Chinese People’s Liberation Army Insights into the Evolving Trends of Cognitive Warfare
外文音譯：
Cognition is the process by which people obtain, process and apply information and knowledge. At present, the cognitive domain has gradually become a new battlefield for competition, and cognitive warfare has gradually attracted attention from all countries. With the development of the technological revolution and the expansion of warfare practice, cognitive warfare is showing an accelerated evolution trend.
Cognitive technology is becoming a fundamental driving force in the evolution of warfare. Technology changes the form of warfare and also changes the way of cognitive warfare. If the large-scale popularization of information networks has promoted the information domain to become a combat domain, and the exponential growth of data and network scale is a sign of the maturity of the information domain, then the large-scale application of cognitive technology and the continuous iterative development of cognitive technology will become A sign of maturity in driving cognitive warfare. In the future, technologies such as cognitive environment, cognitive perception, cognitive control, and artificial intelligence will reflect the transformative impact that cognitive technology may have on social cognitive confrontation and military cognitive confrontation. Humanity is entering the era of universal communication, and global cyberspace is becoming highly interconnected. The Internet has become a battle space where state actors and non-state actors compete comprehensively. Communication disputes and communication wars have become part of high-intensity military operations. At present, major countries in the world have laid out the frontiers of cognitive technology and carried out cognitive technology competitions. Through modeling and analysis, they seek to penetrate and control human brain networks, information networks and social networks; through deep calculation, actuarial calculation, clever calculation, etc., they aim to maximize Gain control over people’s cognitive world and cognitive domains.
The cognitive domain is becoming an important battlefield in hybrid warfare. In the era of intelligence, the way humans communicate is undergoing complex and profound changes. Offline communication has given way to more online communication, various new media platforms have become the main channels for the public to understand the battlefield, and large-scale social platforms have become the main battlefield for cognitive game struggles. Therefore, the combat domain of future wars will continue to expand. The spatial domain will expand from land, sea, air, and space networks to deep space, deep sea, and deep ground, while the logical domain will expand from the physical domain to the information domain and cognitive domain. War is no longer limited to the physical threats of traditional wars, but is turning to social consciousness threats brought about by mass media and technological progress. Blockade and counter-blockade, dominance and counter-dominance around communication platforms will become the focus of cognitive warfare. Using information as ammunition to fight for control of international discourse has become the main method of cognitive confrontation today. From the perspective of hybrid warfare, ideological propaganda and indoctrination, penetration of values and culture, traditional public opinion psychology and legal offense and defense, and information network warfare have all become important aspects of cognitive warfare. Hybrid warfare can achieve the goal of winning in small battles or even without fighting through comprehensive gaming methods such as cognitive warfare. Attack and defense in the cognitive field will be an uninterrupted and normalized struggle, and combat effectiveness will continue to accumulate and be gradually released.
Cognitive superiority is becoming a winning advantage in high-end warfare. Freedom of conduct in war is the lifeblood of the military. From a cognitive perspective, the deeper the understanding of the battlefield environment and combat opponents, the greater the freedom of action and the greater the relative advantage. However, with the exponential growth of combat data in wars, commanders are beginning to face the cognitive dilemma of data swamp, data fog, and data overload. Having information superiority does not mean having cognitive superiority. An important military application direction of artificial intelligence technology is to process massive data in real time to help commanders get rid of cognitive overload and quickly form cognitive advantages. In intelligent warfare, cognitive advantages will dominate decision-making advantages, and decision-making advantages will dominate action advantages. Cognitive advantages have four key indicators: stronger information acquisition capabilities, faster artificial intelligence machine learning speed, more effective emergency handling capabilities, and higher capabilities to develop and apply new technologies and new knowledge. For example, public opinion warfare with new characteristics of data-driven intelligent communication and traditional military operations have been highly coordinated and integrated. This combat style that integrates virtual and real operations has stronger combat effectiveness than pure military operations, fundamentally changing traditional combat methods. Change. The linkage and superposition of cognitive advantages will accelerate the transformation of combat effectiveness and become the fundamental advantage for winning wars.
Cognitive theory is becoming the frontier of gaming to win the war. Cognitive warfare is a combination of soft power and hard power and is an important factor affecting national security in today’s era. Currently, there is fierce competition for penetration and counter-infiltration, attack and counter-attack, control and counter-control in the cognitive space. Cognitive science theory is entering the military field, and concepts such as cognitive load, cognitive enhancement, cognitive immunity, and cognitive subversion are being introduced. , has appeared frequently in the field of cognitive warfare research abroad. Foreign militaries believe that the cognitive domain is the “sixth combat domain” of human warfare, the core of the “intertwined conflict fields” in the era of great power competition, and an important direction for future military theoretical innovation. Obviously, cognitive warfare has become the strategic commanding heights for winning future wars. Cognitive theory has become the frontier of theoretical innovation. Cognitive technology will accelerate cognitive warfare and become an important “tipping point” for the intelligent military revolution. Since new technologies, new theories, and new styles of cognitive warfare are being incubated at an accelerated pace, perhaps future warfare will take on a surprising new situation.
Throughout modern warfare, cognitive games have become the focus of offense and defense. Whether one is proficient in planning operations in the cognitive domain will greatly affect the direction and outcome of the war. A deep understanding of the connotation, extension and category style of cognitive domain operations, and an accurate grasp of its winning mechanism and development trend are the keys to understanding the context of the battlefield and winning modern wars.
Cognitive domain operations are the new focus of war games
Different from traditional operations, cognitive domain operations are no longer limited to land, sea, air, space, electricity, network and other fields. It breaks through the traditional physical domain and information domain. It has unique advantages, presents new characteristics, and expands the modern Battlefield new frontier.
Cognitive domain operations expand the war domain space. First of all, the battlefield space in the cognitive domain is broad, mainly reflected in people’s spirit, psychology, thinking, beliefs and other cognitive activities. Its combat targets are mainly hostile heads of state and political figures, military personnel, social elites and the general public. Secondly, cognitive domain operations take a wide range of forms, including but not limited to political and diplomatic pressure, economic blockade and sanctions, cultural penetration and erosion, etc. Thirdly, the goals of cognitive domain operations are wide-ranging, mainly to shake the enemy’s belief, disintegrate the enemy’s will, influence and change the opponent’s decision-making, thereby causing social chaos, decision-making errors, demoralization of the enemy’s military, and even subverting its national power.
Cognitive domain operations blur the boundaries of the war domain. The main body of cognitive domain operations is people. People are the most active factor in war, especially the cognition of high-level decision-makers, which embodies the overall will of the war, directly affects the overall situation of the war, and determines the outcome of the war. The cognition of state leaders and military generals is the key target of cognitive domain operations. Popular will, social foundation, and international public opinion are usually the basis for cognitive domain operations and are the key forces that promote the process and direction of war. Cognitive domain operations mix conventional and unconventional operations, blurring the boundaries of the war field. It aims to cognitively induce and attack information recipients, bypassing the traditional battlefield and reaching the weakest link – people. Tactical actions can achieve strategic goals, from Fundamentally change the battlefield environment and change the outcome of the war.
Cognitive domain operations reach the ultimate strategic goal. There is a saying in the ancient Chinese art of war: “The way to use troops is to attack the heart first, and to attack the city below; to fight the heart first, and to fight soldiers lower.” Operations in the cognitive domain aim to occupy cognitive dominance and influence the enemy’s decision-making and behavior. Achieve maximum combat effectiveness at minimum cost. As Clausewitz mentioned in “On War”, “War is an act of violence that forces the enemy to obey our will.” Since cognitive domain operations are not hard kills against living forces, but soft kills against invisible targets, they can not only “force the enemy to obey our will”, but also objectively enable the enemy to destroy itself from within, making it unable to resist, disintegrate, and ultimately Achieve the strategic goal of “complete victory” without fighting.
