligent combat systems.

　　The cloud-supported combat system utilizes cloud technology to connect information, physical systems, and the ubiquitous Internet of Things. By configuring combat resource clouds at different levels and scales, it highly shares multi-dimensional combat data across land, sea, air, and space, achieving battlefield resource integration across combat domains such as land, sea, air, space, electronic, and cyber domains. This allows various combat elements to converge into the cloud, completing the network interaction of battlefield data.

　　The cloud-connected combat system enables joint operations to integrate battlefield intelligence information widely distributed across various domains—space, air, ground, sea, and underwater—with the support of big data and cloud computing technologies. This allows for seamless, real-time, and on-demand distribution of information across these domains, achieving cross-domain information fusion and efficient sharing. It also enables command structures at all levels to leverage intelligent command and control systems for multi-dimensional intelligence analysis, battlefield situation assessment, operational optimization, decision-making, operational planning, and troop movement control. Furthermore, it allows combat forces to rapidly and flexibly adjust, optimize configurations, and recombine online based on real-time operational needs, forming adaptive task forces and implementing distributed, focused operations, supported by highly integrated cross-domain information technology. At the same time, through the cross-domain fusion capability of battlefield information in the combat cloud, it is also possible to form an integrated combat force with intelligent combat forces, traditional combat forces, manned combat forces and unmanned combat forces, and intangible space combat forces and tangible space combat forces. In the cloud, different combat units and combat elements in land, sea, air, space, electronic, and cyberspace can be highly integrated, coordinated, and have their strengths maximized. This enables cross-domain and cross-generational collaborative operations, transforming the overall combat effectiveness from the past gradual release and linear superposition of combat effects to non-linear, emergent, adaptive effects fusion and precise energy release.

　　Decentralized and concentrated battlefield deployment

　　Concentrating superior forces is an age-old principle of warfare. With the continuous improvement of network information systems and the widespread use of intelligent weapon systems, various combat forces, combat units, and combat elements can dynamically integrate into and rely on joint operations systems, disperse forces, quickly switch tasks, and dynamically aggregate effectiveness to cope with complex and ever-changing battlefield situations. This has become a force organization form that distinguishes intelligent warfare from information warfare.

　　The battlefield deployment of dispersed and concentrated forces refers to the joint operations system supported by cloud computing, in which various participating forces rely on the high degree of information sharing and rapid flow. Through node-based deployment, networked mobility, and virtual centralization, it can combine various combat elements, weapon platforms, and combat support systems that are dispersed in a multi-dimensional and vast battlefield space in real time, dynamically and flexibly, so as to achieve the distributed deployment of combat forces, the on-demand reorganization of combat modules, and the cross-domain integration of combat effectiveness.

　　The dispersed and concentrated battlefield deployment enables commanders at all levels to deeply perceive and accurately predict the battlefield situation through big data analysis, battlefield situation collection, and multi-source intelligence verification by intelligent command information systems. This allows for rapid and efficient situation assessment and early warning. Furthermore, the wide-area deployment and flexible configuration of various combat forces and units enable timely responses based on predetermined operational plans or ad-hoc collaborative needs. This allows for flexible and autonomous cross-domain coordination, rapid convergence and dispersal, and dynamic concentration of combat effectiveness. At critical times and in critical spaces, focusing on key nodes of the enemy’s operational system and high-value targets crucial to the overall strategic situation, it rapidly forms a system-wide operational advantage. Through a highly resilient and networked kill chain, it precisely releases combat effectiveness, generating an overall advantage spillover effect, thus forming an overwhelming advantage of multiple domains over one domain and the overall situation over the local situation. Especially during the release of combat effectiveness, each combat group, driven by “intelligence + data”, and based on pre-planned combat plans, can autonomously replan combat missions online around combat objectives, and automatically allocate targets online according to the actual combat functions and strengths of each combat unit within the group. This allows each unit to make the most of its strengths and advantages, and flexibly mobilize the free aggregation and dispersal of “materials + energy” in combat operations. Ultimately, this enables rapid matching and integration in terms of targets, situation, missions, capabilities, and timing, thereby forming a focused energy flow that releases systemic energy against the enemy.

　　Human-machine integrated command and control

　　The history of operational command development shows that decision-making and control methods in operational command activities always adapt to the development of the times. With the maturity of artificial intelligence technology and the continuous development of the self-generation, self-organization, and self-evolution of military intelligent systems, various weapon systems will evolve from information-based “low intelligence” to brain-like “high intelligence.” The combat style will evolve from information-based system combat to human-machine collaborative combat supported by the system. The autonomy of the war actors will become stronger, and the intelligence level of command and control systems will become higher. Fully leveraging the comparative advantages of “human and machine” and implementing decision-making and control through the “human-machine integration” model is a brand-new command form for future intelligent warfare.

　　Human-machine integrated command and control, supported by a reasonable division of functions between humans and machines and efficient decision-making through human-machine interaction, fully leverages the complementary advantages of human brain and machine intelligence to achieve the integration of command art and technology. In the process of intelligent combat decision-making and action, it enables rapid, accurate, scientific, and efficient activities such as situation analysis and judgment, combat concept design, combat decision determination, combat plan formulation, and order issuance. It also adopts a “human-in-the-loop” monitoring mode that combines autonomous action by intelligent combat platforms with timely correction by operators to organize and implement combat operations.

　　Human-machine integrated command and control, during planning and decision-making, can construct a combat cloud under the commander’s guidance through ubiquitous battlefield networks, intelligent auxiliary decision-making systems, and distributed intelligent combat platforms. Based on a model- and algorithm-driven intelligent “cloud brain,” it performs intelligent auxiliary decision-making, command and control, and evaluation simulations, combining “human strategy” with “machine strategy.” This leverages the respective strengths of both human and machine, achieving a deep integration of command strategy and intelligent support technologies, significantly improving the speed and accuracy of command decisions. During operational control, staff personnel can, based on operational intentions and missions, utilize intelligent battlefield perception systems, mission planning systems, and command and control systems, following a “synchronous perception—” approach. The basic principle of “rapid response and flexible handling” is based on a unified spatiotemporal benchmark and relies on a multi-dimensional networked reconnaissance and surveillance system to perceive changes in the battlefield situation in real time. It comprehensively uses auxiliary analysis tools to compare and analyze the differences between the current situation and the expected objectives and their impact, and makes timely adjustments to actions and adjusts troop movements on the spot to maintain combat advantage at all times. During the execution of operations, the command and control of intelligent combat platforms by operators of various weapon systems at all levels will be timely and precise to intervene according to the development and changes in the battlefield situation. While giving full play to the high speed, high precision and high autonomous combat capabilities of intelligent combat platforms, it ensures that they always operate under human control and always follow the overall combat intent.

　　Autonomous and coordinated combat operations

　　Implementing autonomous operations is crucial for commanders at all levels to seize opportunities, adapt to changing circumstances, and act rapidly on the ever-changing battlefield, gaining an advantage and preventing the enemy from making a move. This is a vital operational principle and requirement. Previously, due to constraints such as intelligence gathering, command and control methods, and battlefield coordination capabilities, truly autonomous and coordinated operations were difficult to achieve. However, with the continuous development and widespread application of information technology, collaborative control technology, and especially artificial intelligence in the military field, autonomous and coordinated operations will become the most prevalent form of collaboration in future intelligent warfare.

　　Autonomous and coordinated combat operations refer to the rapid acquisition, processing, and sharing of battlefield situation information by various combat forces in a cloud environment supported by multi-dimensional coverage, seamless network links, on-demand extraction of information resources, and flexible and rapid organizational support. This is achieved by utilizing “edge response” intelligence processing systems and big data-based battlefield situation intelligent analysis systems. With little or no reliance on the control of higher command organizations, these forces can accurately and comprehensively grasp intelligence information related to their operations and actively and proactively organize combat and coordinated actions based on changes in the enemy situation and unified operational intentions.

　　Autonomous and coordinated combat operations, while enhancing the autonomy of organizational operations at the local level, are further characterized by various intelligent weapon systems possessing the ability to understand combat intentions and highly adaptive and coordinated. They can automatically complete the “OODA” cycle with minimal or no human intervention, forming a complete closed-loop “adaptive” circuit. This enables them to efficiently execute complex and challenging combat missions. In rapidly changing battlefield environments, they can accurately and continuously conduct autonomous reconnaissance and detection of enemy situations, autonomously process battlefield situational information, autonomously identify friend or foe, autonomously track targets, and autonomously and flexibly select mission payloads, and autonomously launch attacks within the permissions granted by operators. Furthermore, during combat, intelligent weapon systems located in different spaces can, as the battlefield situation evolves and combat needs arise, form a combat power generation chain of “situational sharing—synchronous collaboration—optimal energy release” around a unified combat objective. Following the principle of “whoever is suitable, whoever leads; whoever has the advantage, whoever strikes,” they autonomously coordinate, precisely releasing dispersed firepower, information power, mobility, and protective power to the most appropriate targets at the most appropriate time and in the most appropriate manner, autonomously organizing combat operations. In addition, highly intelligent weapon systems can not only adapt to high-risk and complex combat environments and overcome human limitations in physiology and psychology, but also enter the extreme space of all domains and multiple dimensions to carry out missions. Moreover, they can conduct continuous combat with perception accuracy, computing speed and endurance far exceeding that of humans, autonomously carry out simultaneous cluster attacks and multi-wave continuous attacks, form a continuous high-intensity suppression posture against the enemy, and quickly achieve combat objectives.

[ Editor: Ding Yubing ]

現代國語：

作戰形式是指在特定條件下作戰的展現方式和狀態，通常與某種戰爭形式和作戰方法相適應。隨著智慧武器系統的發展和廣泛應用，未來的智慧戰爭必將呈現出與機械化戰爭和資訊化戰爭截然不同的形式。

雲端作戰系統

作戰系統是作戰能量聚合與釋放的根本基礎。資訊化作戰系統基於網路資訊系統，而智慧作戰系統則由作戰雲支撐。作戰雲能夠將分散的作戰資源自然地重組為靈活動態的作戰資源池。它具有虛擬化、互聯互通、分散式、易於擴展和按需服務等特點，使每個作戰單位都能按需獲取資源。它是實現跨域協同作戰的關鍵支撐，代表了智慧作戰系統的一種新型組織形式。

雲端作戰系統利用雲端技術連接資訊、實體系統和無所不在的物聯網。透過配置不同層級、規模的作戰資源雲，該系統能夠跨陸、海、空、天等多個作戰領域實現多維作戰資料的高效共享，從而實現陸、海、空、天、電子、網路等作戰領域的戰場資源整合。這使得各種作戰要素能夠匯聚到雲端，完成戰場資料的網路互動。

雲端連接作戰系統借助大數據和雲端運算技術，使聯合作戰能夠整合廣泛分佈於天、空、地、海、水下等多個領域的戰場情報資訊。這實現了跨領域資訊的無縫、即時和按需分發，從而實現跨域資訊融合和高效共享。此外，該系統還使各級指揮機構能夠利用智慧指揮控制系統進行多維情報分析、戰場態勢評估、作戰優化、決策、作戰計畫制定和部隊調動控制。此外，它還允許作戰部隊根據即時作戰需求，在線上快速且靈活地調整、優化配置和重組，形成適應性特遣部隊，並實施分散式、聚焦式作戰，這一切都得益於高度整合的跨域資訊技術的支援。同時，透過作戰雲中戰場資訊的跨域融合能力，還可以將智慧作戰部隊、傳統作戰部隊、有人作戰部隊和無人作戰部隊、無形空間作戰部隊和有形空間作戰部隊整合為一體化作戰力量。在雲端，陸、海、空、天、電子、網路空間等不同作戰單位和作戰要素可以高度整合、協調，並最大限度地發揮各自的優勢。這使得跨域、跨世代協同作戰成為可能，將整體作戰效能從以往作戰效果的逐步釋放和線性疊加轉變為非線性、湧現式、適應性的效果融合和精準的能量釋放。

分散與集中的戰場部署

集中優勢兵力是古老的戰爭原則。隨著網路資訊系統的不斷完善和智慧武器系統的廣泛應用，各類作戰力量、作戰單位和作戰要素能夠動態地融入聯合作戰系統並依託其運作，實現兵力分散、任務快速切換、動態聚合作戰效能，從而應對複雜多變的戰場形勢。這已成為區分智慧戰和資訊戰的兵力組織形式。

戰場分散與集中兵力部署是指基於雲端運算的聯合作戰系統，其中各參戰力量依托高度的資訊共享和快速流動，透過節點式部署、網路化移動和虛擬集中等方式，能夠即時、動態、靈活地整合分散在多維廣大戰場空間中的各類部署、作戰作戰、武器平台和作戰系統，從而實現分散在多維廣大戰場空間中的各類部署、作戰作戰、武器平台和作戰系統，從而實現作戰力量的分佈以及跨域作戰空間中的各類部署、作戰級作戰、武器效能的以及跨域作戰元素，從而實現作戰力量的跨域作戰、作戰效能的跨域作戰元素。

分散與集中的戰場部署使得各級指揮官能夠透過智慧指揮資訊系統進行大數據分析、戰場態勢擷取與多源情報驗證，從而深入感知並準確預測戰場態勢。這使得快速和高效率的態勢評估與預警。此外，各類作戰部隊和單位的大範圍部署和靈活配置，使其能夠根據預定的作戰計畫或臨時協同需求做出及時反應。這實現了靈活自主的跨域協同、快速的匯聚與分散，以及動態集中作戰效能。在關鍵時刻和關鍵區域，透過聚焦敵方作戰系統的關鍵節點和對整體戰略態勢至關重要的高價值目標，迅速形成系統級的作戰優勢。透過高韌性、網路化的殺傷鏈，精準釋放作戰效能，產生整體優勢的溢出效應，從而形成多域對單域的壓倒性優勢，以及整體態勢對局部態勢的壓倒性優勢。尤其是在釋放作戰效能的過程中，各作戰群在「情報+數據」的驅動下，基於預先制定的作戰計劃，能夠圍繞作戰目標自主地在線重新規劃作戰任務，並根據群內各作戰單位的實際作戰功能和實力，自動在線分配目標。這使得每個單位都能充分發揮自身優勢，靈活調動作戰行動中「物質+能量」的自由聚合與分散。最終，這能夠實現目標、態勢、任務、能力和時間等方面的快速匹配與整合，從而形成集中的能量流，釋放系統性能量對抗敵人。

人機一體化指揮控制

作戰指揮發展史表明，作戰指揮活動中的決策和控制方法始終與時俱進。隨著人工智慧技術的成熟以及軍事智慧系統自生成、自組織、自演化的不斷發展，各種武器系統將從基於資訊的「低智慧」向類腦的「高智慧」演進。作戰方式也將從資訊為基礎的系統作戰向系統支援的人機協同作戰演進。作戰主體的自主性將增強，指揮控制系統的智慧水準也將提高。充分發揮「人機」的比較優勢，透過「人機融合」模式進行決策與控制，是未來智慧戰爭的全新指揮形式。

人機融合指揮控制，以人機功能合理劃分與人機互動高效決策為基礎，充分發揮人腦與機器智慧的互補優勢，實現指揮藝術與科技的融合。在智慧作戰決策和行動過程中，能夠快速、準確、科學、有效率地進行態勢分析判斷、作戰概念設計、作戰決策確定、作戰計畫制定和命令下達等活動。同時，它採用「人機協同」監控模式，將智慧作戰平台的自主行動與操作人員的及時糾正相結合，組織和實施作戰行動。