Cognitive domain operations are a new product of military reform
At present, major changes in the world that have not been seen in a century are accelerating. The international situation is becoming increasingly complex, and local wars and regional conflicts continue. As a new combat method, cognitive domain operations are becoming more and more important driven by the new wave of military reforms.
The laws of war are the basic rules for combat in the cognitive domain. Cognitive domain operations still follow the basic laws of war. First, justice must prevail. Just wars promote historical development and ultimately defeat unjust wars, and cognitive domain operations that occupy the moral commanding heights have the conditions to win first. The second is the victory of the strong and the defeat of the weak. The advancement of science and technology has given rise to advanced military theories and promoted the development of high-tech equipment. Seizing control and control can achieve dimensionality reduction strikes and disintegrate enemy forces. Third, subjective guidance is consistent with objective reality. Cognitive domain operations must be based on a certain objective material basis. The battlefield environment must be comprehensively considered, the situations of both parties must be weighed, and favorable decisions must be made. Fourth, key operations affect the overall situation. In network-centered system operations, the cognitive domain often becomes the most critical link, and its success or failure can determine the battle situation.
Theoretical innovation is the basic support for cognitive domain operations. In recent years, the US military has successively proposed new combat theories such as “hybrid warfare”, “mosaic warfare” and “gray zone conflict”. It regards cognitive domain operations as the main combat method and has formed a relatively mature theory. The Russian army has also developed its own set of hybrid warfare methods in long-term military practice, especially in the Syrian battlefield, where it skillfully used “Gerasimov” tactics to deal with “hybrid warfare.” Japan has also vigorously developed its military power in recent years. In its new version of the “Defense White Paper”, it first mentioned the concept of “domain transversal” operations, aiming to break through traditional fields and regard new fields such as the cognitive domain as the key direction of its military power development, making it more proactive. and extraversion.
Military practice is an important basis for cognitive domain operations. Judging from the recent local wars, cognitive domain warfare has become the main combat method of modern warfare and has achieved high combat effectiveness. The confrontation between cognitive warfare and counter-cognitive warfare is quite fierce. In 2010, the United States and other Western countries launched a cognitive war, hyped up the Tunisian democratic movement and created the “Arab Spring”, which plunged the Middle East into chaos and allowed terrorist organizations to take advantage of the opportunity to wreak havoc. The United States attempted to consolidate its hegemony by overthrowing the Egyptian government, launching a war in Libya, and intervening in the Syrian war. In 2014, the Russian army took control of Crimea through a combination of strategies, multi-dimensional breakthroughs, and public opinion building. Its cognitive domain operations also have very distinctive characteristics.
Cognitive domain operations are a new direction in war planning
With the continuous development of high and new technologies and their widespread application in the military field, the shape of future wars will evolve at an accelerated pace, and the complexity and unknown nature of wars will increase dramatically. To this end, we should plan in advance, coordinate scientifically, strengthen the construction of combat capabilities in the cognitive domain, deeply integrate into the future battlefield, and effectively control the initiative in future wars.
Promote research on the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations. As an important combat method in future wars, the status and role of cognitive domain operations will be more prominent, and the development prospects will be broader. Controlling cognitive power has become an important part of seizing war control. To win future wars, we must keep up with the trends in the development of war forms, vigorously study the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations, use theoretical innovation to drive innovation in tactics, and seek advantages and opportunities.
Strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive capabilities in cognitive domain operations. From individuals to organizations to countries, the impact of cognitive domain operations spans all time and space and all elements, spans different combat fields, and affects the entire combat process. In future wars, commanders and combatants will face huge cognitive offensive and defensive challenges. Seizing control of cognitive power, and then seizing comprehensive battlefield control, will become the key point of control in future wars. We should adhere to demand-driven efforts, strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive forces in cognitive domain operations, build a cognitive domain combat system that integrates offense and defense, peacetime and war, and multi-dimensional integration, establish and improve drill and evaluation mechanisms, and continuously improve capabilities through long-term military practice.
Accelerate the research and development of high-tech cognitive domain operations. Currently, with the rapid development of high-tech technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, and cloud computing, the acquisition of open source information has become more convenient and efficient. Cognitive domain operations are increasingly characterized by fast start-up, low cost, and high efficiency. In addition, with the quiet development of emerging technologies such as neuroscience and brain science, it can be inferred that cognitive warfare weapons will become increasingly abundant and widely used in future wars. We should keep up with the development of the times, plan and design in advance, vigorously develop cutting-edge technologies oriented to seizing cognitive advantages, and promote the update of cognitive domain combat concepts and methods, so as to seize the initiative in future wars.
Chinese Military From “Cyber Warfare” to “Mosaic Warfare”
Theory is the precursor to action. Strengthening innovation in combat concepts and promoting innovation in combat guidance have always been important ways for militaries around the world to cultivate military advantages. In recent years, the U.S. military has successively proposed cutting-edge combat theories such as “cyber warfare” and “mosaic warfare” in order to realize that the “production relationship” of combat mode can be more adaptable to the development of “productivity” of combat capabilities. By comparing and analyzing these two combat theories, the world can get a glimpse of the changes in the US military’s combat capability building thinking, especially the understanding of the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare”, so that it can be targeted and find effective checks and balances.
● From threat response to war design——
Actively shape and promote the improvement of combat capabilities
“Threat-based” or “capability-based” are two basic ways to build military combat capabilities. “Threat-based” embodies demand traction and focuses on solving practical problems in the near and medium term, which is the basic law that should be followed in the construction of military combat capabilities; “capability-based” embodies goal traction, aims at future strategic missions, and supports strategic concepts with new combat theories, which is the key to military operations. The only way to achieve innovation and transcendence in capabilities. The development from “cyber warfare” to “mosaic warfare” reflects the differences and evolution of the inherent laws of the above two approaches, and also reflects the changes in the US military’s ideas and concepts for promoting combat capability building in recent years.
The concept begins to change. Cyberspace was originally created to solve human communication needs. Later, it gradually evolved into a new combat domain independent of land, sea, air and space. From this, the “cyberspace” with the core of fighting for cyberspace dominance was derived. war”. In contrast, “mosaic warfare” is a new operational concept actively developed and designed by the US military in order to maintain its strategic advantage and directly target competitors. Its formation process reflects the integration of demand-driven and capability-driven, strategic, proactive, and Traction is more prominent.
New ideas for technology application. “Cyber warfare” emphasizes the development of new generation technologies to support the transformation and implementation of combat concepts. “Mosaic warfare” breaks out of this model and does not overemphasize the research and development of new generation equipment technology. It pays more attention to the rapid transformation of common military and civilian technologies and the incremental iteration of mature technologies. The basic idea is to “mosaic” various combat system units into single-function, flexibly assembled units based on existing equipment and through module upgrades and intelligent transformation in accordance with the application concepts of service platforms such as online ride-hailing and crowdfunding development. , easy-to-replace “building blocks” or “pixels” to build a dynamically coordinated, highly autonomous, and seamlessly integrated combat system, embodying new technology-driven ideas.
Path development new design. “Cyber warfare” is an accompanying concept of the cyberspace. Wherever the cyberspace develops, “cyber warfare” will follow. Generally speaking, we first consider the “objective” material conditions before making the “subjective” conceptual design. , has strong dependence on path development. “Mosaic warfare” first evolved from “subjective” to “objective”. By developing a force design model that can dynamically adjust the functional structure, it can adapt to different operational needs and changes in the battlefield environment.