人機融合指揮控制在計畫和決策階段，能夠透過無所不在的戰場網路、智慧輔助決策系統和分散式智慧作戰平台，在指揮官的指導下建構作戰雲。基於模型和演算法驅動的智慧“雲大腦”，該系統能夠進行智慧輔助決策、指揮控制和評估模擬，將“人機戰略”相結合，充分發揮人機各自的優勢，實現指揮戰略與智能支援技術的深度融合，顯著提升指揮決策的速度和準確性。在作戰控制過程中，參謀人員可以根據作戰意圖和任務，運用智慧戰場感知系統、任務規劃系統和指揮控制系統，遵循「同步感知」的原則。該系統以統一的時空基準為基礎，依托多維網路偵察監視系統，即時感知戰場態勢變化，並綜合運用輔助分析工具，對比分析當前態勢與預期目標之間的差異及其影響，及時調整行動，並根據實際情況調整部隊調動，始終保持作戰優勢。在作戰執行過程中，指揮人員能夠根據作戰意圖和任務，即時運用智慧輔助決策、指揮控制和評估模擬等手段，對戰場態勢變化進行即時感知和評估模擬。各級不同武器系統操作人員對智慧作戰平台的控制，將能夠根據戰場情勢的發展變化及時、精準地進行幹預。在充分發揮智慧作戰平台高速、高精度、高自主作戰能力的同時，確保其始終在人為控制下運行，並始終遵循整體作戰意圖。

自主協同作戰

對於各級指揮官而言，實施自主作戰至關重要，它能夠幫助他們抓住機會、適應不斷變化的環境、在瞬息萬變的戰場上迅速行動，取得優勢並阻止敵方行動。這是一項至關重要的作戰原則和要求。過去，由於情報收集、指揮控制方式以及戰場協同能力等方面的限制，真正實現自主協同作戰較為困難。然而，隨著資訊科技、協同控制技術，特別是人工智慧在軍事領域的不斷發展和廣泛應用，自主協同作戰將成為未來智慧戰爭中最普遍的協同作戰形式。

自主協同作戰是指在多維覆蓋、無縫網路鏈路、按需提取資訊資源以及靈活快速的組織支援等雲環境下，各作戰部隊快速獲取、處理和共享戰場態勢資訊。這主要透過利用「邊緣響應」情報處理系統和基於大數據技術的戰場態勢智慧分析系統來實現。這些部隊在幾乎無需依賴上級指揮機構的控制的情況下，能夠準確、全面地掌握與其作戰相關的情報信息，並根據敵情變化和統一作戰意圖，主動組織作戰和協同行動。

自主協同作戰在增強局部組織作戰自主性的同時，也具有多種智慧武器系統能夠理解作戰意圖並高度適應和協調的特徵。這些系統能夠在極少或無需人為幹預的情況下自動完成“OODA循環”，形成完整的閉環“自適應”迴路。這使得它們能夠有效率地執行複雜且具挑戰性的作戰任務。在瞬息萬變的戰場環境中，智慧武器系統能夠準確、持續地自主偵察敵情，自主處理戰場態勢訊息，自主辨識敵我，自主追蹤目標，自主靈活地選擇任務負荷，並在操作人員授權範圍內自主發動攻擊。此外，在戰鬥中，分佈於不同空間的智慧武器系統能夠隨著戰場態勢的演變和作戰需求的出現，圍繞著統一的作戰目標，形成「態勢共享—同步協同—最優能量釋放」的作戰能力生成鏈。遵循「適者先攻，優勢者出擊」的原則，它們自主協調，在最恰當的時間以最恰當的方式，將分散的火力、資訊能力、機動性和防護能力精準地釋放到最恰當的目標，自主組織作戰行動。此外，高度智慧化的武器系統不僅能夠適應高風險、複雜的作戰環境，克服人類生理和心理的限制，還能進入多域、多維度的極端空間執行任務。此外，它們能夠以遠超人類的感知精度、運算速度和續航能力進行持續作戰，自主執行同步集群攻擊和多波次連續攻擊，形成對敵持續高強度壓制態勢，並迅速達成作戰目標。

[ 編：丁玉冰 ]

中國原創軍事資源：https://mil.gmw.cn/2022-02/284/content_38585848178687.htm

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Artificial Intelligence, Chinese Military Artificial Intelligence Weaponizatio, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Intelligentization, Information Support Force, Intelligent Warfare

China’s Forward-looking Intelligent Combat System Provides Chinese Military a “Smart” Advantage

Leave a comment

中國前瞻性的智慧作戰系統為中國軍隊提供了「智慧」優勢

現代英語：

The evolution of warfare and combat styles is inextricably linked to profound changes in combat systems. The “intelligence” of intelligent combat systems lies not merely in the accumulation of technologies, but more importantly in the reconstruction of the paths for generating and releasing combat power, enabling leaps in combat effectiveness and serving as a key fulcrum for achieving victory in future wars. A deep understanding and forward-looking construction of the “intelligent” advantages of intelligent combat systems has become an essential requirement for winning intelligent warfare.

Survival advantages of elastic redundancy

The survival of operational elements is fundamental to victory in combat. Intelligent combat systems, through distributed and flexible deployment, modular functional reconfiguration, and autonomous damage recovery, have formed a resilient survival mode to cope with high-intensity confrontation and uncertainty.

Heterogeneous and distributed global deployment. Heterogeneity reflects the degree of aggregation of different capabilities on the same platform, while distribution reflects the degree of distribution of the same capability on different platforms. Intelligent combat systems enhance the diversity of platform capabilities through heterogeneity. For example, new combat aircraft can serve as multi-functional integrated platforms with sensing, command and control, relay, and strike capabilities. By distributing combat functions to different platforms, large-scale, low-cost global deployment can be achieved. For instance, the same combat function can be assigned to multiple platforms and systems such as UAVs and loitering munitions. With the heterogeneous dispersion and matrix cross-linking of intelligent nodes, continuous pressure can be formed everywhere and in all directions in physical space, while rapid aggregation in key directions can be achieved. This unifies global elasticity and dynamic real-time optimization, maximizing functional distribution and effectiveness release to cope with the uncertainties of intelligent combat.

Functional restructuring through modular combination. The intelligent combat system, employing a flexible paradigm of software-defined, task-oriented invocation, and modular reconfiguration, deconstructs functions fixed to specific equipment into standardized, interoperable hardware and software modules. During combat, based on rapidly changing battlefield demands, these modules can be quickly and flexibly loaded and combined online through a unified interface and open architecture, achieving non-linear functional combinations and flexible capability reshaping. This plug-and-play, on-demand generation model unlocks unlimited functional potential within a limited physical scale, realizing a shift from “using whatever weapons are available to fight” to “generating the appropriate capabilities for the specific battle,” fundamentally enhancing the adaptability and mission flexibility of the combat system.

Self-healing resilience. The advantage of an intelligent combat system lies not in its absolute invulnerability, but in its self-healing resilience—the ability to detect damage and reconstruct immediately upon interruption. When some nodes fail due to combat damage or interference, the system autonomously and rapidly diagnoses the damage based on preset functions and path redundancy rules. It then mobilizes nearby healthy nodes to take over the mission or activates backup communication paths to rebuild connections, propelling the system to quickly transition to a new stable state. This inherent elastic redundancy allows the system to maintain core functions and reconstruct the combat network even after enduring continuous attacks, minimizing the impact of combat damage on overall combat effectiveness.

The cognitive advantage of agile penetration

Cognitive advantage is key to gaining the initiative in battlefield information and achieving decisive victory. Its essence lies in breaking through the barriers of “information fog” and the constraints of “decision anxiety” through the deep integration of intelligent algorithms and advanced sensors, and realizing a leap from passive perception to proactive cognition.

Resilient communication capable of adapting to changing circumstances. Resilient communication refers to the ability of communication systems to detect interference in real time and dynamically reconfigure links in highly contested and complex electromagnetic environments to maintain the continuity and stability of command and control. Intelligent combat systems, relying on technologies such as cognitive radio, achieve on-demand allocation of communication resources, intelligent optimization of transmission paths, and autonomous reconfiguration of network topology, enabling them to “penetrate gaps” in complex electromagnetic environments and flexibly acquire communication “windows.” This resilience—able to maintain communication even amidst interference and resume operations even after interruptions—ensures the continuity of command and control relationships in extremely harsh electromagnetic environments, providing a reliable communication line for system cognitive activities.

The organic integration of multi-modal information. Multi-modal integration refers to the process of extracting consistency from diverse and heterogeneous information to form a high-value battlefield situation. The intelligent combat system, based on intelligent algorithms, performs cross-modal alignment of data from different sources such as radar, optoelectronics, reconnaissance, and cyber warfare. It automatically extracts enemy deployment, action patterns, and tactical intentions from massive and fragmented intelligence, achieving heterogeneous complementarity and cross-verification. This drives a qualitative leap from data redundancy to accurate intelligence, thereby providing commanders with a comprehensive and reliable battlefield cognitive map, clearing away the “fog of war,” and reaching the core of the situation.

Human-machine interaction achieves seamless intent. Intent-based intent aims to bridge the semantic gap between human commanders and intelligent combat systems, enabling precise and lossless conversion from natural language commands to machine-executable tasks. Intelligent combat systems utilize technologies such as natural language processing and knowledge graphs to construct an intelligent interaction engine with natural language understanding and logical reasoning capabilities. This engine automatically decomposes the commander’s general operational intent into task lists, constraints, and evaluation criteria, generating machine-understandable and executable tactical instructions and action sequences, which are then precisely distributed to the corresponding combat units, directly driving their execution. This “what is thought is what is directed, what is directed is what is attacked” command model significantly reduces the understanding and communication cycle in the traditional command chain, enabling deep integration of human and machine intelligence at the decision-making level and achieving a leap in command effectiveness.

Synergistic advantages of autonomous adaptation

Synergistic advantages are a multiplier for unleashing the effectiveness of system-of-systems warfare. The synergy of intelligent combat systems transcends programmed pre-setup, manifesting as the self-organizing and adaptive synchronization and cooperation of cross-domain combat units under unified rules and common missions. Its essence is the embodiment of system intelligence at the operational level.

Spatiotemporal coordination constrained by rules. Spatiotemporal coordination refers to setting action boundaries and interaction rules for widely dispersed combat units within a unified spatiotemporal reference framework, ensuring their orderly cooperation in the physical domain. Under a unified operational rule framework, each unit of the intelligent combat system autonomously calculates its relative position and predicts its trajectory through intelligent algorithms, achieving time-domain calibration, spatial-domain integration, and frequency-domain nesting of different platforms. This ensures conflict-free path planning, interference-free spectrum use, and accident-free firepower application. This collaborative mechanism, which combines order and flexibility, avoids mutual interference while maintaining tactical flexibility, providing a spatiotemporal reference for combat operations in complex battlefield environments.

Task-driven logical coordination. Logical coordination refers to using combat missions as the underlying logic, autonomously decomposing tasks, allocating resources, and planning actions to achieve intelligent organization and scheduling. The intelligent combat system, based on task analysis, capability matching, and planning generation algorithms, automatically decomposes combat objectives into specific action sequences and intelligently schedules corresponding combat units to “dispatch orders.” Each intelligent node, based on its understanding of the overall mission, real-time situational awareness, and its own capabilities, autonomously decides on action plans through a multi-agent negotiation mechanism and dynamically negotiates and cooperates with relevant units to “accept orders.” This task-oriented command greatly liberates higher-level commanders, enabling the system to possess agility and flexibility in responding to emergencies and significantly improving its mission adaptability.

Target-aligned awareness collaboration. Awareness collaboration refers to the autonomous decision-making and actions of combat units based on a shared understanding of the target and environment, resulting in synergistic effects. Intelligent combat systems consist of systems or nodes with predictive and reasoning capabilities. Driven by operational objectives, they can anticipate the actions of friendly forces and the course of the battlefield, and through local perception and independent decision-making, conduct self-organized and self-inspired collaborative support. This efficiency-driven, unspoken consensus transcends communication constraints and pre-set procedures, enabling the system to demonstrate exceptional adaptability and creativity when facing powerful adversaries.

The evolutionary advantages of learning iteration

Evolutionary advantage is key to a combat system’s sustained competitiveness and ability to seize the initiative on the battlefield. Intelligent combat systems rely on real-time adversarial data to drive overall optimization, accelerate capability diffusion through cross-domain experience transfer, and foster disruptive tactics through virtual gaming environments, thereby achieving autonomous evolution and generational leaps in combat effectiveness during the adversarial process.

The evolution of a system built upon accumulated experience. Intelligent combat systems will gather perception, decision-making, and action data acquired from complex adversarial environments in real time to a knowledge hub. Leveraging advanced algorithms such as reinforcement learning, they will conduct in-depth analysis and mining, performing closed-loop evaluation and dynamic adjustment of system-level operational logic such as command processes, coordination rules, and resource allocation strategies. This will form reusable and verifiable structured knowledge units, enhancing the combat system’s understanding of its environment and its autonomous adaptability. This will enable the entire system to form a shared “collective memory,” achieving adaptive radiation from single-point intelligence to overall operational effectiveness, and ultimately achieving individual evolution that becomes “more refined with each battle.”

Cross-domain empowerment of knowledge transfer. The intelligent combat system, relying on a unified semantic space and feature alignment framework, can rapidly embed localized experiences extracted and summarized from a specific battlefield or domain into other combat domains or mission scenarios. This breaks down information barriers between combat units, enabling the lossless transformation and cross-domain application of combat experience. Essentially, it promotes the secure flow and synergistic effect of knowledge within the system, completing the sublimation and reconstruction from “concrete experience” to “abstract knowledge,” achieving “gains from one battle benefiting all domains,” and accelerating the synchronous evolution of combat capabilities across various domains. This not only significantly improves the overall learning efficiency of the combat system and avoids repeated trial and error, but also achieves the intensive enhancement and systematic inheritance of combat capabilities.

The disruptive potential of game theory and confrontation is emerging. Systemic intelligent game theory aims to break through the boundaries of human cognition, fostering disruptive combat capabilities that transcend traditional experience. Its essence lies in the proactive creation and self-transcendence of knowledge at the system level. By constructing a high-intensity, long-term, realistic “red-blue” adversarial environment in a digital twin battlefield, and utilizing generative adversarial networks and multi-agent reinforcement learning frameworks, intelligent combat systems can explore the unknown boundaries of the strategy space in continuous game development. Based on game theory and complex systems theory, the system can spontaneously form better strategies during adversarial evolution, leading to combat modes and organizational forms that transcend conventional cognition. This makes the intelligent combat system a “super think tank” capable of continuously producing disruptive tactics.

現代國語：

戰爭和作戰方式的演變與作戰系統的深刻變革密不可分。智慧作戰系統的「智慧」不僅在於技術的積累，更重要的是重構作戰能力生成與釋放路徑，從而實現作戰效能的飛躍，並成為未來戰爭取勝的關鍵支點。深入理解並前瞻性地建構智慧作戰系統的「智慧」優勢，已成為贏得智慧戰爭的必要條件。

彈性冗餘的生存優勢

作戰要素的生存是戰爭勝利的根本。智慧作戰系統透過分散式靈活部署、模組化功能重建和自主損傷恢復，形成了應對高強度對抗和不確定性的韌性生存模式。

異質分散式全球部署。異質性反映了不同能力在同一平台上的聚合程度，而分散式則反映了相同能力在不同平台上的分佈程度。智慧作戰系統透過異質性增強了平台能力的多樣性。例如，新型作戰飛機可以作為集感知、指揮控制、中繼和打擊能力於一體的多功能整合平台。透過將作戰功能分配到不同的平台，可以實現大規模、低成本的全球部署。例如，同一作戰功能可以分配給多個平台和系統，例如無人機和巡彈。借助智慧節點的異質分散和矩陣式交叉連接，可以在物理空間的各個方向形成持續的壓力，同時實現關鍵方向的快速聚合。這統一了全局彈性和動態即時最佳化，最大限度地提高功能分配和效能釋放，以應對智慧作戰的不確定性。

透過模組化組合進行功能重構。智慧作戰系統採用軟體定義、任務導向和模組化重構的靈活範式，將固定於特定設備的功能解構為標準化、可互通的硬體和軟體模組。在戰鬥中，基於瞬息萬變的戰場需求，這些模組可透過統一的介面和開放式架構，在線上快速靈活地載入和組合，實現非線性功能組合和靈活的能力重塑。這種即插即用、按需生成的模式，在有限的物理規模內釋放了無限的功能潛力，實現了從「使用任何可用武器作戰」到「為特定戰鬥生成合適的能力」的轉變，從根本上增強了作戰系統的適應性和任務靈活性。

自癒韌性。智慧作戰系統的優勢不在於其絕對的無懈可擊，而在於其自癒韌性——即在中斷發生後能夠立即檢測損傷並進行重建。當某些節點因戰鬥損傷或乾擾而失效時，系統會基於預設功能和路徑冗餘規則，自主快速地診斷損傷。然後，它會調動附近的健康節點接管任務，或啟動備用通訊路徑重建連接，從而使系統迅速過渡到新的穩定狀態。這種固有的彈性冗餘使系統即使在遭受持續攻擊後也能維持核心功能並重建作戰網絡，從而最大限度地降低戰鬥損傷對整體作戰效能的影響。

敏捷滲透的認知優勢

認知優勢是掌握戰場資訊主動權並取得決定性勝利的關鍵。其本質在於透過智慧演算法和先進感測器的深度融合，突破「資訊迷霧」的障礙和「決策焦慮」的束縛，實現從被動感知到主動認知的飛躍。

適應環境變化的彈性通訊。彈性通訊是指通訊系統在高度對抗且複雜的電磁環境中即時偵測幹擾並動態重配置鏈路，以維持指揮控制的連續性和穩定性的能力。智慧作戰系統依托認知無線電等技術，實現通訊資源的按需分配、傳輸路徑的智慧優化以及網路拓撲的自主重配置，使其能夠在複雜的電磁環境中「穿透縫隙”，靈活獲取通訊「視窗」。這種韌性－即使在…之中也能保持溝通即使中斷後也能進行幹擾並恢復操作－確保在極度惡劣的電磁環境下指揮控制關係的連續性，為系統認知活動提供可靠的通訊線路。

多模態訊息的有機融合。多模態融合是指從多樣化且異構的資訊中提取一致性，形成高價值的戰場態勢的過程。基於智慧演算法的智慧作戰系統，對雷達、光電、偵察和網路戰等不同來源的資料進行跨模態對齊。它能夠從海量且碎片化的情報中自動提取敵方部署、行動模式和戰術意圖，實現異質互補和交叉驗證。這實現了從數據冗餘到精準情報的質的飛躍，從而為指揮官提供全面可靠的戰場認知地圖，撥開“戰爭迷霧”，直擊戰局核心。

人機互動實現無縫意圖傳遞。基於意圖的意圖旨在彌合人類指揮官與智慧作戰系統之間的語義鴻溝，實現自然語言指令到機器可執行任務的精確無損轉換。智慧作戰系統利用自然語言處理和知識圖譜等技術建構具備自然語言理解和邏輯推理能力的智慧互動引擎。該引擎自動將指揮官的整體作戰意圖分解為任務清單、約束條件和評估標準，產生機器可理解和執行的戰術指令和行動序列，並將其精確地分發給相應的作戰單元，直接驅動其執行。這種「所想即所發，所發即所攻」的指揮模式顯著縮短了傳統指揮鏈中的理解和溝通週期，實現了決策層面的人機智能深度融合，從而大幅提升了指揮效能。

自主調適的協同優勢

協同優勢是釋放系統間作戰效能的倍增器。智慧作戰系統的協同作用超越了預設的程序，表現為跨域作戰單元在統一規則和共同任務下進行自組織、自適應的同步與協作。其本質是系統智能在作戰層面的體現。

規則約束下的時空協調。時空協調是指在統一的時空參考框架內，為分散部署的作戰單元設定行動邊界和交互規則，確保其在物理域內的有序協作。在統一的作戰規則框架下，智慧作戰系統的每個單元透過智慧演算法自主計算其相對位置並預測其軌跡，實現不同平台的時域校準、空域融合和頻域嵌套。這確保了無衝突的路徑規劃、無幹擾的頻譜使用和無事故的火力運用。這種兼具有序性和靈活性的協同機制，在保持戰術靈活性的同時避免了相互幹擾，為複雜戰場環境下的作戰行動提供了時空參考。

任務驅動的邏輯協調。邏輯協調是指以作戰任務為底層邏輯，自主分解任務、分配資源、規劃行動，進而達成智慧化的組織與調度。智慧作戰系統基於任務分析、能力匹配和計畫生成演算法，自動將作戰目標分解為具體的行動序列，並智慧調度相應的作戰單位進行「命令下達」。每個智慧節點基於對整體任務的理解、即時態勢感知以及自身能力，透過多智能體協商機制自主制定行動計劃，並與相關單位動態協商協作以「接受命令」。這種以任務為導向的指揮方式極大地解放了上級指揮官，使系統在應對突發事件時具備敏捷性和靈活性，顯著提升了任務適應性。

目標對齊感知協同。感知協同是指作戰單位基於對目標和環境的共同理解進行自主決策和行動，從而產生協同效應。智慧作戰系統由具備預測和推理能力的系統或節點組成。在營運目標的驅動下，它們可以智慧作戰系統能夠預判友軍行動和戰場局勢，透過局部感知和獨立決策，進行自組織、自發的協同支援。這種以效率為導向的、無聲的共識超越了溝通限制和預設程序，使系統在面對強大對手時展現出卓越的適應性和創造力。

學習迭代的演化優勢

演化優勢是作戰系統保持競爭力和在戰場上掌握主動權的關鍵。智慧作戰系統依靠即時對抗數據來驅動整體優化，透過跨域經驗轉移加速能力擴散，並透過虛擬博弈環境培養顛覆性戰術，從而在對抗過程中實現自主演化和作戰效能的世代飛躍。

基於經驗累積的系統演化。智慧作戰系統將從複雜的對抗環境中即時獲得的感知、決策和行動數據收集到知識中心。利用強化學習等先進演算法，該系統將進行深度分析和挖掘，對系統級運作邏輯（如指揮流程、協調規則和資源分配策略）進行閉環評估和動態調整，從而形成可重用、可驗證的結構化知識單元，增強作戰系統對環境的理解和自主適應能力。這將使整個系統形成共享的“集體記憶”，實現從單點智慧到整體作戰效能的自適應輻射，並最終實現“越戰越精進”的個體演進。

跨域知識遷移賦能。智慧作戰系統依托統一的語意空間和特徵對齊框架，能夠將從特定戰場或領域提取和總結的局部經驗快速嵌入到其他作戰領域或任務場景中，打破作戰單元之間的資訊壁壘，實現作戰經驗的無損轉換和跨域應用。本質上，它促進了系統內知識的安全流動和協同效應，完成了從「具體經驗」到「抽象知識」的昇華和重構，實現了「一戰多域」的效益，並加速了跨領域作戰能力的同步演進。這不僅顯著提高了作戰系統的整體學習效率，避免了重複試錯，而且實現了作戰能力的強化和系統繼承。

博弈論與對抗的顛覆性潛能正在顯現。系統智慧博弈論旨在突破人類認知的限制，培養超越傳統經驗的顛覆性作戰能力。其本質在於系統層面知識的主動創造與自我超越。透過在數位孿生戰場上建構高強度、長期、逼真的「紅藍」對抗環境，並利用生成對抗網路和多智能體強化學習框架，智慧作戰系統能夠在持續的博弈演進中探索戰略空間的未知邊界。基於博弈論和複雜系統理論，該系統能夠在對抗演化過程中自發性地形成更優策略，從而產生超越傳統認知的作戰模式和組織形式。這使得該智慧作戰系統成為一個能夠持續產生顛覆性戰術的「超級智庫」。

中國原創軍事資源：https://military.people.com.cn/n18/2025/18216/c1011-480682584829.html

#Artificial #Intelligence, #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 Informatization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Command information Systems, Information Support Force

Looking at Intelligent Warfare: Focusing on Counter-AI Operations in Chinese Military Operations During Intelligent Warfare

Leave a comment

檢視情報戰：聚焦中國軍事行動中的反空戰策略

現代英語：

Original Title: A Look at Intelligent Warfare: Focusing on Counter-AI Operations in Intelligent Warfare

　　  introduction

　　  The widespread application of science and technology in the military field has brought about profound changes in the form of warfare and combat methods. Military competition among major powers is increasingly manifested as technological subversion and counter-subversion, surprise attacks and counter-surprise attacks, and offsetting and counter-offsetting. To win future intelligent warfare, it is necessary not only to continuously promote the deep transformation and application of artificial intelligence technology in the military field, but also to strengthen dialectical thinking, adhere to asymmetric thinking, innovate and develop anti-AI warfare theories and tactics, and proactively plan research on anti-AI technologies and the development of weapons and equipment to achieve victory through “breaking AI” and strive to seize the initiative in future warfare.

　　  Fully recognize the inevitability of anti-artificial intelligence warfare

　　  In his essay “On Contradiction,” Comrade Mao Zedong pointed out that “the law of contradiction in things, that is, the law of unity of opposites, is the most fundamental law of dialectical materialism.” Throughout the history of military technology development and its operational application, there has always been a dialectical relationship between offense and defense. The phenomenon of mutual competition and alternating suppression between the “spear” of technology and the “shield” of corresponding countermeasures is commonplace.

　　  In the era of cold weapons, people not only invented eighteen kinds of weapons such as knives, spears, swords, and halberds, but also corresponding helmets, armor, and shields. In the era of firearms, the use of gunpowder greatly increased attack range and lethality, but it also spurred tactical and technical innovations, exemplified by defensive fortifications such as trenches and bastions. In the mechanized era, tanks shone brightly in World War II, and the development of tank armor and anti-tank weapons continues to this day. In the information age, “electronic attack” and “electronic protection,” centered on information dominance, have sparked a new wave of interest, giving rise to electronic warfare units. Furthermore, numerous opposing concepts in the military field, such as “missiles” versus “anti-missile,” and “unmanned combat” versus “counter-unmanned combat,” abound.

　　  It should be recognized that “anti-AI warfare,” as the opposite concept of “intelligent warfare,” will inevitably emerge gradually with the widespread and in-depth application of intelligent technologies in the military field. Forward-looking research into the concepts, principles, and tactical implementation paths of anti-AI warfare is not only a necessity for a comprehensive and dialectical understanding of intelligent warfare, but also an inevitable step to seize the high ground in future military competition and implement asymmetric warfare.

　　  Scientific Analysis of Counter-AI Combat Methods and Paths

　　  Currently, artificial intelligence (AI) technology is undergoing a leapfrog development, moving from weak to strong and from specialized to general-purpose applications. From its underlying support perspective, data, algorithms, and computing power remain its three key elements. Data is the fundamental raw material for training and optimizing models, algorithms determine the strategies and mechanisms for data processing and problem-solving, and computing power provides the hardware support for complex calculations. Seeking ways to “break through” AI by addressing these three elements—data, algorithms, and computing power—is an important methodological approach for implementing counter-AI warfare.

　　  Counter-data warfare. Data is the raw material for artificial intelligence to learn and reason, and its quality and diversity significantly impact the accuracy and generalization ability of models. Numerous examples in daily life demonstrate how minute changes in data can cause AI models to fail. For instance, facial recognition models on mobile phones may fail to accurately identify individuals due to factors such as wearing glasses, changing hairstyles, or changes in ambient light; autonomous driving models may also misjudge road conditions due to factors like road conditions, road signs, and weather. The basic principle of counter-data warfare is to mislead the training and judgment processes of military intelligent models by creating “contaminated” data or altering its distribution characteristics. This “inferiority” in the data leads to “errors” in the model, thereby reducing its effectiveness. Since AI models can comprehensively analyze and cross-verify multi-source data, counter-data warfare should focus more on multi-dimensional features, packaging false data information to enhance its “authenticity.” In recent years, foreign militaries have conducted relevant experimental verifications in this area. For example, by using special materials for coating and infrared emitter camouflage, the optical and infrared characteristics of real weapon platforms, and even the vibration effects of engines, can be simulated to deceive intelligent intelligence processing models; in cyberspace, traffic data camouflage can be implemented to improve the silent operation capability of network attacks and reduce the effectiveness of network attack detection models.

　　  Anti-algorithm warfare. The essence of an algorithm is a strategy mechanism for solving problems described in computer language. Because the scope of application of such strategy mechanisms is limited, they may fail when faced with a wide variety of real-world problems. A typical example is Lee Sedol’s “divine move” in the 2016 human-machine Go match. Many professional Go players, after reviewing the game, stated that the “divine move” was actually invalid, yet it worked against AlphaGo. AlphaGo developer Silva explained this by saying that Lee Sedol exploited a previously unknown vulnerability in the computer; other analyses suggest that this move might have contradicted AlphaGo’s Go logic or been outside its strategic learning range, making it unable to respond. The basic principle of anti-algorithm warfare is to target the vulnerabilities in the algorithm’s strategy mechanism and weaknesses in its model architecture through logical attacks or deception to reduce the algorithm’s effectiveness. Anti-algorithm warfare should be combined with specific combat actions to achieve “misleading and deceiving” the algorithm. For example, drone swarm reconnaissance operations often use reinforcement learning algorithms to plan reconnaissance paths. In this case, irregular or abnormal actions can be created to reduce or disable the reward mechanism in the reinforcement learning algorithm model, thereby reducing its reconnaissance search efficiency.

　　  Counter-computing power warfare. The strength of computing power represents the speed at which data processing can be converted into information and decision-making advantages. Unlike counter-data warfare and counter-algorithm warfare, which primarily rely on soft confrontation, counter-computing power warfare employs a combination of hard and soft tactics. Hard destruction mainly refers to attacks on enemy computing centers and computing network infrastructure, crippling their AI models by cutting off their computing power. Soft confrontation focuses on increasing the enemy’s computing costs, primarily by creating a “fog of war” and data noise. For example, during operations, large quantities of meaningless data of various types, such as images, audio, video, and electromagnetic data, can be generated to constrain and deplete the enemy’s computing resources, reducing their effective utilization rate. Furthermore, attacks can also be launched against weak points in the defenses of the computing power support environment and infrastructure. Computing centers consume enormous amounts of electricity; attacking and destroying their power support systems can also achieve the effect of counter-computing power warfare.