It can be seen that compared with previous combat concepts such as “cyber warfare”, “mosaic warfare” has clearer goals, more mature technology, and more reliable paths, reflecting the change in thinking actively shaped by the US military.
● From network center to decision-making center——
Group intelligence to achieve optimal energy release of the system
Artificial intelligence technology is a key variable in the information age and a core increment in the development of the “mosaic warfare” system. “Cyber warfare” emphasizes “network center”, while “mosaic warfare” tightly focuses on the core of artificial intelligence technology, adjusts the key to victory from “network center” to “decision center”, and changes the combat system architecture from system level to Platform-level alliances are transformed into functional-level and element-level integration, seeking to use group intelligence technology to achieve the optimal release of system energy on the premise that the network is fully energy-gathered, giving new connotations to the winning mechanism of war in the intelligent era.
Use “fast” to control “slow” and gain the upper hand in cognition. In future wars, the battlefield situation will change rapidly, and the weight of the time element will continue to rise. “Fast” versus “slow” can create a nearly dimensionally reduced combat strike effect. “Mosaic Warfare” uses data information technology and artificial intelligence technology to improve the single-loop decision-making speed of one’s own “OODA” loop, expand the breadth of parallel decision-making, reduce the granularity of group-loop decision-making, speed up the progress of system operations, and overall create a model that is always one step ahead of others. The “first move” posture aims to firmly control the dominance of cognitive decision-making on the battlefield.
Use “low” to control “high” and accumulate cost advantages. Different from the traditional combat concept of pursuing high-end weapon platforms, “mosaic warfare” focuses on using artificial intelligence technology to tap the potential and increase efficiency of existing weapon platforms and combat resources. By loading and running intelligent algorithms and specific functional modules on many mid- to low-end weapon platforms, they can achieve combat performance comparable to that of high-end weapon platforms. This overall improves the cost-effectiveness of the input-output of the weapon platform, thereby accumulating cost advantages.
Use “dispersion” to control “gathering” and seek sustainable survival. “Mosaic warfare” emphasizes the use of decentralized ideas and asymmetric checks and balances, using an open system architecture to decentrally configure various functions such as reconnaissance, positioning, communication, and strike on various manned/unmanned platforms to achieve Distributed deployment of power. At the same time, intelligent algorithms are used to improve the self-organization, self-coordination, and independent attack capabilities of each platform, so as to achieve centralized firepower. When some combat platforms are eliminated, disrupted, or stripped away, the entire combat system can still operate normally, thus enhancing the battlefield survivability of the force cluster.
Use “dynamic” to control “quiet” and improve system flexibility. “Mosaic warfare” emphasizes further breaking through barriers in each combat domain. By turning fixed “kill chains” in different combat domains into dynamically reconfigurable “kill nets”, the “OODA” large ring is disassembled into small rings, and a single ring is differentiated into multiple rings. According to changes in the combat process and combat needs, rely on intelligent networking to realize on-the-go splitting, on-the-go deployment, and on-the-go combination of combat forces. In this way, on the one hand, it can enhance the flexibility and adaptability of the combat system; on the other hand, it can also offset the node aggregation effect of complex networks, making it difficult for opponents to find key nodes to defeat one’s own system.
“Mosaic warfare” provides a reference prototype for intelligent warfare. But at the same time, as an idealized force design and application framework, “mosaic warfare” also needs supporting support such as technology, doctrine, and policies that are closely related to it. There is still a long way to go before it can be fully realized. Compared with traditional warfare, The situation of system coexistence will exist for a long time.
● From element integration to system reorganization——
Dynamic structure to enhance the flexibility of the combat system
Structure and relationships often determine functions and properties. “Cyber warfare” and “mosaic warfare” are built on the same material foundation in the information age and follow the same evolutionary paradigm, but the principles and effects of system construction are different. The architecture formed by “cyber warfare” can be statically deconstructed, while “mosaic warfare” dynamically combines functional units according to certain construction rules to form an elastic architecture with self-organizing and adaptive characteristics, similar to a “dynamic black box”. Conventional The means are difficult to track and predict. This flexible structure often “emerges” new capabilities to empower and increase the efficiency of the combat system.
The integrated development of network and cloud makes combat space and time more dynamic and malleable. The Internet and cloud are the basic environment for the operation of the information combat system. They have reshaped the process elements of intelligence, command, attack, and support in traditional operations, and at the same time derived new combat time and space. “Cyber warfare” mainly focuses on the cyberspace, and its combat time and space are relatively static. “Mosaic warfare” is not limited to a single combat space. Under the development trend of information infrastructure network moving with the cloud and integrating cloud and network, the tangible and intangible space can be further hinged, the boundaries of combat space and time are more flexible, and the allocation of combat resources is more flexible. The combat architecture is more dynamic.
Data flows across domains, making combat control more seamlessly coordinated. In the command and control link, “cyber warfare” focuses on the command and control of combat units by joint combat command institutions, and the cross-domain exchange and flow of data is mainly concentrated on theater battlefields. “Mosaic warfare” further lowers the level of joint operations to the tactical end. Through the independent cross-domain exchange and seamless flow of data at the tactical level, various data islands can be gathered into data clusters on demand, thereby generating significant “overflow” “” effect makes the dynamic, discrete, agile, and parallel characteristics of the combat command and control loop more obvious, and is more conducive to realizing agile connection and efficient coordinated actions of various combat units on demand.
The algorithm penetrates all dimensions, making the system run more autonomously and efficiently. Algorithms are the mapping of human consciousness in cyberspace, forming two basic forms: compiled codes transformed by intentions and neural networks transformed by knowledge. In “Cyber Warfare”, compiled code is used extensively and neural networks are only used locally. In the “mosaic war”, the algorithm has expanded to two key functions: shaping rules and providing engines, and the breadth and depth of its application are more prominent. The shaping rules mainly focus on compiled code, supplemented by neural networks, to construct the process framework and operating logic of the “mosaic warfare” system, laying a structural foundation for its uncertainty, adaptability and “emergent” capabilities; providing the engine mainly integrates intelligence The algorithm model is distributed to edge elements for operation, forming a knowledge diffusion effect, thereby comprehensively improving the intelligent autonomous combat capabilities of the “mosaic warfare” system.
The independent release of energy at the edge makes the combat style more flexible and diverse. The edge is an abstract model of various manned/unmanned combat functional units and is also the direct source of the “emergence” of system capabilities. In the “cyber warfare” system, edge elements are closely coupled with the superior and subordinate command and control processes and are in a state of precise control. In the “Mosaic Warfare” system, the perception, interaction, reasoning, and decision-making capabilities of edge elements are greatly improved. Its “OODA” loop does not need to be linked back to the higher-level command organization, which is conducive to supporting the formation of a decentralized combination of high-low and manned/unmanned. The optimized combat cluster form can give edge elements more self-organizing authority, which significantly enhances battlefield confrontation advantages.
It can be seen that if “cyber warfare” is called a sophisticated war machine, “mosaic warfare” can be regarded as a complex “ecology” that can stimulate the dynamic growth of combat capabilities. New technologies generated by network clouds, data, algorithms, and edge devices Changes promote the formation of a dynamic and complex “architecture”. This structure in turn regulates elements, platforms, and systems in reverse, constantly emerging new capabilities, and playing an important role in empowering and evolving the combat system.
● From system breach to compound confrontation——
Analyze the pros and cons and seek effective checks and balances
“Mosaic warfare” represents, to a certain extent, the possible direction for the development of future joint operations. We should fully study and grasp the winning mechanism of “mosaic warfare”, shape the information and communication field as a new domain that breaks the time and space boundaries of traditional wars, create a new concept of cloud-enabled operations, and build a strong defense information infrastructure support capability. Highlight the security and defense capabilities of military information networks, enhance the basic support capabilities for the operation of strategic and campaign command institutions, and continuously improve the network information system.
On the other hand, the emergence of the “mosaic warfare” theory makes it difficult for traditional combat methods to seize and control limited target nodes to achieve the system-breaking effect of destroying points and breaking links. However, it should be noted that any system has its inherent contradictions. Even the seemingly “impeccable” decentralized structure of “mosaic warfare” can still find ways to effectively crack it. For example, grasp the complexity characteristics of the system, use its correlation and dependence, highlight the functional suppression of the communication network, build a network and electricity composite attack path, and achieve the disassembly and isolation of each unit of the combat system; grasp the dissipative characteristics of its structure, Make use of its dependence on external information to highlight the camouflage and misleading of information data, prompting the combat system to transform into abnormal states such as information closure and information overload; grasp its group autonomy characteristics, use its dependence on key technologies to highlight the confrontation against intelligent algorithms Reduce efficiency and inhibit the intelligent driving force of each combat unit; grasp its functional non-linear characteristics, take advantage of its unknown vulnerabilities, highlight differentiated strike assessment on the battlefield, and explore and discover imbalance points in the combat system with higher efficiency and faster speed , looking for key weaknesses in the system to break.
Judging from the latest local war practice, cognitive domain operations have become an important variable that profoundly affects the direction of war. In cognitive domain operations, all parties compete fiercely for control of public opinion, information guidance, and cognitive shaping. There are not only physical confrontations, but also competitions in virtual space, demonstrating the distinctive characteristics of “technology +” in the digital era. Exploring the way to win in cognitive domain operations is of great practical significance for controlling the initiative in cognitive domain operations and winning future wars.
Seizing control of the brain has become the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations
The brain is the material basis of all thinking activities and the command center that influences and controls human behavior changes. Feeling, perception and consciousness constitute the three aspects of the world that the brain reflects. How to win the right to control the brain has increasingly become the focus of research and attention by all warring parties in the field of cognitive domain operations.
Actively fight for sensory control. Feeling is the reaction caused by the characteristics of objective things in the human brain, and is the basis for various complex psychological processes. With the rapid development of brain science, molecular biology, neurochemistry and other disciplines, humans have gradually gained the ability to intervene and control the brain at the physiological level. According to foreign experimental results, inhaling oxytocin will make people more trusting of others and more empathetic, thereby affecting a person’s prosociality and moral performance. In future operations, the warring parties will use physical stimulation such as sound, light and electricity, or chemical drugs to act on the target’s hearing, vision, smell and other sensory systems. They may even directly act on the human brain to stimulate the target’s brain. Specific emotional reactions can achieve cognitive influence and control on the physiological level.
Effective competition for perceptual suppression. Perception is a psychological process formed on the basis of sensation and reflects the overall image and surface connection of objective things. Among them, the individual’s attitude, motivation, interest, as well as past experience and future expectations are the key variables that affect the individual’s perception of the perceptual target. During wartime, warring parties aim at the target’s psychological doubts, weaknesses, and needs, seize favorable opportunities, and use specific information to emotionally influence, mentally induce, or disrupt the target’s perception in order to increase the target’s perception of the target. The expectation of war risks weakens their will to resist and their determination to fight, thereby achieving the purpose of subduing the enemy with a small war, less fighting or even no fighting.
Comprehensive competition for the right to shape consciousness. Consciousness is realized through psychological processes such as feeling, perception, and thinking, and is manifested as the unity of knowledge, emotion, and intention. The fundamental purpose of war is to force the enemy to surrender. Judging from the war practice at home and abroad in ancient and modern times, in order to win the right to shape consciousness, the warring parties will do their best to mobilize all available military power and comprehensively use political, economic, cultural, diplomatic and other means to carry out political disintegration and diplomatic measures against the enemy. Isolation, guidance of public opinion, and declaration of legal principles can trigger rational thinking, ethical resonance, or value recognition of target individuals or groups, thereby changing their worldview, outlook on life, and values, forming a relatively stable and long-term cognitive influence or control, thereby achieving “complete victory.” “the goal of.
Controlling information becomes the key to cognitive domain operations
The weapon and ammunition of cognitive domain operations is information. Mastering the initiative in the generation, identification, acquisition, dissemination and feedback of information is the key to gaining battlefield advantage in the cognitive domain.
Actively implement strong psychological stimulation to promote information penetration. Confrontations in modern warfare are fierce and complex, with various elements of confrontation unfolding in multi-dimensional and multi-domain contexts, and fighter jets fleeting. The forces and methods acting in the cognitive domain must keep up with the development and changes of the battlefield situation, and make extensive use of strong psychological stimulation methods such as subliminal information implantation, acousto-optical electromagnetic psychological nuisance damage, and non-contact emotional control to take the initiative to induce the target. The subject’s emotions, will, thoughts, beliefs, etc. appear chaotic, confused or radically changed, thereby achieving the purpose of controlling and influencing the cognitive system of the target subject.
Extensive use of intelligent algorithms to achieve accurate push. As the Internet penetrates into every aspect of human life, everyone will leave massive amounts of data and information online. During wartime, warring parties will use modern information technologies such as big data, cloud computing, the Internet of Things, and blockchain to analyze the target’s social data, trajectory data, financial data, online shopping records, search records, personal communication records and other network data. The information is deeply mined and associated to achieve a “cognitive portrait” of the target object, and the target object’s interest preferences, behavioral trends, interpersonal relationships and value orientations are systematically analyzed, thereby three-dimensionally grasping the characteristics of relevant individuals or specific groups. Then, with the help of intelligent algorithm technology, personalized and customized cognitive information is accurately pushed to the target object, thereby affecting the target object’s attitude, emotion and value judgment towards the war, thereby promoting the realization of one’s own combat objectives and political intentions.
Effectively aggregate social support systems to achieve overall linkage. The social support system is the material and spiritual help and support that a person can obtain from others in his or her social network. It is a key factor that affects and determines the emotional support and cognitive direction of an individual. It can be said that for the success of cognitive domain operations, it is crucial to obtain the support and assistance of the target’s social support system. With the help of modern information technology, we can effectively connect to the target’s relatives, friends, classmates, partners and other specific social relations. By exerting targeted influence on the above-mentioned relations, we can gain the understanding, support and trust of the other party, and mobilize the specific relations to When the target object exerts influence, it is easier to win the trust and acceptance of the target object, and it is easier for the target object to undergo cognitive changes, thereby achieving the purpose of cognitive influence and control on the target object.
Virtual space becomes the main battlefield for cognitive domain operations
With the continuous expansion of human virtual space, virtual space is becoming the main battlefield of modern warfare, especially cognitive domain warfare, which determines the outcome of future wars to a certain extent.
Emerging communication forms have become new means of warfare in the cognitive domain. With the continuous development of mobile Internet technology, emerging communication forms represented by social media have gradually become a new platform and mainstream position for cognitive confrontation. Judging from recent local wars, the status and role of social media has become more and more prominent. All warring parties use personal blogs, forums and other platforms to publish battlefield graphics, video recordings and comments in real time, which has not only become a global mobile network media terminal It has also become the main battleground for the value perception game among different countries and different factions around the world. Emerging communication forms such as social media, with their unique decentralization and interactivity characteristics, have broken the information monopoly and information control in traditional communication methods and spawned numerous product styles. While meeting people’s information needs, they are also Unknowingly changing people’s perceptions. It is foreseeable that social media will play an increasingly prominent role in future cognitive domain operations.