　　  Forward-looking planning for the development of anti-artificial intelligence combat capabilities

　　  In all warfare, one engages with conventional tactics and wins with unconventional ones. Faced with intelligent warfare, while continuously advancing and improving intelligent combat capabilities, it is also necessary to strengthen preparedness for counter-AI warfare, proactively planning for theoretical innovation, supporting technology development, and equipment platform construction related to counter-AI warfare, ensuring the establishment of an intelligent combat system that integrates offense and defense, and combines defense and counter-attack.

　　  Strengthen theoretical innovation in counter-AI warfare. Scientific military theory is combat effectiveness. Whether it’s military strategic innovation, military technological innovation, or other aspects of military innovation, all are inseparable from theoretical guidance. We must adhere to liberating our minds, broadening our horizons, and strengthening dialectical thinking. We must use theoretical innovation in counter-AI warfare as a supplement and breakthrough to construct an intelligent warfare theoretical system that supports and serves the fight for victory. We must adhere to the principle of “you fight your way, I fight my way,” strengthening asymmetric thinking. Through in-depth research on the concepts, strategies, and tactics of counter-AI warfare, we must provide scientific theoretical support for seizing battlefield intelligence dominance and effectively leverage the leading role of military theory. We must adhere to the integration of theory and technology, enhancing our scientific and technological awareness, innovation, and application capabilities. We must establish a closed loop between counter-AI warfare theory and technology, allowing them to complement and support each other, achieving deep integration and positive interaction between theory and technology.

　　  Emphasis should be placed on accumulating military technologies for countering artificial intelligence. Science and technology are crucial foundations for generating and enhancing combat effectiveness. Breakthroughs in some technologies can have disruptive effects, potentially even fundamentally altering the traditional landscape of warfare. Currently, major world powers view artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology and have elevated the development of military intelligence to a national strategy. Simultaneously, some countries are actively conducting research on technologies related to countering artificial intelligence warfare, exploring methods to counter AI and aiming to reduce the effectiveness of adversaries’ military intelligent systems. Therefore, it is essential to both explore and follow up, strengthening research and tracking of cutting-edge technologies, actively discovering, promoting, and fostering the development of technologies with counter-disruptive capabilities, such as intelligent countermeasures, to seize the technological advantage at the outset of counter-AI warfare and prevent enemy technological surprise attacks; and to carefully select technologies, maintaining sufficient scientific rationality and accurate judgment to dispel the technological “fog” and avoid falling into the adversary’s technological traps.

Developing anti-AI warfare weapons and equipment. Designing weapons and equipment is designing future warfare; we develop weapons and equipment based on the types of warfare we will fight in the future. Anti-AI warfare is an important component of intelligent warfare, and anti-AI weapons and equipment will play a crucial role on the future battlefield. When developing anti-AI warfare weapons and equipment, we must first closely align with battlefield needs. We must closely integrate with the adversary, mission, and environment to strengthen anti-AI warfare research, accurately describe anti-AI warfare scenarios, and ensure that the requirements for anti-AI warfare weapons and equipment are scientifically sound, accurate, and reasonable. Secondly, we must adopt a cost-conscious approach. Recent local wars have shown that cost control is a crucial factor influencing the outcome of future wars. Anti-AI warfare focuses on interfering with and deceiving the enemy’s military intelligent systems. Increasing the development of decoy weapon platforms is an effective way to reduce costs and increase efficiency. By using low-cost simulated decoy targets to deceive the enemy’s intelligent reconnaissance systems, the “de-intelligence” effect can be extended and amplified, aiming to deplete their high-value precision-guided missiles and other high-value strike weapons. Finally, we must emphasize simultaneous development, use, and upgrading. Intelligent technologies are developing rapidly and iterating quickly. It is crucial to closely monitor the application of cutting-edge military intelligent technologies by adversaries, accurately understand their intelligent model algorithm architecture, and continuously promote the upgrading of the latest counter-artificial intelligence technologies in weapon platforms to ensure their high efficiency in battlefield application. (Kang Ruizhi, Li Shengjie)

現代國語：

原文標題：智慧化戰爭面面觀－關注智慧化戰爭中的反人工智慧作戰

引言

科學技術在軍事領域的廣泛運用，引起戰爭形態和作戰方式的深刻變化，大國軍事博弈越來越表現為技術上的顛覆與反顛覆、突襲與反突襲、抵消與反抵消。打贏未來智慧化戰爭，既要不斷推進人工智慧技術在軍事領域的深度轉化應用，還應加強辯證思維、堅持非對稱思想，創新發展反人工智慧作戰理論和戰法，前瞻佈局反人工智慧技術研究和武器裝備研發，實現「破智」制勝，努力掌握未來戰爭主動權。

充分認識反人工智慧作戰必然性

毛澤東同志在《矛盾論》中指出：「事物的矛盾法則，即對立統一的法則，是唯物辯證法的最根本的法則。」縱觀軍事技術發展及其作戰運用歷史，從來都充滿了攻與防的辯證關係，技術之矛與反制止制、反制止制相較制、相較制抗擊現象之間的技術之緣關係。

冷兵器時代，人們不僅發明出「刀、槍、劍、戟」等十八般兵器，與之對應的「盔、甲、盾」等也被創造出來。熱兵器時代，火藥的使用大幅提升了攻擊距離和殺傷力，但同時也催生了以「塹壕」「稜堡」等防禦工事為代表的技戰術創新。機械化時代，坦克在二戰中大放異彩，人們對「坦克裝甲」與「反坦克武器」相關技術戰術的開發延續至今。資訊時代，圍繞制資訊權的「電子攻擊」與「電子防護」又掀起一陣新的熱潮，電子對抗部隊應運而生。此外，「飛彈」與「反導」、「無人作戰」與「反無人作戰」等軍事領域的對立概念不勝枚舉。

應當看到，「反人工智慧作戰」作為「智慧化作戰」的對立概念，也必將隨著智慧科技在軍事領域的廣泛深度運用而逐漸顯現。前瞻性研究反人工智慧作戰相關概念、原則及其技戰術實現路徑，既是全面辯證認識智慧化戰爭的時代需要，也是搶佔未來軍事競爭高地、實施非對稱作戰的必然之舉。

科學分析反人工智慧作戰方法路徑

目前，人工智慧技術正經歷由弱向強、由專用向通用的跨越式發展階段。從其底層支撐來看，數據、演算法、算力依舊是其三大關鍵要素。其中，資料是訓練與最佳化模型的基礎原料，演算法決定了資料處理與問題解決的策略機制，算力則為複雜運算提供硬體支撐。從資料、演算法、算力三個要素的角度尋求「破智」之道，是實施反人工智慧作戰的重要方法路徑。

反資料作戰。數據是人工智慧實現學習和推理的原始素材，數據的品質和多樣性對模型的準確度和泛化能力有重要影響。生活中因為微小數據變化而導致人工智慧模型失效的例子比比皆是。例如，手機中的人臉辨識模型，可能會因人戴上眼鏡、改變髮型或環境明暗變化等原因，而無法準確辨識身分；自動駕駛模型也會因路況、路標及天氣等因素，產生對道路狀況的誤判。實施反數據作戰，其基本原理是透過製造“污染”數據或改變數據的分佈特徵，來誤導軍事智能模型的訓練學習過程或判斷過程，用數據之“差”引發模型之“謬”，從而降低軍事智能模型的有效性。由於人工智慧模型能夠對多源數據進行綜合分析、交叉印證，反數據作戰應更加註重從多維特徵出發，包裝虛假數據信息，提升其「真實性」。近年來，外軍在這方面已經有相關實驗驗證。例如，利用特殊材料塗裝、紅外線發射裝置偽裝等方式，模擬真實武器平台光學、紅外線特徵甚至是引擎震動效果，用來欺騙智慧情報處理模型；在網路空間，實施流量資料偽裝，以提升網路攻擊靜默運作能力，降低網路攻擊偵測模型的效果。

反演算法作戰。演算法的本質，是用電腦語言描述解決問題的策略機制。由於這種策略機制的適應範圍有限，在面對千差萬別的現實問題時可能會失效，一個典型例子就是2016年人機圍棋大戰中李世石的「神之一」。不少職業圍棋選手複盤分析後表示，「神之一手」其實並不成立，但卻對「阿爾法狗」發揮了作用。 「阿爾法狗」開發者席爾瓦對此的解釋是，李世石點中了電腦不為人知的漏洞；還有分析稱，可能是「這一手」與「阿爾法狗」的圍棋邏輯相悖或不在其策略學習範圍內，導致其無法應對。實施反演算法作戰，其基本原理是針對演算法策略機制漏洞和模型架構弱點，進行邏輯攻擊或邏輯欺騙，以降低演算法有效性。反演算法作戰應與具體作戰行動結合，達成針對演算法的「誤導欺騙」。例如，無人機群偵察行動常採用強化學習演算法模型規劃偵察路徑，針對此情況，可透過製造無規則行動或反常行動，致使強化學習演算法模型中的獎勵機制降效或失效，從而達成降低其偵察搜尋效率的目的。

反算力作戰。算力的強弱代表著將資料處理轉換為資訊優勢和決策優勢的速度。有別於反數據作戰和反演算法作戰以軟對抗為主，反算力作戰的對抗方式是軟硬結合的。硬摧毀主要指對敵算力中心、計算網路設施等實施的打擊，透過斷其算力的方式使其人工智慧模型難以發揮作用；軟對抗著眼加大敵算力成本，主要以製造戰爭「迷霧」和資料雜訊為主。例如，作戰時大量產生影像、音訊、視訊、電磁等多類型的無意義數據，對敵算力資源進行牽制消耗，降低其算力的有效作用率。此外，也可對算力的支撐環境和配套建設等防備薄弱環節實施攻擊，算力中心電能消耗巨大，對其電力支援系統進行攻擊和摧毀，也可達成反算力作戰的效果。

前瞻佈局反人工智慧作戰能力建設

凡戰者，以正合，以奇勝。面對智慧化戰爭，持續推動提升智慧化作戰能力的同時，也需強化對反人工智慧作戰的未雨綢繆，前瞻佈局反人工智慧作戰相關理論創新、配套技術發展與裝備平台建設，確保建立攻防兼備、防反一體的智慧化作戰體系。

加強反人工智慧作戰理論創新。科學的軍事理論就是戰鬥力，軍事戰略創新也好，軍事科技創新也好，其他方面軍事創新也好，都離不開理論指導。要堅持解放思想、開拓視野，強化辯證思維，以反人工智慧作戰理論創新為補充和突破，建構支撐和服務打贏制勝的智慧化作戰理論體系。要堅持你打你的、我打我的，強化非對稱思想，透過對反人工智慧作戰概念、策略戰法等問題的深化研究，為奪取戰場制智權提供科學理論支撐，切實發揮軍事理論的先導作用。要堅持理技融合，增強科技認知力、創新力、運用力，打通反人工智慧作戰理論與技術之間的閉環迴路，讓兩者互相補充、互為支撐，實現理論與技術的深度融合與良性互動。

注重反人工智慧軍事技術累積。科學技術是產生和提高戰鬥力的重要基礎，有些技術一旦突破，影響將是顛覆性的，甚至可能從根本上改變傳統的戰爭攻防格局。目前，世界各主要國家將人工智慧視為顛覆性技術，並將發展軍事智慧化上升為國家戰略。同時，也有國家積極進行反人工智慧作戰相關技術研究，探索人工智慧對抗方法，意圖降低對手軍事智慧系統效能。為此，既要探索跟進，加強對前沿技術的跟踪研究，積極發現、推動、催生智能對抗這類具有反顛覆作用的技術發展，在反人工智能作戰起步階段就搶佔技術先機，防敵技術突襲；還要精挑細選，注重保持足夠科學理性和準確判斷，破除技術“迷霧”，避免陷入對手技術陷阱。

研發反人工智慧作戰武器裝備。設計武器裝備就是設計未來戰爭，未來打什麼仗就發展什麼武器裝備。反人工智慧作戰是智慧化戰爭的重要組成部分，反人工智慧武器裝備也將在未來戰場上發揮重要作用。在研發反人工智慧作戰武器裝備時，首先要緊貼戰場需求。緊密結合作戰對手、作戰任務和作戰環境等，加強反人工智慧作戰研究，把反人工智慧作戰場景描述準確，確保反人工智慧作戰武器裝備需求論證科學、準確、合理。其次要建立成本思維。最新局部戰爭實踐表明，作戰成本控制是影響未來戰爭勝負的重要因素。反人工智慧作戰重在對敵軍事智慧系統的干擾與迷惑，加大誘耗型武器平台研發是一種有效的降本增效方法。透過低成本模擬示假目標欺騙敵智能偵察系統，可將「破智」效應延伸放大，力求消耗其精確導引飛彈等高價值打擊武器。最後要注重邊建邊用邊升級。智慧技術發展速度快、更新迭代快，要緊密追蹤對手前沿軍事智慧技術應用，摸準其智慧模型演算法架構，不斷推動最新反人工智慧技術在武器平台中的運用升級，確保其戰場運用的高效性。 （康睿智 李聖傑）

中國原創軍事資源：https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/zonghe/2025-05-20/doc-inexeiih2818486808984.shtml

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, China's Informatization - 中國信息化, Chinese Artificial Intelligence, Chinese Military Artificial Intelligence Weaponizatio, Chinese Military Informatization, Chinese Military Intelligentization, Command information Systems, Information Support Force, Intelligent Warfare

Where is the Transformation of Chinese Military Intelligent War Preparedness Heading?

Leave a comment

中國軍事情報戰備轉型將走向何方？

現代英語：

Where should the intelligent transformation for combat readiness go?

Currently, the form of warfare is rapidly evolving towards intelligence, and the era of intelligent warfare is imminent. To adapt to the development of military intelligent technology, the changing mechanisms of war, and the high-quality development of the armed forces, it is imperative to accelerate the advancement of intelligent combat readiness. Modern combat readiness must, while advancing the transformation from mechanization and semi-mechanization to informatization, further proactively address the challenges of military intelligence, adhere to intelligence as the guiding principle, and accelerate the integrated development of mechanization, informatization, and intelligence. In short, vigorously promoting intelligent combat readiness is a practical necessity for driving the high-quality development of national defense and the armed forces; only by successfully transforming to intelligent combat readiness can we promote the leapfrog development of the military’s combat capabilities.

Construct an intelligent warfare theoretical system. Focusing on solving key and difficult issues in intelligent warfare theory, such as war prediction, war forms, war design, operational concepts, operational styles, operational systems, troop formation, and troop training, we will deepen research on the application of intelligent warfare, explore the winning mechanisms, characteristics, laws, tactics, action methods, and comprehensive support of intelligent warfare, enrich the theories of intelligent warfare, intelligent operations, and the construction of intelligent combat forces, and gradually construct an intelligent warfare theoretical system.

Establish an intelligent command and control paradigm. Strengthen the development of technologies such as adversarial and game-theoretic operational planning, digital twin parallel simulation, and efficient organization and precise scheduling of complex operational resources. Enhance capabilities such as automatic planning of operational plans under large-scale, high-intensity conditions and autonomous decomposition of cross-domain and cross-level tasks. Achieve deep integration of military knowledge and machine intelligence, reliable and explainable auxiliary decision-making, and self-learning and self-evolving adversarial strategies. Integrate technological achievements such as sensing, networking, cloud computing, and quantum computing to enhance intelligent auxiliary capabilities in situation generation, operational command, and staff operations. Accelerate the development of intelligent staff business systems and intelligently upgrade and transform operational command information systems. Achieve intelligent information Q&A, intelligent plan generation, and decision support suggestions for typical campaign/tactical command, greatly reducing the workload of staff personnel and significantly improving the timeliness of command operations.