Cyberspace has become a new space for cognitive domain operations. Under the conditions of informatization and intelligence, the threshold of network technology has been greatly reduced, making it possible to watch the game in real time around the world. Modern warfare has developed from “living room warfare” in the television era to “handheld warfare” in today’s all-media era. Online live broadcast is more intuitive and richer than any form of battlefield reporting, and “global synchronicity” has become a prominent feature. Through live broadcasts on the Internet, videos and pictures of fierce battles between the two warring parties, as well as numerous burned tanks and armored vehicles, as well as homes destroyed by the war and refugees fleeing their homes, can be visually displayed. People can see the micro-state of individual civilians and soldiers on both sides through the Internet. The “transparency” of the battlefield makes any attempt to conceal the truth and false statements more and more difficult. But on the other hand, the emergence of technologies such as intelligent voice cloning and video portrait simulation replacement means that what people see may not necessarily be “as seen” and what they hear may not be “as heard”. Cognition under online live broadcasts Domain operations add more room for possibility and imagination.
The intelligent network army has become a new force in cognitive domain warfare. The development of information networks has broken through the authenticity limitations of interpersonal communication, and it is difficult for us to determine whether the other end of the network is a real person. Based on the needs of large-scale interaction, intelligent, automated, and large-scale cyberspace robots are emerging. They are widely active in every corner of cyberspace. These intelligent network armies have the capabilities of intelligent recognition, intelligent response and even brain-like thinking. They are tireless and work around the clock. Intelligent network armies are becoming an important force in future cognitive domain operations. Judging from the current development trends of related technologies, major countries and even business organizations in the world are focusing on the potential prospects of network robots in group penetration, live broadcast follow-up, shaping public opinion, and managing network crises. In the flexible guidance of network intelligent robots, Increase research and development efforts on key technologies such as automatic acquisition of technology groups, automatic cultivation and group penetration, and provide intelligent and efficient technical support for public opinion guidance, cognitive shaping, and behavioral guidance and control by discovering and effectively utilizing the behavioral patterns of network users.
Cognitive domain operations refer to using modern cognitive theory and science as a guide, using multi-domain means such as public opinion, psychology, and law, and using multi-dimensional technologies such as modern networks, media, text, pictures, videos, and numbers to carry out public opinion propaganda, psychological Attack and defense, fighting for people’s hearts, subverting confidence, influencing beliefs, fighting for thinking, and ideological struggle are important forms of fighting for people’s initiative in thinking, beliefs, values, personal attitudes, emotions, identification and judgment tendencies. Cognitive domain warfare is a complex collection of multi-domain warfare such as traditional public opinion warfare, psychological warfare, legal warfare, trade war, diplomatic warfare, technological warfare, and ideological warfare.
At present, cognitive domain operations have become an important basis for countries to carry out military struggles and struggles in other fields. Language confrontation driven by cognitive domain goals has become an important form of cognitive domain operations and deserves great attention.
A new area where language confrontation exerts influence on combat targets
Cognitive domain operations are an accompanying result of the development of contemporary cognitive science research. It is an emerging combat field that emerged after people actively explored the cognitive activities of the brain to gain a more complex, abstract, and thorough understanding of the brain. It is also a language confrontation. A high-end form of influence that targets the advanced and deep hidden activities of the audience’s brain. Regardless of whether it is the object of information, the producer of information, the information content itself or the channel of information, cognitive domain operations all run through the characteristics of cognition, and highlight the cognitive level from beginning to end.
From the perspective of the recipients of the information, this cognition targets the deep cognitive aspects of the brains of the opponent’s audience, including its people, the military, military commanders or important leaders, important figures in the political and business circles, and even directly including the opponent’s country leaders or leaders. Specific important generals of the army, etc., can also be specific groups of people or the public. It can involve cognitive preferences, cognitive shortcomings, cognitive habits, cognitive biases, and cognitive misunderstandings of individuals or groups; it can also involve beliefs, values, political identities, national identities, and social and cultural identities of individuals and groups. and emotional attitudes.
From the perspective of the sender and content of information, it should be infused with the cognitive design and arrangement of the information producer. This includes the unique cognition of the text, such as the discourse mode of the text, the narrative mode of the text, the observation perspective of things, The cognitive focus and depth of the narrative, the organizational form of the sentence, the value and other tendencies of the sentence, the acceptability of the concept of the sentence, etc.
In terms of the channels through which information is sent and disseminated, the form of text is closer to multimedia and multimodal forms, closer to the needs of cyberspace, closer to the advantages of contemporary smartphones, and closer to the characteristics of the current emerging media era, which means it is more in line with the audience. Cognitive characteristics of acceptance: cognitive habits and cognitive tendencies. The communication form of the text fully considers the cognitive effects in international communication, especially cross-cultural, cross-language, cross-media, and cross-group cognitive communication. In this way, the text will better influence the audience from a cognitive level.
Language confrontation generates new tactics in response to changes in combat styles
Throughout human history, it is not difficult to find that the patterns of military struggle have been constantly changing. From the initial physical struggle with the help of cold weapons, it has developed into a contest of mechanical power with hot weapons, and then into the checks and balances of information capabilities under high-tech war conditions. In recent years, it has also moved towards intelligent decision-making in the direction of intelligence and unmanned operations. Competition develops, and every change brings profound changes in tactics. In the current transitional stage of mechanized, informatized and intelligent coexistence, people not only pay attention to the struggle for dominance in the physical domain and information domain of the battlefield, but also pay more attention to the control of the cognitive domain that affects the main body of the war, that is, the way of thinking of the personnel on both sides of the war. , cognitive models and styles, values, emotional attitudes, cultural models, communication models, psychological strengths and weaknesses, cognitive preferences, cultural and knowledge maps, ideological identity and other fields of competition. The latter involves social personnel and the basic situation of social existence, which is the emerging field where cognitive domain operations have an impact, and its tactics have strong particularities.
Flexibility of issues: Cognitive domain operations can select many issues in the cognitive domain and carry out flexible combat operations. Depending on the current situation and needs, the topic can be selected to involve either a relatively macro strategic level (such as the ideology and system of the other party’s entire society, etc.), or a meso-level operational level (such as social issues in local areas or directions of the other party’s society: Social welfare policy or environmental protection policy, etc.), you can also choose to involve very micro tactical issues in society (such as the unfair, unjust, and unbeautiful side of society reflected by a certain person or a specific event). Issues in the macro, meso, and micro cognitive domains are interconnected and transform into each other. It is very likely that a micro issue will also become a major macro strategic issue. The question raised must be considered in relation to the entire military operation, and cognitive domain operations must be subordinated to the overall combat operations and serve the needs of the macro-political and diplomatic overall situation. What’s more important is that topics should be prepared in normal times and data on various topics should be collected in normal times, especially paying attention to various important data in real society. Once needed, these data can be quickly transformed into arrows, bullets, and artillery shells fired into the enemy’s cognitive domain, and even become strategic weapons that affect the overall situation.
Combat-level controllability: The important design of cognitive operations is that at the operational level, the overall system can be controlled and regulated, and corresponding upgrades or dimensionality reductions can be made according to changes in the situation. If the strategic level is needed, commanders can activate the design and force investment at the strategic level; if the operational level is needed, it can also be controlled at the corresponding campaign level; if it is only needed at the level of specific small issues, it can also be controlled at the corresponding level. The niche local level enables the entire operation to serve the needs of overall combat operations. The strategies, battles and tactics here refer more to combat design and force investment. Since the battlefield situation may change rapidly, some issues may also change at the level, from strategic issues to affect campaign and tactical-level effects; some issues, due to the particularity of tactical issues, become campaign-strategic issues that affect the overall situation.
Dominance of emerging media: The main channel of influence in the cognitive domain has shifted from traditional paper media and print media to emerging media. Traditional media mainly rely on a single medium, such as newspapers, magazines, books, flyers, posters, etc. to convey information; the later emergence of television brought about three-dimensional media. In the Internet era, especially the Internet 2.0 era and the birth of smart communication devices, people rely more on multi-media, multi-modal, short videos and short texts to convey information. The introduction of various advanced devices such as smart phones, smart tablets, and smart players, as well as the birth of various emerging social software and tools, have made emerging media the main tool for people to communicate and communicate. Emerging media, emerging social software and tools have become an important space for various forces to compete and fight in social security, public opinion security, ideological security, social security and political security. Internet security, especially the ability to grasp the security of new social media, emerging social software and tools, etc., is to some extent the key to the security of a country’s cognitive domain. Information from emerging media tools and new media spaces has become the main battlefield, main position and main contested space for cognitive operations in various countries. It is worth pointing out that the ideas and theories that influence people’s cognition will become the most influential weapons at all levels of cognitive domain warfare.
Language confrontation adapts to the intelligent era, cognitive computing enhances new computing power
In the era of artificial intelligence, based on the significant improvements in big data analysis and application, super computing power, intelligent computing power, natural language processing power, smartphone communication capabilities, and new generation network communication capabilities, humans have begun to be able to control the entire society and the entire network. Conduct accurate modeling and analysis of language, culture, psychological cognition, group emotions, and social behavior across domains, local groups, different local groups, and specific individuals. In particular, people’s profound understanding and grasp of brain cognition, human brain thinking, thinking patterns, habits and preferences, image schemas, cognitive frameworks, and even neural networks, human-computer collaboration, brain control technology, etc., as long as there are sufficiently diverse With dynamic data, people can calculate and simulate all people’s psychological activities, emotional activities, cognitive activities, social opinions, and behavioral patterns. Through deep calculation, actuarial calculation, and clever calculation, we can accurately grasp people’s cognitive world and form Delicate and profound control over people’s cognitive domains. This aspect also presents the following characteristics:
Comprehensive dimensionality of computing: As an emerging field, all aspects involved in the cognitive domain can be digitized and made fully computable across all processes and individuals. It can collect various types of information extensively and sort out the information, which can then be reflected as Big data about the diversified main factors of combat opponents can be used to carry out various calculations for the whole, groups, between groups, and individual data and between them. Therefore, based on thinking, psychology, emotion, and speech, which has not been possible in the past, Various activities in terms of activities, behaviors, etc. can be completed, displayed and accurately grasped through calculation.
Cognitiveness of computing: Computing in the cognitive domain embodies strong cognition. It can reveal more connections between various things, events, and people that are difficult to observe with the naked eye, and can reveal the same event framework. The clustering and hierarchical relationships between various concepts in the text reflect the explicit or implicit, direct or indirect deep cognitive connections between concepts, reveal the complex conceptual network system between concepts, and enable people to see completely beyond the ordinary naked eye. The deep cognitive world of observation.
Computing intelligence: Computing in the cognitive domain also reflects strong intelligence. This kind of intelligence is manifested in drawing intelligent conclusions through calculation. For example, through large-scale text collection and data mining, we can find the relationships between various topics, various opinions, various tendencies, various groups of people, various positions, and various demands that cannot be seen due to limited human power, and form a comparison. A more comprehensive, in-depth, accurate and systematic understanding of a certain problem to make scientifically optimized decisions. This kind of decision-making may be consistent with human intelligence, or it may exceed or even far exceed human intelligence. By making good use of the power of cognitive computing, especially by integrating the data of one’s own country and that of opponents, one can better prevent, warn, and deploy in advance, and achieve the best, fastest, and most accurate strikes and counterattacks. , and can also better reflect efficient, powerful and targeted protection. Cognitive computing here is more about a possible macro, meso or micro issue in different groups of people, different time periods, and different backgrounds, in the entire network domain or a certain local network domain, or within a specific group. The repercussions generated, especially the analysis and examination of the active and passive situations that both parties may present when playing games with opponents, and the attack and defense of the cognitive domain, etc.
Give full play to the subject position of discourse and release the new application of discourse power
Cognitive domain operations have a very important support, that is, they mainly rely on language media to exert their effects, mainly exerting influence through the discourse level, mainly through the narrative nature of discourse to form a hidden effect on the cognitive domain, and mainly through cultural models. To exert a potential effect, exert an explicit or implicit effect through cross-cultural communication. It is mainly reflected in the following aspects:
Uniqueness of textual discourse: The cognitive domain requires the use of information to exert influence. Although information may rely on the special visual effects of video images to be presented, fundamentally speaking, the uniqueness of the discourse synthesized by the text becomes the main basis for cognitive impact. Among them, the mode of discourse expression, the skills of discourse expression, the main design of the persuasiveness and appeal of discourse expression, especially the uniqueness of discourse narrative will be the key to affecting people’s cognition. This may include the perspective of the narrative, the theme and style of the narrative, the story frame of the narrative, the language innovation of the narrative, the key sentences of the narrative, the philosophy, humanities, religion, society, nature and other feelings contained in the narrative, and the identities of the different participants in the narrative. , the diversified evaluation of narratives, the authenticity, depth and emotional temperature of narratives, the subtle influence of narratives on opinions, the personal emotions, values, ideologies, and standpoint evaluations released by narratives, etc. The uniqueness of textual discourse is an important reliance on the cognitive influence of texts in cognitive domain operations. Making full use of the complexity of text, giving full play to the respective advantages of diverse texts, and giving full play to the implicit and explicit cognitive effects of text connotations have become the key to combating the cognitive domain of textual discourse. The most important thing is to innovate textual discourse, use newer words, more novel expressions, and more unique expressions to win over readers, so that readers can understand and subtly feel the ideas in the text, and accept them silently. Text ideas.
Potential of cultural models: To operate in the cognitive domain, we must have a deep understanding of the characteristics and models of different countries and national cultures. Different countries and different ethnic groups have different cultural models, and their philosophical thinking, traditional culture, religious beliefs, customs, and ways of thinking are all significantly different; citizens of different cultures also have different national psychology and national identity. The cognitive model should also have typical cognitive preferences belonging to the nation and culture, as well as corresponding shortcomings and weaknesses. Some people have obviously huge differences in understanding from other ethnic groups in the country, and even misunderstandings and hostility. Therefore, at the cultural level, cognitive domain operations are to grasp the overall cultural models of different countries, build cultural models of different groups in different countries, build different cognitive models of different countries on different things, and fully grasp the differences between a certain country and the The overall attitude and behavior on a series of things and issues, especially some typical cases, cultural taboos, religious requirements, spiritual pursuits, overall concepts, etc. It is necessary to make use of existing theories and findings to comprehensively construct the basic performance of different groups of people in the cognitive field on some typical, sensitive, and important issues, so as to provide important reference and guidance for the next step in cognitive operations. Strengthen the research and construction of the basic cultural characteristics and models of different enemy personnel, especially military personnel and personnel in key positions, including the opponent’s generals, officers, soldiers, etc., such as character psychological cognitive behavior and cultural model portraits , has become the core practice of cognitive domain operations. The cognitive analysis of ordinary people on the other side, especially ordinary citizens and citizens, as well as cognitive analysis of specific groups of people, including special non-governmental organization forces, is also of great value.