Develop intelligent weapon and equipment systems. Strengthen the intelligent upgrading and transformation of traditional weapons, promote the practical application of intelligent technologies in backbone equipment, and deploy low-cost, expendable unmanned combat platforms on a large scale. Develop intelligent individual soldier integrated systems, air-to-ground unmanned swarm collaborative attack systems, and underground space swarm warfare systems, etc., research and develop intelligent flexible wearable technologies and mobile intelligent terminal technologies, develop intelligent wearable equipment, brain-computer interface helmets, and human implant devices, etc., and accelerate the application of intelligent new weapon platforms, using the pioneering development of key equipment to drive overall breakthroughs.

Increase the proportion of intelligent combat forces. Focusing on optimizing structure and function, implement intelligent design for the existing organizational structure of the armed forces, and gradually increase the proportion of intelligent combat forces. Formulate talent development plans, cultivate the intelligent literacy of combat personnel, and explore a talent cultivation path that integrates military and civilian sectors, services, and enterprises. Build a new generation of combat forces that are intelligently led, cross-domain collaborative, all-domain mobile, and precise and multi-functional; focus on research on intelligent air defense and anti-missile systems, passive detection and intelligent identification of aerial targets, and build intelligent air combat forces such as anti-aircraft unmanned combat aircraft and “swarm” aircraft; emphasize research on intelligent missiles and develop long-range missile deterrence and strike capabilities; deepen research on the architecture design of intelligent attack and defense systems in cyberspace and the intelligent generation of attack strategies, upgrade the new generation of cyberspace reconnaissance, attack, and defense forces, and comprehensively enhance intelligent combat capabilities.

Optimize intelligent autonomous collaboration methods. Focusing on the human-machine “interaction-understanding-co-progress” framework, break through human-machine hybrid perception enhancement and human-machine adaptive multi-task collaboration to improve human-machine hybrid perception capabilities, cognitive abilities, and overall combat effectiveness in complex battlefield environments, achieving complementarity and intelligent enhancement between human wisdom and machine intelligence. Accelerate the development of applied research in areas such as intelligent swarm distributed elastic architecture, self-organizing anti-jamming communication and interaction, distributed autonomous collaboration in complex confrontation scenarios, and swarm intelligent command and control adapted to complex environments and tasks. Enhance the autonomous elastic planning and swarm intelligence confrontation learning capabilities of unmanned swarms in complex scenarios, promoting an overall leap in the combat effectiveness of multi-domain/cross-domain heterogeneous swarms.

Innovate an intelligent, all-dimensional support model. Facing the overall requirements of comprehensive support for future battlefields, including all-time intelligent perception, precise control of supplies and ammunition, and accurate delivery of combat supplies, enhance the intelligent combat logistics equipment support capabilities. Develop capabilities such as comprehensive multi-dimensional support demand mining across all domains, online networked dynamic monitoring of equipment status, autonomous early warning of support risks, and on-demand allocation of support resources. Promote research and verification of intelligent network information systems, intelligent military logistics systems, intelligent support for battlefield facilities and environment information, smart individual soldier support, intelligent rapid medical treatment for future battlefields, and intelligent energy support and transportation delivery, achieving the organic integration of combat, technology, and logistics support elements with combat command and troop movements.

現代國語：

智慧戰備轉型應走向何方？

當前，戰爭形式正迅速朝向智慧化演進，智慧戰時代迫在眉睫。為適應軍事智慧技術的發展、戰爭機制的轉變以及軍隊高品質發展，加速推動智慧戰備勢在必行。現代戰備在推動從機械化、半機械化轉型為資訊化的同時，必須更積極主動地應對軍事情報挑戰，堅持以情報為指導原則，加速機械化、資訊化、情報化整合發展。總之，大力推動智慧戰備是推動國防和軍隊高品質發展的現實需求；只有成功實現智慧戰備轉型，才能推動軍隊作戰能力的跨越式發展。

建構智能戰理論體系。我們將著力解決智慧戰理論中的關鍵難點問題，例如戰爭預測、戰爭形態、戰爭設計、作戰理念、作戰風格、作戰體系、部隊編組和部隊訓練等，深化智能戰應用研究，探索智能戰的製勝機制、特徵、規律、戰術、行動方法和綜合保障，豐富智能戰、智能作戰和智能作戰力量建設的理論，逐步構建的理論體系。

建立智慧指揮控制範式。加強對抗性與博弈論作戰規劃、數位孿生並行模擬、複雜作戰資源高效組織和精確調度等技術的研發。提升大規模、高強度條件下作戰計畫的自動規劃、跨域、跨層級任務的自主分解等能力。實現軍事知識與機器智慧的深度融合，實現可靠、可解釋的輔助決策，以及對抗策略的自學習、自我演化。整合感知、網路、雲端運算、量子運算等技術成果，提升態勢生成、作戰指揮、參謀運作等方面的智慧輔助能力。加速智慧參謀業務系統建設，實現作戰指揮資訊系統的智慧升級改造。實現典型戰役/戰術指揮的智慧資訊問答、智慧計畫生成、決策支援建議，大幅減輕參謀人員工作負擔，顯著提升指揮運作的時效性。

發展智慧武器裝備系統。加強傳統武器的智慧升級改造，推動智慧技術在骨幹裝備的實際應用，大規模部署低成本、消耗型無人作戰平台。研發智慧單兵一體化系統、空地無人群聚協同攻擊系統、地下空間集群作戰系統等，研發智慧柔性穿戴技術與行動智慧終端技術，開發智慧穿戴設備、腦機介面頭盔、人體植入式設備等，加速智慧新型武器平台的應用，以關鍵裝備的先導研發為驅動力，實現整體突破。

提高智慧作戰力量比例。著力優化結構與功能，對現有軍隊組織結構進行智慧化設計，逐步提升智慧作戰力量比例。制定人才培育計劃，提升作戰人員的智慧素養，探索軍民融合、服務業與企業融合的人才培育路徑。建構智慧主導、跨域協同、全域機動、精準多功能的新一代作戰力量；重點研發智慧防空反導系統、空中目標被動偵測與智慧辨識技術，建構以防空無人作戰飛機、「群聚」飛機等為代表的智慧空戰力量；重視智慧飛彈研發，發展遠程飛彈威懾與打擊能力；深化網路空間太空防空防電系統設計與智慧飛彈威懾策略的新一代攻擊能力。全面提升網路空間偵察、攻擊和防禦力量的智慧作戰能力。

優化智慧自主協同作戰方式。圍繞人機「互動-理解-協同-進步」框架，突破人機混合感知增強和人機自適應多任務協同作戰，提升複雜戰場環境下人機混合感知能力、認知能力和整體作戰效能，實現人機智慧互補與智能增強。加速智慧集群分散式彈性架構、自組織抗干擾通訊與互動、複雜對抗場景下的分散式自主協同作戰、適應複雜環境和任務的集群智慧指揮控制等領域的應用研究。增強複雜場景下無人群集的自主彈性規劃與群集智慧對抗學習能力，推動多域/跨域異質群集作戰效能的全面飛躍。

創新智能化全維度支援模式。面對未來戰場全面保障的整體需求，包括全時智慧感知、物資彈藥精準管控、作戰物資準確投放等，提升智慧作戰後勤裝備保障能力。發展跨域多維綜合保障需求挖掘、裝備狀態線上網路動態監控、保障風險自主預警、保障資源按需調配等能力。推動智慧網路資訊系統、智慧軍事後勤系統、戰場設施及環境資訊智慧保障、智慧單兵保障、未來戰場智慧快速醫療救治、智慧能源保障及運輸配送等研究驗證，實現作戰、技術、後勤支援要素與作戰指揮、部隊調動有機融合。

陶利民，秦昊

來源：中國軍網-解放軍報 作者：陶立民 秦浩 責任編輯：王粲

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/ll_20888543/186482825186.html

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, 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 Informatization, Chinese Military Intelligentization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Information Support Force, Intelligent Warfare

Chinese Military Embracing the Challenges of Intelligent Warfare with New Combat Concepts

Leave a comment

中國軍隊以新的作戰概念迎接智慧戰爭的挑戰

現代英語：

Foreword

Breakthroughs in artificial intelligence technology, marked by deep learning, and their applications across various fields have propelled intelligentization to new heights globally, becoming a focal point of attention. In the military field, where technological innovation and application are never lagging behind, a new revolution is also actively brewing. We must accurately grasp the pulse of intelligent warfare’s evolution and analyze its intrinsic nature in order to embrace and master intelligent warfare with a fresh perspective.

How far away is intelligent warfare from us?

Intelligent warfare is warfare primarily supported by artificial intelligence technology. Imbuing weapon platforms with human-like intelligence and replacing human combatants on the battlefield has been a dream for humanity for millennia. With the powerful impact of AI systems like AlphaGo and Atlas, and the emerging concepts and platforms of new warfare such as swarm warfare and flying aircraft carriers, the door to intelligent warfare seems to be quietly opening.

The laws of historical development foreshadow the inevitable rise of intelligent warfare on the battlefield. Advances in science and technology drive the evolution of weaponry, triggering fundamental changes in military organization, combat methods, and military theory, ultimately forcibly propelling a historical transformation in the form of warfare. The arrival of intelligent warfare aligns with this inevitable historical trend. Looking back at the evolution of human warfare, every major advancement in science and technology has driven significant military transformations. The invention of gunpowder ushered in the era of firearms, wiping out infantry and cavalry formations under the linear warfare tactics of firearms. The application of the steam engine in the military led to the mechanized era, giving rise to large-scale mechanized warfare led by armored ships, tanks, and aircraft. The emergence and application of intelligent technology will profoundly change human cognition, war thinking, and combat methods, once again triggering a major military revolution, and intelligent warfare will inevitably take center stage.

The development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology determines the pace of intelligent warfare. The continuous development and widespread application of AI technology are propelling intelligent warfare from its initial stages of uncertainty to reality, gradually emerging and growing, step by step approaching us. To truly enter the era of intelligent warfare, AI technology needs to advance through four stages. The first stage is computational intelligence, which means breaking through the limitations of computing power and storage space to achieve near real-time computing and storage capabilities—capabilities far beyond the reach of large computers and massive servers. The widespread application of cloud computing has already firmly placed humanity on this first stage. The second stage is perceptual intelligence, where machines can understand, see, distinguish, and recognize, enabling direct communication and dialogue with humans. Natural language understanding, image and graphics recognition, and biometric identification technologies based on big data have allowed humanity to reach this second stage. The third stage is cognitive intelligence, where machines can understand human thought, reason and make judgments and decisions like humans. Knowledge mining, knowledge graphs, artificial neural networks, and decision tree technologies driven by deep learning algorithms are propelling humanity towards this third stage. The fourth stage is human-machine integrated augmented intelligence, which involves complementary and two-way closed-loop interaction between humans’ strengths in perception, reasoning, induction, and learning, and machines’ strengths in search, computation, storage, and optimization. Virtual reality augmentation technology, brain-like cognitive technology, and brain-like neural network technology are exploring how humanity can reach this fourth stage. When humanity reached the second stage, the intelligent warfare began to approach; when we step onto the fourth stage, the era of intelligent warfare will fully begin.

Self-learning and growth are accelerating the sudden arrival of the intelligent warfare revolution. “Learning” ability is the core capability of artificial intelligence; once machines can learn on their own, their learning speed will be astonishing. Once machines possess self-learning capabilities, they will enter a rapid growth trajectory of continuous “intelligence enhancement and accelerated evolution.” All the technical difficulties in moving towards intelligent warfare will be readily resolved as “learning” deepens. The era of intelligent warfare may very well arrive suddenly in ways no one could have imagined!

What exactly will intelligent warfare change?

Intelligent warfare will break through the limits of traditional spatiotemporal cognition . In intelligent warfare, artificial intelligence technology can collect, calculate, and push information on the actions of all forces in combat in real time and across all domains. This will enable humans to break through the logical limits of thought, the physiological limits of senses, and the physical limits of existence, greatly improving the scope of cognition of time and space. It will allow for real-time and precise control over all actions of all forces, and enable the rapid transfer, aggregation, and attack of superior combat resources in multidimensional space and domains. Any time and any space may become a point in time and space where victory can be achieved.

Intelligent warfare will reshape the relationship between humans and weaponry . With the rapid advancement of intelligent technologies and the continuous improvement of their intelligence levels, weapon platforms and combat systems can not only passively and mechanically execute human commands, but also, based on deep understanding and prediction, leverage the computational, storage, and retrieval capabilities that machines excel at, thereby autonomously and proactively executing specific tasks to a certain extent. It can be said that weapon platforms and combat systems can also, to some extent, proactively exert human consciousness, even exceeding the scope of human understanding, autonomously and even creatively completing combat missions according to specific programs. The traditional distinction between humans and weaponry becomes blurred, even making it difficult to differentiate whether it is humans or machines at work. People are exclaiming that “humans and weaponry will become partners.” Therefore, in intelligent warfare, while humans remain the most important factor in combat effectiveness, the changing way humans and weaponry are integrated enriches the connotation of combat effectiveness, and the traditional relationship between humans and weaponry will be restructured on this basis.

Intelligent warfare will spur the emergence of new combat methods . Revolutionary advancements in science and technology inevitably lead to revolutionary changes in combat methods; significant progress in intelligent technologies will inevitably bring about a period of rapid transformation in combat methods. On the one hand, emerging technologies in fields such as deep cognition, deep learning, and deep neural networks, driven by computing, data, algorithms, and biology, along with their cross-integration with achievements in information, biology, medicine, engineering, and manufacturing, will inevitably drive an explosive emergence of new combat methods. On the other hand, the intense confrontation between intelligent weapon platforms and combat systems will inevitably become the target and driving force for innovative combat methods. The higher the level of intelligent technology in a war, the more it will become the focus of confrontation. Disadvantages in areas such as the limits of spatiotemporal cognition, massive information storage and computing capabilities, and neural network organization and generation capabilities will lead to new types of “blinding,” “deafening,” and “paralyzing” combat methods in new domains.

Intelligent warfare will incubate entirely new command and control methods. The advantages of command and control are a focal point in warfare, and intelligent warfare calls for entirely new command and control approaches. First, human-machine collaborative decision-making will become the primary command and decision-making method in intelligent warfare. In previous wars, command and decision-making was primarily driven by commanders, with technology playing a supporting role. In intelligent warfare, intelligent auxiliary decision-making systems will proactively urge or prompt commanders to make decisions based on changes in the battlefield situation. This is because the human brain can no longer quickly absorb and efficiently process the massive and rapidly changing battlefield situational information, and human senses can no longer withstand the extraordinary speed of change. Under such circumstances, decisions made solely by commanders are likely to be delayed and useless. Only human-machine collaborative decision-making driven by intelligent auxiliary decision-making systems can compensate for time and space differences and the gap between machine and brain, ensuring the advantage of command and decision-making. Second, brain-computer interface control will become the primary command and control method in intelligent warfare. In previous wars, commanders issued commands to control troops level by level through documents, radio, and telephone, in written or voice form. In intelligent warfare, commanders use intelligent, brain-like neurons to issue commands to troops through a neural network combat system platform. This reduces the conversion process of command presentation formats and shortens the time for commands to be converted across media, resulting in a faster pace and higher efficiency. When the combat system platform is attacked and partially damaged, this command and control method can autonomously repair or reconstruct the neural network, quickly restoring its main functions or even all functions, making it more resistant to attack.

How should we prepare for intelligent warfare?

In the research and exploration of intelligent warfare, we must not be content with lagging behind and following others. We must aim to win future wars and meet the challenges of intelligent warfare with a more proactive attitude, advanced concepts, and positive actions.

Breakthroughs in intelligent technologies will drive a leap in the effectiveness of intelligent combat systems. While significant progress has been made in areas such as neural network algorithms, intelligent sensing and networking technologies, data mining, and knowledge graph technologies, intelligent technologies are still largely in the weak intelligence stage, far from reaching the advanced stage of strong intelligence, and there is still vast potential for future development. It is essential to strengthen basic research in artificial intelligence, follow the laws of scientific and technological development, scientifically plan the development direction of intelligent technologies, select appropriate technological breakthroughs, and strengthen key core technologies in artificial intelligence, especially fundamental research that plays a supporting role. Emphasis should be placed on research into key military technologies. Driven by military needs, and focusing on key military technologies such as intelligent perception, intelligent decision-making, intelligent control, intelligent strike, and intelligent support, intelligent reconnaissance and perception systems, command and control systems, weapon systems, and combat support systems should be developed. Collaborative innovation between military and civilian technologies should be promoted, fully leveraging the advantages of civilian intelligent technology development, relying on the advantages of military and civilian resources, strengthening strategic cooperation between the military and civilian sectors, and building a service platform for the joint research and sharing of artificial intelligence scientific and technological achievements, the joint construction and sharing of conditions and facilities, and the integration of general standards between the military and civilian sectors, thus forming a new landscape of open, integrated, and innovative development of intelligent combat technologies.

Leading the innovation of combat methods with the concept of intelligent warfare. A shift in mindset is a prerequisite for welcoming the arrival of intelligent warfare. Mindset precedes action; if our mindset remains at the traditional level, it will be difficult to adapt to the needs of intelligent warfare. Intelligent warfare has brought about profound changes in technological support, combat forces, and winning mechanisms, requiring us to first establish the concept of intelligent warfare and use it to guide the innovation of our military’s future combat methods. First, we must strengthen the struggle for “intelligent control.” Artificial intelligence is the foundation of intelligent warfare. Depriving and weakening the opponent’s ability to utilize intelligence, while maintaining our own freedom to utilize intelligence, is fundamental to ensuring the smooth implementation of intelligent warfare. The militaries of developed Western countries are exploring various means, such as electromagnetic interference, electronic suppression, high-power microwave penetration, and takeover control, to block the opponent’s ability to utilize intelligence, seize “intelligent control,” and thus gain battlefield advantage. Second, we must innovate intelligent combat methods. We must focus on fully leveraging the overall effectiveness of the intelligent combat system, strengthening research on new intelligent combat methods such as human-machine collaborative intelligent warfare, intelligent robot warfare, and intelligent unmanned swarm warfare, as well as the processes and methods of intelligent combat command and intelligent combat support. With a view to effectively counter the threat of intelligent warfare from the enemy, we should study strategies to defeat the enemy, such as intelligent disruption warfare and intelligent interdiction warfare.

Intelligent training innovation is driving a transformation in combat capability generation. Intelligent warfare will be a war jointly waged by humans and machines, with intelligent unmanned combat systems playing an increasingly important role. It is imperative to adapt to the new characteristics of intelligent warfare force systems, innovate and develop intelligent training concepts, and explore new models for generating combat capability in intelligent warfare. On the one hand, it is necessary to strengthen training for humans in operating intelligent systems. By leveraging big data, cloud computing, VR technology, and other technologies to create new training environments, we can continuously improve human intelligence literacy, enhance human-machine cognition, understanding, and interaction quality, and improve the ability of humans to operate intelligent combat systems. On the other hand, it is necessary to explore new training models with machines as the primary focus. Previous training has primarily focused on humans, emphasizing the ability of humans to master and use weapons and equipment in specific environments to improve combat effectiveness. To adapt to the new characteristics of the force structure in intelligent warfare, the training organization concept and model of traditional training, which is centered on people, should be changed. Instead, the focus should be on improving the self-command, self-control, and self-combat capabilities of intelligent combat systems. By making full use of the characteristics of intelligent systems that can engage in self-competition and self-growth, a training system, training environment, and training mechanism specifically for intelligent combat systems should be formed. This will enable intelligent combat systems to achieve a geometric leap in combat capability after a short period of autonomous intensive training.

現代國語：

前言

以深度學習為代表的人工智慧技術的突破及其在各個領域的應用，已將全球智慧化推向新的高度，成為關注的焦點。在科技創新與應用從未落後的軍事領域，一場新的革命也正悄悄醞釀。我們必須精確掌握智慧戰爭演進的脈搏，分析其內在本質，才能以全新的視角擁抱和掌握智慧戰爭。

智慧戰爭離我們還有多遠？

智慧戰爭是指以人工智慧技術為主要的支撐戰爭。賦予武器平台類人智能，並在戰場上取代人類作戰人員，一直是人類數千年來的夢想。隨著AlphaGo和Atlas等人工智慧系統的強大影響力，以及集群作戰、飛行航空母艦等新型戰爭概念和平台的湧現，智慧戰爭的大門似乎正在悄悄開啟。

歷史發展的規律預示著智慧戰爭在戰場上的必然崛起。科技進步推動武器裝備的演進，引發軍事組織、作戰方式和軍事理論的根本性變革，最終強而有力地推動戰爭形式的歷史性轉型。智慧戰爭的到來正契合這不可避免的歷史趨勢。回顧人類戰爭的發展歷程，每一次科技的重大進步都帶來了意義深遠的軍事變革。火藥的發明開啟了火器時代，在火器線性戰術下，步兵和騎兵陣型被徹底摧毀。蒸汽機在軍事上的應用開啟了機械化時代，催生了以裝甲艦、坦克和飛機為主導的大規模機械化戰爭。智慧科技的出現與應用將深刻改變人類的認知、戰爭思維和作戰方式，再次引發一場重大的軍事革命，智慧戰爭必定成為戰爭的核心。

人工智慧（AI）技術的發展速度決定著智慧戰爭的進程。人工智慧技術的持續發展和廣泛應用正推動智慧戰爭從最初的不確定階段走向現實，逐步興起、發展壯大，一步步向我們逼近。要真正進入智慧戰爭時代，人工智慧技術需要經歷四個階段。第一階段是運算智能，這意味著突破運算能力和儲存空間的限制，實現近實時運算和儲存能力——這種能力遠遠超出大型電腦和海量伺服器的範疇。雲端運算的廣泛應用已經使人類穩固地邁入了這個階段。第二階段是感知智能，機器能夠理解、觀察、區分和識別，從而實現與人類的直接溝通和對話。基於大數據技術的自然語言理解、影像和圖形識別以及生物特徵識別技術，已經使人類邁入了第二階段。第三階段是認知智能，機器能夠理解人類的思維，像人類一樣進行推理、判斷和決策。知識探勘、知識圖譜、人工神經網路以及由深度學習演算法驅動的決策樹技術，正在推動人類邁向第三階段。第四階段是人機融合增強智能，它涉及人類在感知、推理、歸納和學習方面的優勢與機器在搜尋、計算、儲存和最佳化方面的優勢之間互補的雙向閉環互動。虛擬實境增強技術、類腦認知技術和類腦神經網路技術正在探索人類如何達到這個第四階段。當人類達到第二階段時，智慧戰爭開始逼近；當我們邁入第四階段時，智慧戰爭時代將全面開啟。

自主學習和成長正在加速智慧戰爭革命的到來。 「學習」能力是人工智慧的核心能力；一旦機器能夠自主學習，其學習速度將令人驚嘆。一旦機器擁有自主學習能力，它們將進入持續「智慧增強和加速進化」的快速成長軌跡。隨著「學習」能力的加深，邁向智慧戰爭的所有技術難題都將迎刃而解。智慧戰爭時代很可能以我們無法想像的方式突然降臨！

智慧戰爭究竟會帶來哪些改變？

智慧戰爭將突破…的限制。在傳統時空認知中，人工智慧技術能夠即時、跨域地收集、計算並推送所有作戰力量的行動資訊。這將使人類突破思維的邏輯限制、感官的生理限制以及存在的物理限制，大大拓展時空認知範圍。它將實現對所有作戰力量行動的即時精準控制，並能夠在多維空間和領域內快速調動、聚合和攻擊優勢作戰資源。任何時間、任何空間都可能成為取得勝利的時空點。

智慧戰爭將重塑人與武器之間的關係。隨著智慧技術的快速發展和智慧水準的不斷提升，武器平台和作戰系統不僅可以被動、機械地執行人類指令，還能基於深度理解和預測，充分利用機器強大的運算、儲存和檢索能力，在一定程度上自主、主動地執行特定任務。可以說，武器平台和作戰系統也能在某種程度上主動發揮人類意識，甚至超越人類理解的範疇，根據特定程序自主、甚至創造性地完成作戰任務。人與武器之間的傳統界線變得模糊，甚至難以區分究竟是人在工作還是機器在工作。人們開始高喊「人與武器將成為夥伴」。因此，在智慧戰爭中，雖然人仍是作戰效能的最重要因素，但人與武器融合方式的改變豐富了作戰效能的內涵，傳統的人與武器關係也將在此基礎上重構。

智慧戰爭將催生新的作戰方式。科技的革命性進步必然導致作戰方式的革命性變革；智慧技術的顯著進步必然會帶來作戰方式的快速轉型期。一方面，由計算、數據、演算法和生物學驅動的深度認知、深度學習和深度神經網路等領域的新興技術，以及它們與資訊、生物、醫學、工程和製造等領域成果的交叉融合，必將推動新型作戰方式的爆發式湧現。另一方面，智慧武器平台與作戰系統之間的激烈對抗，必將成為創新作戰方式的目標與驅動力。戰爭中智慧科技的程度越高，就越會成為對抗的焦點。時空認知能力、海量資訊儲存和運算能力以及神經網路組織和生成能力等方面的局限性，將導致在新的領域出現新型的「致盲」、「致聾」和「致癱」作戰方式。

智慧戰爭將孕育全新的指揮控制方式。指揮控制的優勢是戰爭的關鍵所在，而智慧戰爭需要全新的指揮控制方法。首先，人機協同決策將成為智慧戰中主要的指揮決策方式。以往戰爭中，指揮決策主要由指揮官主導，技術僅扮演輔助角色。而在智慧戰中，智慧輔助決策系統將根據戰場態勢的變化，主動敦促或提示指揮官做出決策。這是因為人腦已無法快速有效地吸收和處理大量且瞬息萬變的戰場態勢訊息，人類的感官也無法承受如此巨大的變化速度。在這種情況下，僅由指揮官做出的決策很可能滯後且無效。只有由智慧輔助決策系統驅動的人機協同決策才能彌補時空差異以及人機之間的差距，從而確保指揮決策的優勢。其次，腦機介面控制將成為智慧戰中主要的指揮控制方式。以往戰爭中，指揮官透過文件、無線電、電話等方式，以書面或語音形式，逐級下達命令來控制部隊。在智慧戰爭中，指揮官利用類似大腦的智慧神經元，透過神經網路作戰系統平台向部隊下達命令。這減少了命令呈現格式的轉換過程，並且 縮短跨媒介指令轉換時間，進而加快速度，提高效率。當作戰系統平台遭受攻擊並部分受損時，這種指揮控制方法可以自主修復或重建神經網絡，快速恢復其主要功能甚至全部功能，使其更具抗攻擊能力。

我們該如何應對智慧戰爭？

在智慧戰爭的研究和探索中，我們不能滿足於落後和跟隨他人。我們必須以贏得未來戰爭為目標，以更積極的態度、先進的理念和積極的行動迎接智慧戰爭的挑戰。

智慧技術的突破將推動智慧作戰系統效能的飛躍。雖然在神經網路演算法、智慧感知和網路技術、資料探勘和知識圖譜技術等領域已經取得了顯著進展，但智慧技術仍處於弱智慧階段，距離強智慧的先進階段還有很長的路要走，未來發展潛力巨大。必須加強人工智慧基礎研究，遵循科技發展規律，科學規劃智慧技術發展方向，選擇合適的技術突破點，強化人工智慧核心技術，特別是起到支撐作用的基礎研究。重點要加強關鍵軍事技術的研究。在軍事需求的驅動下，聚焦智慧感知、智慧決策、智慧控制、智慧打擊、智慧支援等關鍵軍事技術，發展智慧偵察感知系統、指揮控制系統、武器系統、作戰支援系統等。要推動軍民技術協同創新，充分發揮民用智慧技術發展優勢，依托軍民資源優勢，加強軍民戰略合作，建構人工智慧科技成果聯合研究共享、條件設施聯合建設共享、軍民通用標準融合的服務平台，形成智慧作戰技術開放、融合、創新發展的新格局。

以智慧戰理念引領作戰方式創新。思維方式的轉變是迎接智能戰到來的先決條件。思考方式先於行動；如果我們的思考方式仍停留在傳統層面，就難以適應智慧戰的需求。智能戰為技術保障、作戰力量和致勝機制帶來了深刻的變革，這就要求我們先確立智能戰的理念，並以此指導我軍未來作戰方式的創新。首先，我們必須加強對「智慧控制」的爭奪。人工智慧是智能戰的基礎。在保障自身智慧運用自由的同時，削弱和限制對手運用智慧的能力，是確保智能戰順利實施的根本。西方已開發國家的軍隊正在探索各種手段，例如電磁幹擾、電子壓制、高功率微波穿透和控制權奪取等，以阻斷對手運用智能的能力，奪取“智能控制權”，從而獲得戰場優勢。其次，我們必須創新智慧作戰方式。我們必須集中精力充分發揮智慧作戰系統的整體效能，加強對人機協同智能戰、智能機器人戰、智能無人集群戰等新型智能作戰方式以及智能作戰指揮、智能作戰支援的流程和方法的研究。為有效應對敵方智能戰的威脅，我們應研究擊敗敵方的策略，例如智慧幹擾戰、智慧封鎖戰等。

智慧訓練創新正在推動作戰能力產生方式的改變。智慧戰將是一場人機協同作戰，智慧無人作戰系統將發揮日益重要的作用。必須適應智慧戰部隊系統的新特點，創新發展智慧訓練理念，探索智慧作戰能力生成的新模式。智慧戰爭。一方面，需要加強操作智慧系統的人員的訓練。利用大數據、雲端運算、虛擬實境等技術創造新的訓練環境，可以不斷提高人員的智慧素養，增強人機認知、理解和互動質量，提高人員操作智慧作戰系統的能力。另一方面，需要探索以機器為核心的新型訓練模式。過去的訓練主要以人為中心，強調人員在特定環境下掌握和使用武器裝備以提升作戰效能的能力。為了適應智慧戰爭部隊結構的新特點，需要改變以人為中心的傳統訓練組織理念和模式，轉而專注於提升智慧作戰系統的自主指揮、自主控制和自主作戰能力。充分利用智慧系統能夠進行自我競爭和自我成長的特性，建構專門針對智慧作戰系統的訓練體系、訓練環境和訓練機制。這將使智慧作戰系統在經過短時間的自主強化訓練後，作戰能力實現幾何級的飛躍。

李始江 杨子明 陈分友

中国军网 国防部网
2018年7月26日 星期四

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/28018-07/286/content_28118827.htm

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Chinese #Quantum #technology, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, #quantum computing warfare, China's Informatization - 中國信息化, China's Military Infratsructure, Chinese Artificial Intelligence, Chinese Military Informatization, Command information Systems, Information Support Force, quantum computing warfare

Inclusive Plan for Building Chinese Artificial Intelligence Capabilities

Leave a comment

建構中國人工智慧能力的包容性規劃

現代英語：

To bridge the digital and intelligent divide, and particularly to ensure the Global South benefits equitably from the development of artificial intelligence, China believes it is essential to uphold the UN’s coordinating role in international development cooperation, adhere to genuine multilateralism, and, based on the principles of sovereign equality, development orientation, people-centeredness, inclusiveness, and collaborative cooperation, effectively implement the UN General Assembly resolution on strengthening international cooperation in artificial intelligence capacity building ( A/RES/78/311 ) through North-South cooperation, South-South cooperation, and trilateral cooperation, thereby promoting the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. To this end, China has proposed the “Inclusive Plan for Artificial Intelligence Capacity Building” and calls on all parties to increase investment in artificial intelligence capacity building.