Cross-cultural strategic communication: Cognitive domain operations are international language communication and cultural communication, and need to follow the laws of international communication. It is necessary to grasp the basic paradigm of international communication, to skillfully combine domestic stories with international expressions, to skillfully combine the other country’s language and culture with the country’s stories and ideas; to be good at combining different art forms, including text, pictures, paintings, and music. (sound), video and other means or multi-modal means to realize the international dissemination of information. At the same time, we must coordinate multi-dimensional macro communication at the strategic level: we must use various means and rely on military-civilian integration to coordinate military-civilian communication; in addition to non-governmental organizations, we must especially rely on civilian forces, experts, opinion leaders, and ordinary people. The people come to help the military carry out cognitive domain operations; it is necessary to set topics in a unified manner, speak out from multiple points and multiple dimensions, form a strategic communication situation, form a good situation for emergency resolution of major operations, major issues, major crisis management and control, etc., and form a good atmosphere of public opinion , create positive effects, eliminate adverse effects or extinguish adverse effects. In particular, it is necessary to establish a capable team that is proficient in foreign languages, understands cross-cultural skills, understands the laws of international communication, and can speak skillfully on international multi-dimensional platforms. These personnel can usually conduct awareness, collection and discussion of a wide range of issues, establish personal relationships and fan groups with the help of ordinary or special issues; more importantly, at critical moments, through their fan groups, they can exert influence and complete strategic communication tasks. .
Currently, with the popularity of hybrid warfare, multi-domain warfare, and global warfare, cognitive domain warfare has become a common means of hybridization and hybridization. The process of cognitive domain warfare from unfamiliarity, emerging, development to strength, is also a reflection of traditional public opinion warfare, The advanced stage, complex stage and escalation stage of the development of psychological warfare and legal warfare. Its rise is more deceptive, vague, concealed, embedded, implantable and unobservable, especially considering its deep integration with contemporary emerging media, and its continuous learning and reference to integrate into multi-disciplinary, New ideas, new technologies, and new methods across disciplines and disciplines. As a result, cognitive domain operations have become a form of warfare that we must be highly vigilant and vigilant about.
(Liang Xiaobo, professor and doctoral supervisor at the College of Arts and Sciences, National University of Defense Technology)
[This article is a phased result of the National Social Science Fund’s major project “National Defense Language Capacity Building from the Perspective of National Defense and Military Reform”]
●Practice has proven that cognitive domain operations break the traditional online and offline data barriers. By integrating the use of telecommunications networks, the Internet, the Internet of Things and other channels, and with the help of advanced algorithms, the initiator can effectively switch between various spaces and optimize the combat style. , and even focus on private spaces and public spaces to accurately release interference information, thereby achieving effects that traditional combat methods cannot achieve.
●In future battles in the cognitive domain, the influence of rational factors such as science and logic on individual cognition is likely to be weakened, and cognitive confrontation may become a battle between emotion and emotion.
At present, the rapid development of intelligent technology is changing the logic of information dissemination in all aspects, making the impact of information on thinking and consciousness more profound and comprehensive, and human brain cognition has truly become an important field of military confrontation. In the era of intelligence, the continuous evolution of information dissemination mechanisms will systematically reshape cognitive confrontation from many aspects, thereby promoting fundamental changes in cognitive domain operations.
Artificial intelligence becomes the main driving force for cognitive domain operations
In the era of intelligence, information dissemination is based on data, and artificial intelligence technology runs through the entire process of information collection, production, and feedback. The extensive and in-depth application of artificial intelligence, a disruptive technology in the military field, will be a key support for the entire process of planning and implementation of future cognitive domain operations.
Artificial intelligence technology will run through multiple scenarios of future cognitive domain operations. In the process of deployment and rhythm control of combat operations in the cognitive domain, all parties involved in the war rely on advanced algorithms as the “regulators” and “gatekeepers” of the action. A large amount of information about battlefield operations from various combat domains provides the warring parties with Provide driving force for efficient decision-making and implementation of cognitive domain operations. Practice has proven that cognitive domain operations break the traditional online and offline data barriers. By integrating the use of telecommunications networks, the Internet, the Internet of Things and other channels, and with the help of advanced algorithms, the initiator can effectively switch between various spaces and optimize the combat style. It even focuses on private spaces and public spaces to accurately release interference information, thereby achieving effects that traditional combat methods cannot achieve.
In addition, artificial intelligence has evolved from empowering a single link to connecting all links and the entire process of combat. At present, artificial intelligence is still limited to locating target audiences in information dissemination to improve the matching rate between information and information sources. In future cognitive domain operations, artificial intelligence will play a “one-stop” role in the planning and implementation of cognitive domain operations, and will continue to strengthen the coupling between various links. Foreign militaries believe that in future operations in the cognitive domain, differentiated delivery of data can be used to activate robots to instantly create public opinion trends and influence cognitive effects. At the strategic and campaign level, based on long-term tracking data and continuously adjusted and optimized algorithm strategies, we can measure the cognitive status of different regions and groups, assist decision-makers in planning core narratives, major issues, etc., thereby regulating the implementation of actions and coordinated actions.
Autonomous confrontation has become a distinctive feature of cognitive domain operations
As intelligent programs move from collaborative and participatory dissemination to independent dissemination, and the connection ecology of intelligent terminals continues to expand, on the future battlefield, officers and soldiers will increasingly be able to receive various types of information sent by intelligent programs and intelligent terminals. In the virtual space, the interactive communication between digital twins and virtual people will affect people’s cognition in the real world. Judging from the development trend of cognitive domain operations under intelligent conditions, human intervention will gradually decrease, the collection, synthesis, and transmission of information ammunition will become more autonomous and efficient, and the formulation and execution of discourse strategies and action strategies will become more autonomous. The whole process is faster than ever. But in terms of results, people are still the ultimate target of cognitive domain operations, and the process accelerated by autonomous weapon empowerment will continue to strengthen the control of human cognition.
With the help of autonomous countermeasures tools such as intelligent programs, intelligent terminals, digital twins, and virtual humans, all parties involved in the war will have more flexibility in cognitive domain combat situation layout, time and space application, and information content design. Information authenticity confrontation will be more protrude. In future cognitive domain operations, autonomous weapons will likely break through the limitations of power and time and space, and their action patterns will become more complex. The practice of foreign military forces shows that using the Internet to carry out “sprinkler-type” communication for the general public and “drip-type” communication for specific groups will become a common pattern of cognitive domain operations. Smart programs and smart terminals can support the development of more and more complex behavior patterns due to their features such as batch copy deployment and non-intermittent operation. For example, you can focus on specific issues and target specific attack targets, quickly mobilize a large number of social robots, and take turns to spread information, or use smart devices around specific individuals to collect relevant data, and use conversational robots and virtual humans to interact with individuals for a long time and continue to induce them. achieve combat objectives.
In future cognitive domain operations, autonomous weapons covertly control the cognitive domain battlefield will become the norm. Social robots can create fake public opinions and fake hot spots as needed, thereby generating more individual perception fog; intelligent synthesis technology will lower the threshold for producing false information. This will increase the cost and difficulty of identifying counterfeiting; it will be more difficult to identify robot accounts and virtual human information sources, and “one-on-one” cognitive fraud will become increasingly common.
Emotional conflict becomes a prominent attribute of cognitive domain operations
In the era of intelligence, new technologies will broaden the scope of human cognition and deepen people’s perception. Technologies such as extended reality and the metaverse will present battlefield environments, event scenes, etc. more holographically and transparently, and the scenes will be touchable, perceptible, and interactive. The audience will be more subject to the influence of perceptual logic when recognizing the truth of events.
Thanks to the development of the mobile Internet, the speed of information dissemination has increased rapidly. The centralized release of large batches of information in a short period of time can greatly shorten the reaction time of individuals, making it difficult for individuals to think deeply. Before the full picture of the incident is fully revealed, the audience has often formed a stance or even turned their attention to a new focus. The mode of outputting conclusions based on fragmented clues intensifies irrational and emotional reactions to the information. In future battles in the cognitive domain, the influence of rational factors such as science and logic on individual cognition is likely to be weakened, and cognitive confrontation may become a battle between emotion and emotion. In the decision between appealing to reason and appealing to emotion, all parties involved in the war are paying more and more attention to moving people with emotion, using emotional means to stir up, occupy and even polarize the minds of the target objects, and dominate the confrontation situation in the cognitive domain.