I. Vision and Goals

(a) Promoting the connectivity of artificial intelligence and digital infrastructure    

Improve the global interoperability of artificial intelligence and digital infrastructure, actively assist countries, especially the Global South, in developing artificial intelligence technologies and services, and help the Global South truly access artificial intelligence and keep up with the pace of its development.

(II) Promoting the application of “AI+” to empower various industries

Explore and promote the all-round, full-chain, and multi-scenario empowerment of the real economy by artificial intelligence, promote the application of artificial intelligence in industrial manufacturing, traditional agriculture, green transformation and development, climate change response, biodiversity protection and other fields, and promote the construction of a rich, diverse, healthy and benevolent artificial intelligence development ecosystem in accordance with local conditions.

(III) Strengthening AI literacy and talent cultivation

Actively promote the widespread application of artificial intelligence in education, carry out talent training and exchange in artificial intelligence, increase the sharing of general professional knowledge and best practices, cultivate public awareness of artificial intelligence, protect and strengthen the digital and intelligent rights of women and children, and share knowledge, achievements and experiences in artificial intelligence.

(iv) Enhance the security and diversity of artificial intelligence data

Cooperation will promote the lawful, orderly, and free cross-border flow of data, explore the establishment of a global mechanism platform for data sharing, and safeguard personal privacy and data security. It will also promote the equality and diversity of AI data corpora, eliminate racism, discrimination, and other forms of algorithmic bias, and promote, protect, and preserve the diversity of civilizations.

(v) Ensure that artificial intelligence is safe, reliable and controllable

Upholding the principles of fairness and non-discrimination, we support the establishment of a globally interoperable framework, standards, and governance system for AI security risk assessment that takes into account the interests of developing countries within the framework of the United Nations. We will jointly assess the risks of AI research and application, actively promote and improve technologies and policies to address AI security risks, and ensure that the design, research and development, use, and application of AI promote human well-being.

II. China’s Actions

(i) China is willing to carry out North-South cooperation, South-South cooperation and trilateral cooperation in the field of artificial intelligence with all countries, jointly implement the outcomes of the UN Future Summit, actively cooperate with all countries, especially developing countries, in the construction of artificial intelligence infrastructure, and jointly build joint laboratories.

(ii) China is willing to carry out cooperation in the research and development and empowerment of artificial intelligence models, especially to promote the application of artificial intelligence in poverty reduction, medical care, agriculture, education and industrial manufacturing, deepen international cooperation in the artificial intelligence production and supply chain, and unleash the dividends of artificial intelligence as a new type of productive force.

(III) China is willing to work with all countries, especially developing countries, to explore the potential of artificial intelligence to empower green development, climate change response, and biodiversity conservation, and contribute to global climate governance and sustainable development.

(iv) China is willing to build an international cooperation platform for artificial intelligence capacity building. China’s artificial intelligence industry and industry alliances are willing to carry out various forms of exchange activities with all countries, especially developing countries, to share best practices, and to build an open source community for artificial intelligence in a responsible manner, so as to promote the construction of a multi-level and multi-industry cooperation ecosystem.

(v) The Chinese government will organize short- and medium-term education and training programs for artificial intelligence capacity building in developing countries, share artificial intelligence education resources, and carry out joint programs and exchanges in artificial intelligence to help developing countries cultivate high-level artificial intelligence science and technology and application talents.

(vi) The Chinese government is willing to strengthen cooperation with developing countries in human resources assistance. Building on the first artificial intelligence capacity building workshop held this year, it will hold ten more training and seminar programs in the field of artificial intelligence, focusing on developing countries, by the end of 2025.

(vii) China is willing to work with all countries, especially developing countries, to cultivate public awareness of artificial intelligence, and promote the popularization and professional knowledge of artificial intelligence in a multi-dimensional, multi-level and multi-platform manner through a combination of online and offline methods, and strive to improve the artificial intelligence literacy and skills of our people, especially to protect and improve the digital rights of women and children.

(viii) China is willing to work with all countries, especially developing countries, to jointly develop artificial intelligence corpora, take positive measures to eliminate racial, algorithmic, and cultural discrimination, and commit to maintaining and promoting linguistic and cultural diversity.

(ix) China is willing to work with all countries, especially developing countries, to promote and improve data infrastructure and jointly promote the fair and inclusive use of global data.

(x) China is willing to work with all countries, especially developing countries, to strengthen the alignment of artificial intelligence strategies and policy exchanges, actively share policies and technical practices in artificial intelligence testing, evaluation, certification and regulation, and work together to address the ethical and security risks of artificial intelligence.

現代國語：

為彌合數位落差和智慧鴻溝，尤其要確保全球南方國家公平地受益於人工智慧發展，中國認為必須維護聯合國在國際發展合作中的協調作用，堅持真正的多邊主義，並本著主權平等、發展導向、以人為本、包容性和協作性原則，透過南北合作、南南合作和三方合作，切實落實聯合國大會關於加強人工智慧能力建構國際合作的決議（A/RES/78/311），從而推動落實聯合國2030年永續發展議程。為此，中國提出了“人工智慧能力建設包容性方案”，並呼籲各方加大對人工智慧能力建設的投入。

一、願景與目標

(a) 促進人工智慧與數位基礎設施的互聯互通

提升人工智慧與數位基礎設施的全球互通性，積極協助各國，特別是全球南方國家，發展人工智慧技術和服務，幫助全球南方國家真正獲得人工智慧，並跟上其發展步伐。

(II) 推動「AI+」賦能各產業

探索並推動人工智慧對實體經濟的全方位、全鏈、多場景賦能，推動人工智慧在工業製造、傳統農業、綠色轉型發展、氣候變遷因應、生物多樣性保護等領域的應用，並根據當地實際情況，推動建構豐富多元、健康向善的人工智慧發展生態系統。

（三）加強人工智慧素養與人才培養

積極推動人工智慧在教育領域的廣泛應用，進行人工智慧人才培訓和交流，加強一般專業知識和最佳實踐的分享，提升大眾對人工智慧的認識，保護和加強婦女兒童的數位和智慧權利，分享人工智慧領域的知識、成果和經驗。

（四）增強人工智慧資料的安全性與多樣性

合作將促進資料合法、有序、自由的跨境流動，探索建立全球資料共享機制平台，保障個人隱私和資料安全。同時，也將促進人工智慧資料語料庫的平等性和多樣性，消除種族主義、歧視和其他形式的演算法偏見，促進、保護和維護文明多樣性。

（五）確保人工智慧安全、可靠、可控

秉持公平、非歧視原則，我們支持在聯合國框架內建立兼顧發展中國家利益的全球互通人工智慧安全風險評估架構、標準和治理體系。我們將共同評估人工智慧研發和應用風險，積極推動和改善應對人工智慧安全風險的技術和政策，確保人工智慧的設計、研發、使用和應用促進人類福祉。

二、中國的行動

（一）中國願與各國在人工智慧領域進行南北合作、南南合作與三方合作，共同落實聯合國未來高峰會成果，積極與各國，特別是發展中國家合作建置人工智慧基礎設施，共同建置聯合實驗室。

（二）中國願在人工智慧模型研發和賦能方面開展合作，尤其是在推動人工智慧在減貧、醫療、農業、教育和工業製造等領域的應用方面，深化人工智慧生產和供應鏈領域的國際合作，釋放人工智慧作為新型生產力的紅利。

（三）中國願與各國，特別是發展中國家，共同探索人工智慧在賦能綠色發展、應對氣候變遷和保護生物多樣性方面的潛力，為全球氣候治理和永續發展做出貢獻。

（四）中國願建構人工智慧能力建構國際合作平台。中國人工智慧產業和產業聯盟願進行各種形式的合作。

與各國，特別是發展中國家進行交流活動，分享最佳實踐，負責任地建構人工智慧開源社區，以促進多層次、多產業的合作生態系統建設。

（五）中國政府將在發展中國家組織進行短期和中期人工智慧能力建構教育培訓項目，共享人工智慧教育資源，進行人工智慧聯合項目和交流，幫助發展中國家培養高水準人工智慧科技及應用人才。

（六）中國政府願加強與發展中國家在人力資源援助的合作。在今年舉辦的首屆人工智慧能力建構研討會的基礎上，到2025年底，中國將再舉辦十期人工智慧領域的培訓和研討會，重點是發展中國家。

（七）中國願同各國，特別是發展中國家，共同努力，透過線上線下相結合的方式，多維度、多層次、多平台地普及人工智慧知識，提高國民人工智慧素養和技能，尤其要保護和改善婦女兒童的數位權利。

（八）中國願同各國，特別是發展中國家，共同建構人工智慧語料庫，積極消除種族歧視、演算法歧視和文化歧視，致力於維護和促進語言文化多樣性。

（九）中國願同各國，特別是發展中國家，共同促進資料基礎建設，共同推動全球資料的公平、包容性利用。

（十）中國願與各國，特別是發展中國家，加強人工智慧戰略和政策交流的協調一致，積極分享人工智慧測試、評估、認證和監管方面的政策和技術實踐，共同應對人工智慧的倫理和安全風險。

中國原創軍事資源：https://www.mfa.gov.cn/web/wjbzhd/2028409/t2028409827_114984638.shtml

#Artificial #Intelligence, #Information Support Force, #informatization, #intelligent warfare, #intellligentization, 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 Informatization, Chinese Military Intelligentization, Chinese Military Use of Cognitive Confrontation within the Combat Domain, Cognitive Confrontation, Cognitive Domain Warfare, Information Support Force, Intelligent Warfare

A Look at Chinese Intelligent Warfare: Warfare Considerations Brought by AGI

Leave a comment

中國情報戰概覽：AGI帶來的戰爭考量

現代英語：

Technology and war have always been intertwined. While technological innovation constantly changes the face of war, it hasn’t altered its violent nature and coercive objectives. In recent years, with the rapid development and application of artificial intelligence (AI) technology, the debate about its impact on war has never ceased. Compared to artificial intelligence (AI), artificial general intelligence (AGI) is considered to be a higher level of intelligence, comparable to human intelligence. How will the emergence of AGI affect war? Will it change the violent and coercive nature of war? This article will explore this question with a series of reflections.

Is AGI just an enabling technology?

Many believe that while large-scale models and generative artificial intelligence (AGI) demonstrate great potential for future military applications, they are ultimately just enabling technologies. They can only enhance and optimize weapons and equipment, making existing equipment smarter and improving combat efficiency, but they are unlikely to bring about a true military revolution. Just like “cyber warfare weapons,” which were once highly anticipated by many countries when they first appeared, now seem somewhat exaggerated.

The disruptive nature of AGI is entirely different. It brings tremendous changes to the battlefield with reaction speeds and knowledge far exceeding those of humans. More importantly, it produces enormous disruptive results by accelerating technological progress. On the future battlefield, autonomous weapons will be endowed with advanced intelligence by AGI, their performance will be universally enhanced, and they will become “strong in offense and difficult in defense” due to their speed and swarm advantages. At that time, the highly intelligent autonomous weapons predicted by some scientists will become a reality, and AGI will play a key role in this. Currently, the military applications of artificial intelligence include autonomous weapons, intelligence analysis, intelligent decision-making, intelligent training, and intelligent support, which are difficult to summarize simply as “empowerment.” Moreover, AGI develops rapidly, has a short iteration cycle, and is in a state of continuous evolution. In future operations, AGI needs to be prioritized, and special attention should be paid to the potential changes it brings.

Will AGI make wars disappear?

Historian Jeffrey Breeny argues that “wars always occur due to misjudgments of each other’s strength or will,” and that with the application of AGI in the military field, misjudgments will become increasingly rare. Therefore, some scholars speculate that wars will decrease or even disappear. Indeed, relying on AGI can significantly reduce misjudgments, but even so, it’s impossible to eliminate all uncertainty, as uncertainty is a defining characteristic of war. Moreover, not all wars arise from misjudgments, and the inherent unpredictability and inexplicability of AGI, along with people’s lack of experience using AGI, will bring new uncertainties, plunging people into an even deeper “artificial intelligence fog.”

AGI algorithms also present rational challenges. Some scholars believe that AGI’s ability to mine and accurately predict critical intelligence has a dual impact. In practical operation, AGI does indeed make fewer mistakes than humans, improving intelligence accuracy and reducing misjudgments; however, it can sometimes lead to overconfidence and reckless actions. The offensive advantage brought by AGI results in the best defensive strategy being “preemptive strike,” disrupting the balance between offense and defense, creating a new security dilemma, and ultimately increasing the risk of war.

AGI (Automatic Genomics) is highly versatile and easily integrated with weaponry. Unlike nuclear, biological, and chemical technologies, it has a low barrier to entry and is particularly prone to proliferation. Due to technological gaps between countries, immature AGI weapons could potentially be deployed on the battlefield, posing significant risks. For example, the application of drones in recent local conflicts has spurred many small and medium-sized countries to begin large-scale drone procurement. The low-cost equipment and technology offered by AGI could very well stimulate a new arms race.

Will AGI be the ultimate deterrent?

Deterrence is the maintenance of a capability to intimidate an adversary into refraining from actions that exceed one’s own interests. Ultimate deterrence occurs when it becomes so powerful as to be unusable, such as nuclear deterrence that ensures mutual destruction. But ultimately, the deciding factor is “human nature,” a crucial element that will never be absent from war.

Without the considerations of “humanity,” would AGI become a formidable deterrent? AGI is fast but lacks empathy; its resolute execution severely compresses the strategic space. AGI is a key factor on the future battlefield, but due to a lack of practical experience, accurate assessment is difficult, easily leading to overestimation of the adversary’s capabilities. Furthermore, regarding autonomous weapon control, whether to have humans within the system for full-time supervision or to leave it entirely to the outside world requires careful consideration. Should the firing control of intelligent weapons be handed over to AGI? If not, the deterrent effect will be greatly diminished; if so, can the life and death of humanity truly be decided by machines unrelated to them? Research at Cornell University shows that large-scale wargaming models frequently escalate wars with “sudden nuclear attacks,” even when in a neutral state.

Perhaps one day in the future, AGI will surpass human capabilities. Will we then be unable to regulate and control it? Jeffrey Hinton, who proposed the concept of deep learning, said he has never seen a case where something with a higher level of intelligence was controlled by something with a lower level of intelligence. Some research teams believe that humans may not be able to supervise super artificial intelligence. Faced with powerful AGI in the future, will we really be able to control them? This is a question worth pondering.

Will AGI change the nature of war?

With the widespread use of AGI, will battlefields filled with violence and bloodshed disappear? Some argue that AI warfare far exceeds human capabilities and may even push humanity off the battlefield. When AI transforms warfare into a conflict entirely between autonomous robots, will it still be a “violent and bloody war”? When unequal adversaries clash, the weaker party may have no chance to act. Can wars be ended before they even begin through war games? Will AGI change the nature of warfare as a result? Is a “war” without humans still a war?

Yuval Noah Harari, author of Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, states that all human behavior is mediated by language and influences our history. The Large Language Model (AGI) is a typical example of AGI, differing from other inventions in its ability to create entirely new ideas and cultures; “storytelling AI will change the course of human history.” When AGI gains control over language, the entire system of human civilization could be overturned, without even requiring its own consciousness. Like Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, will humanity worship AGI as a new “god”?

AGI establishes a close relationship with humans through human language and alters their perceptions, making them difficult to distinguish and discern, thus posing a risk that the will to fight could be controlled by those with ulterior motives. Harari stated that computers don’t need to send out killer robots; if necessary, they will allow humans to pull the trigger themselves. AGI precisely manufactures and refines situational information, controlling battlefield perception through deep deception. This can be achieved through drones to fabricate battlefield situations and through pre-war public opinion manipulation, as already evident in recent local conflicts. The cost of war would thus decrease significantly, leading to the emergence of new forms of warfare. Would small and weak nations still have a chance? Can the will to fight be changed without bloodshed? Is “force” no longer a necessary condition for defining war?

The form of war may change, but its essence remains. Regardless of how “bloody” war is, it will still force the enemy to submit to its will and inflict significant “collateral damage,” only the methods of resistance may be entirely different. The essence of war lies in the deep-seated “human nature,” which is determined by culture, history, behavior, and values. It is difficult to completely replicate using any artificial intelligence technology, so we cannot outsource all ethical, political, and decision-making issues to AI, nor can we expect AI to automatically generate “human nature.” AI technology may be abused due to impulsive passions, so it must be under human control. Since AI is trained by humans, it will not always be without bias, therefore it cannot be completely free from human oversight. In the future, artificial intelligence can become a creative tool or partner, enhancing “tactical imagination,” but it must be “aligned” with human values. These issues need to be continuously considered and understood in practice.

Will AGI subvert war theory?

Most academic knowledge is expressed in natural language. A comprehensive language model, which integrates the best of human writing, can connect seemingly incompatible linguistic works with scientific research. For example, some have input classical works, and even works from philosophy, history, political science, and economics, into a comprehensive language model for analysis and reconstruction. They have found that it can comprehensively analyze all scholars’ viewpoints and also offer its own “insights,” without sacrificing originality. Therefore, some have asked whether it is possible to re-analyze and interpret war theory through AGI, stimulating human innovation and driving a major evolution and reconstruction of war theory and its systems. Perhaps there would indeed be some theoretical improvements and developments, but war science is not only theoretical but also practical, and AGI simply cannot achieve this practicality and realism. Can classical war theory really be reinterpreted? If so, what is the significance of the theory?

In short, AGI’s disruption of the concept of warfare will far exceed that of “mechanization” and “informatization.” We must embrace AGI boldly, yet remain cautious. Understanding the concept prevents ignorance; in-depth research prevents falling behind; and strengthened oversight prevents oversight. How to cooperate with AGI and guard against adversaries’ AGI technological surprise attacks is our primary concern for the future.

After editing

Look to the future with an open mind

■Ye Chaoyang

Futurist Roy Amalra famously asserted that people tend to overestimate the short-term benefits of a technology while underestimating its long-term impact, a principle known as “Amalra’s Law.” This law emphasizes the non-linear nature of technological development, meaning that the actual impact of technology often only becomes fully apparent over a longer timescale. It reflects the pulse and trends of technological development, and embodies humanity’s acceptance and aspirations towards technology.

Currently, in the development of artificial intelligence from weak AI to strong AI, and from specialized AI to general AI, each time people think they have completed 90% of the process, looking back, they may only have completed less than 10%. The driving role of technological revolution in military revolution is becoming increasingly prominent, especially as high-tech technologies, represented by artificial intelligence, penetrate the military field in multiple ways, causing profound changes in the mechanisms, factors, and methods of winning wars.

In the foreseeable future, intelligent technologies such as AGI will continue to iterate, and the cross-evolution of intelligent technologies and their empowering applications in the military field will become increasingly diversified, perhaps even transcending the boundaries of humanity’s current understanding of warfare. The development of technology is unstoppable and unstoppable. Whoever can use keen insight and a clear mind to see the trends and future of technology, to see its potential and power, and to penetrate the “fog of war,” will be more likely to seize the initiative.

This serves as a reminder that we should adopt a broader perspective and mindset in exploring the future forms of warfare in order to get closer to the underestimated reality. Where is AGI headed? Where is intelligent warfare headed? This tests human wisdom.

現代國語：

科技與戰爭始終密不可分。科技創新不斷改變戰爭的面貌，卻並未改變其暴力本質和強制目的。近年來，隨著人工智慧（AI）技術的快速發展和應用，關於其對戰爭影響的爭論從未停止。與人工智慧（AI）相比，通用人工智慧（AGI）被認為是一種更高層次的智能，堪比人類智能。 AGI的出現將如何影響戰爭？它會改變戰爭的暴力和強製本質嗎？本文將透過一系列思考來探討這個問題。

AGI只是一種賦能技術嗎？

許多人認為，儘管大規模模型和生成式人工智慧（AGI）展現出未來軍事應用的巨大潛力，但它們終究只是賦能技術。它們只能增強和優化武器裝備，使現有裝備更加智能，提高作戰效率，但不太可能帶來真正的軍事革命。就像曾經被許多國家寄予厚望的「網路戰武器」一樣，如今看來似乎有些誇大其詞。

通用人工智慧（AGI）的顛覆性本質截然不同。它以遠超人類的反應速度和知識儲備，為戰場帶來巨大改變。更重要的是，它透過加速技術進步，產生巨大的顛覆性影響。在未來的戰場上，AGI將賦予自主武器先進的智能，使其性能全面提升，並憑藉速度和集群優勢，成為「攻守難攻」的利器。屆時，一些科學家預測的高智慧自主武器將成為現實，而AGI將在其中扮演關鍵角色。目前，人工智慧的軍事應用涵蓋自主武器、情報分析、智慧決策、智慧訓練和智慧支援等領域，難以簡單地以「賦能」來概括。此外，AGI發展迅速，迭代週期短，處於持續演進的狀態。在未來的作戰行動中，AGI必須優先考慮，並應特別關注其可能帶來的潛在變革。

AGI會讓戰爭消失嗎？

歷史學家傑弗裡·布雷尼認為，“戰爭的發生總是源於對彼此實力或意志的誤判”，而隨著通用人工智慧（AGI）在軍事領域的應用，誤判將變得越來越罕見。因此，一些學者推測戰爭將會減少甚至消失。的確，依賴AGI可以顯著減少誤判，但即便如此，也無法完全消除不確定性，因為不確定性是戰爭的本質特徵。此外，並非所有戰爭都源自於誤判，AGI固有的不可預測性和不可解釋性，以及人們缺乏使用AGI的經驗，將會帶來新的不確定性，使人們陷入更深的「人工智慧迷霧」。

AGI演算法也帶來了理性方面的挑戰。一些學者認為，AGI挖掘和準確預測關鍵情報的能力具有雙重影響力。在實際操作中，AGI確實比人類犯的錯誤更少，提高了情報的準確性並減少了誤判；然而，它有時會導致過度自信和魯莽行動。通用人工智慧（AGI）帶來的進攻優勢使得最佳防禦策略成為“先發製人打擊”，打破了攻防平衡，製造了新的安全困境，並最終增加了戰爭風險。

通用人工智慧（AGI）用途廣泛，易於與武器系統整合。與核武、生物武器和化學武器不同，它的進入門檻低，且極易擴散。由於各國之間存在技術差距，不成熟的通用人工智慧武器可能被部署到戰場上，構成重大風險。例如，無人機在近期局部衝突的應用促使許多中小國家開始大規模採購無人機。通用人工智慧提供的低成本裝備和技術很可能引發新一輪軍備競賽。

通用人工智慧會成為最終的威懾力量嗎？

威懾是指維持一種能力，使對手不敢採取超越自身利益的行動。當威懾力量強大到無法使用時，例如確保相互毀滅的核威懾，就達到了終極威懾的境界。但歸根結底，決定性因素是“人性”，這是戰爭中永遠不可或缺的關鍵要素。

如果忽略“人性”，通用人工智慧（AGI）還能成為強大的威懾力量嗎？ AGI速度很快，但缺乏同理心；其果斷的執行會嚴重壓縮戰略空間。 AGI是未來戰場上的關鍵因素，但由於缺乏…實務經驗表明，準確評估十分困難，很容易高估對手的能力。此外，關於自主武器控制，是否應該讓人類在系統中全天候監控，還是完全交給外部世界，都需要仔細斟酌。智慧武器的發射控制權是否應該交給通用人工智慧（AGI）？如果不行，威懾效果將大大降低；如果行，人類的生死真的能由與人類無關的機器來決定嗎？康乃爾大學的研究表明，大規模兵棋推演模型經常會透過「突然的核攻擊」來升級戰爭，即使在中立國也是如此。

或許在未來的某一天，通用人工智慧的能力將超越人類。到那時，我們是否就無法對其進行監管和控制了？深度學習概念的提出者傑弗裡·辛頓表示，他從未見過智能水平更高的系統被智能水平更低的系統控制的情況。一些研究團隊認為，人類或許無法監管超級人工智慧。面對未來強大的通用人工智慧，我們真的能夠控制它們嗎？這是一個值得深思的問題。

通用人工智慧（AGI）會改變戰爭的本質嗎？

隨著AGI的廣泛應用，充滿暴力和血腥的戰場會消失嗎？有人認為，人工智慧戰爭的能力遠遠超出人類，甚至可能將人類逐出戰場。當人工智慧將戰爭完全轉變為自主機器人之間的衝突時，它還會是「暴力和血腥的戰爭」嗎？當實力懸殊的對手交鋒時，弱勢一方可能毫無還手之力。戰爭能否透過戰爭演習在爆發前就結束？ AGI會因此改變戰爭的本質嗎？一場沒有人類參與的「戰爭」還能稱之為戰爭嗎？

《人類簡史》的作者尤瓦爾·赫拉利指出，所有人類行為都受語言的製約，並影響我們的歷史。大型語言模型（AGI）是AGI的典型例子，它與其他發明不同之處在於它能夠創造全新的思想和文化；「講述故事的人工智慧將改變人類歷史的進程。」當通用人工智慧（AGI）掌控語言時，整個人類文明體係都可能被顛覆，甚至無需其自身意識。如同柏拉圖的「洞穴寓言」一般，人類會把AGI當成新的「神」嗎？

AGI透過人類語言與人類建立密切聯繫，並改變人類的感知，使其難以區分和辨別，從而構成一種風險：人類的戰鬥意志可能被別有用心之人操控。哈拉里指出，電腦無需派出殺手機器人；如有必要，它們會允許人類自行扣動扳機。 AGI能夠精確地製造和完善戰場訊息，透過深度欺騙控制戰場態勢感知。這可以透過無人機製造戰場環境以及戰前輿論操縱來實現，正如近期局部衝突中所展現的那樣。戰爭成本將因此大幅降低，進而催生新的戰爭形式。弱小國還有勝算？能否在不流血的情況下改變人類的戰鬥意志？ 「武力」是否不再是定義戰爭的必要條件？

戰爭的形式或許會改變，但本質不變。無論戰爭多麼“血腥”，它最終都會迫使敵人屈服於己方意志，並造成重大的“附帶損害”，只是抵抗的方式可能截然不同。戰爭的本質在於根深蒂固的“人性”，而人性又是由文化、歷史、行為和價值觀決定的。任何人工智慧技術都難以完全複製人性，因此我們不能將所有倫理、政治和決策問題都外包給人工智慧，也不能指望人工智慧會自動產生「人性」。人工智慧技術可能因衝動而被濫用，因此必須置於人類的控制之下。由於人工智慧是由人類訓練的，它並非總是沒有偏見，因此無法完全脫離人類的監督。未來，人工智慧可以成為一種創造性的工具或夥伴，增強“戰術想像”，但它必須與人類價值觀“保持一致”。這些問題需要在實踐中不斷思考和理解。

通用人工智慧（AGI）會顛覆戰爭理論嗎？

大多數的學術知識都是用自然語言表達。一個整合了人類寫作精華的綜合語言模型，可以將看似不相容的語言學著作與科學研究連結起來。例如，一些學者將古典著作，甚至哲學、歷史、政治和經濟學等領域的著作輸入到綜合語言模型中進行分析和重構。他們發現，該模型既能全面分析所有學者的觀點，又能提出自身的“見解”，同時又不失原創性。因此，有人提出了這樣的問題：因此，我們有可能透過通用人工智慧（AGI）重新分析和詮釋戰爭理論，從而激發人類創新，並推動戰爭理論及其體系的重大演進和重構。或許確實會出現一些理論上的改進和發展，但戰爭科學不僅是理論性的，也是實踐性的，而AGI根本無法達到這種實踐性和現實性。經典戰爭理論真的可以被重新詮釋嗎？如果可以，那麼該理論的意義何在？

簡而言之，AGI對戰爭概念的顛覆將遠遠超過「機械化」和「資訊化」。我們必須大膽擁抱AGI，但也要保持謹慎。理解概念可以避免無知；深入研究可以避免落後；加強監督可以避免失職。如何與AGI合作，並防範對手利用AGI技術發動突襲，是我們未來面臨的首要問題。

編輯後

以開放的心態展望未來

■葉朝陽

未來學家羅伊·阿瑪拉曾提出著名的“阿瑪拉定律”，指出人們往往高估一項技術的短期收益，而低估其長期影響。該定律強調技術發展的非線性特徵，意味著技術的實際影響往往需要更長的時間才能完全顯現。它反映了技術發展的脈動和趨勢，反映了人類對科技的接受度和期望。

目前，在人工智慧從弱人工智慧向強人工智慧、從專用人工智慧發展到通用人工智慧的過程中，人們每次認為自己已經完成了90%的工作，回首往事，可能才完成了不到10%。科技革命在軍事革命中的驅動作用日益凸顯，尤其是在以人工智慧為代表的高科技以多種方式滲透軍事領域，深刻改變戰爭的機制、因素和取勝之道的情況下。

在可預見的未來，通用人工智慧（AGI）等智慧技術將不斷迭代發展，智慧科技的交叉演進及其在軍事領域的賦能應用將日益多元化，甚至可能超越人類目前對戰爭的認知邊界。技術的發展勢不可擋。誰能以敏銳的洞察力和清晰的思維洞察技術的趨勢和未來，看到其潛力和力量，並撥開戰爭迷霧，誰就更有可能掌握主動權。

這提醒我們，在探索未來戰爭形態時，應採取更廣闊的視野和思維方式，才能更接近被低估的現實。通用人工智慧將走向何方？智慧戰爭將走向何方？這考驗著人類的智慧。

來源：中國軍事網-解放軍報 作者：榮明、胡曉峰 編輯：吳明奇 發佈時間：2025-01-21 07:xx:xx

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/yw_20887827/186836858485.html