In the era of intelligence, cognitive leveraging relies more and more on rational competition. On the one hand, emotional arousal strategies are used to enhance cognitive resonance. In future cognitive domain operations, action initiators will selectively present cruel and fierce battle scenes, post-war tragedies, or the casualties and current status of soldiers participating in the war to the audience, thereby strongly stimulating the audience’s emotions and awakening the audience’s innermost feelings. emotional identification. As a node in the communication network, people can collect various physical data through intelligent algorithms, allowing action initiators to more accurately judge the emotional effects of information, thereby dynamically adjusting content and strengthening emotional responses. Action initiators use data calculations to select groups with similar understanding contexts and the same emotional characteristics, or select specific individuals who are susceptible to influence and have greater influence value, and target and disseminate homogeneous information flows to stimulate them. Group cognitive resonance.
On the other hand, moral coercion strategies are used to stimulate value recognition. Faced with the accumulation of fragmented and irrational cognitive response patterns, combat action initiators can occupy the moral high ground through a binary oppositional discourse system, gather a torrent of self-interested value cognition, and then achieve a coercion effect. The rich presentation formats and social channels that directly reach the public in the intelligent communication environment provide convenient means for action initiators to use this strategy. In local wars in recent years, technological evolution has gradually promoted moral coercion strategies. For example, social media has exposed past secret diplomacy to the public. Leaders and politicians of warring parties have used this method to live broadcast or make the entire decision-making process public with other countries. The details of communication among political leaders, elite groups, etc., and the discourse strategies increasingly highlight moral arbitration and criticism, thereby influencing and stimulating the international public to support one’s own value position.
The Internet of Everything expands the battlefield space for cognitive domain operations
With the development of information communication technology, social media has gradually become the main battlefield for shaping cognition. Institutions, individuals and the public on all warring parties can directly contact and interact with each other through social media, making it possible to compete for cognition around the clock.
In the era of intelligent communication, the Internet of Everything has become a new social connection model, and communication subjects and communication behaviors are everywhere. Under this influence, the cognitive domain battle space will expand to smart IoT terminals and scenarios, and extend to both the physical space and the virtual space. The Internet of Everything has led to the ubiquity of the cognitive domain battle space, which will further promote the ubiquity of combat subjects. Natural people, intelligent terminals with information sending and receiving capabilities, and even virtual characters in the online world may become combat subjects, and cognitive domain operations will participate in the war. The types of forces will be greatly expanded, and the organization method of cognitive domain operations will shift towards distributed collaboration.
In future cognitive domain operations, humans and machines deep in the hinterland of conflicts will become important forces in combat. With the support of intelligent technology, they will collaborate to draw battlefield pictures and participate in “writing” the entire process of war. Frontline soldiers continuously share their personal battlefield experiences through social networks, then push them to the world in a timely manner after personalized packaging. Individual soldier equipment and combat platforms will be responsible for collecting and transmitting battlefield images, and trigger automatic processing and release mechanisms according to preset procedures. , cooperate with physical space combat operations in various ways to compete for information and brain control. With the continuous development of communication technology, frontline soldiers and intelligent equipment can also reprocess and reprocess the information they have in a targeted manner according to superior instructions, so as to more conveniently and panoramically present the battlefield scene that one wants to express. , to achieve the ultimate goal of cognitive domain operations to capture the mind and capture the will.
A brief analysis of cognitive domain combat styles in the era of intelligence
As modern warfare accelerates towards intelligence, the bottom physical domain, the middle information domain and the top cognitive domain are characterized by multi-domain linkage. Cognitive domain operations are gradually becoming the focus of the war arena. The main purpose of cognitive domain operations is to seize brain control and lay a solid foundation for seizing land, sea, air, space, and network power. Accurately grasping and fully utilizing the main modes of cognitive domain operations is an inevitable requirement to seize opportunities and gain the initiative in future wars.
1. Cognitive electronic warfare – the “tentacles” of cognitive warfare
Cognitive electronic warfare is the product of the combination of electronic warfare and artificial intelligence technology. It is the main combat style for fighting for electromagnetic control and is also a model of the integration of tactics and technology. The United States is the first country to carry out cognitive electronic warfare research. Its Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the Army, Navy and Air Force have carried out projects including adaptive radar countermeasures and adaptive electronic warfare behavioral learning. Implementing cognitive electronic warfare requires focusing on three aspects.
One is cognitive electronic reconnaissance. It mainly uses electronic means to quickly, accurately and comprehensively obtain battlefield data, promptly discover threat signals, identify target characteristic signals, establish and dynamically update signal databases, and provide necessary information for commanders to judge situations, make decisions, and evaluate effectiveness. support.
The second is cognitive electronic modeling. Mainly in view of the characteristics of various types, large power and large number of electromagnetic radiation sources in the battlefield and surrounding areas, the frequency, bandwidth, waveform characteristics, protection mode, arrival direction and other information of the radiation source are distinguished between dynamic and static categories, and a unified system is established. The information describes the model architecture, thereby providing the basis for electromagnetic perception.
The third is cognitive electronic interference. Mainly in view of the complex and diverse characteristics of battlefield electronic warfare equipment and strong anti-interference capabilities, it combines active interference with passive interference, suppression interference and deception interference, and flexibly implements adaptive interference pattern decision-making, adaptive interference waveform optimization and adaptive interference. Interference resource scheduling to ensure interference quality and efficiency.
2. Cognitive intelligence warfare—the “bloodline” of cognitive warfare
The International Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers once proposed the concept of “cognitive information science”; some domestic scholars define cognitive information science as the study of people’s cognitive structures, processes and characteristics in all aspects of information production and utilization from a psychological perspective field or discipline. The concept of “cognitive intelligence warfare” is proposed here, which is consistent with cognitive logic and the nature of intelligence, and can borrow concepts and principles from cognitive intelligence science. Depending on the motivation for obtaining and using intelligence, three strategies can be used to implement cognitive intelligence warfare.
The first is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on individual cognition. It mainly uses the cognition of combat subjects as an intermediary for intelligence coordination, adheres to battlefield user-driven rather than combat system-driven, and is based on “meaning construction theory” and “knowledge abnormality hypothesis” to improve the cognitive structure of intelligence service subjects and realize subject cognition. Positive interaction between knowledge and intelligence services.
The second is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on group cognition. It mainly focuses on the common cognitive structure formed by factors such as the battlefield environment and social background of the user group, and makes full use of advanced analysis methods such as situation analysis, domain analysis, and value analysis to strive to improve the pertinence and applicability of group intelligence services. sex.
The third is to obtain and utilize intelligence based on brain-body cognition. It mainly understands the cognitive structure and cognitive activities of the human brain as computing logic and computing activities, makes full use of machine intelligent cognition and intelligent computing capabilities, strives to improve the human-machine integration environment on the battlefield, and smoothes the information link from intelligence to cognition. Implement programmed and large-scale intelligence services.
3. Cognitive algorithm warfare—the “brain” of cognitive warfare
In 2017, the U.S. Department of Defense officially proposed “algorithmic warfare” for the first time in a memorandum and clearly established an “algorithmic warfare cross-functional team.” Algorithmic warfare, like cognitive warfare, runs through the entire process of all fields of warfare, embodying the core requirements of intelligent warfare. The concept of “cognitive algorithmic warfare” is proposed here based on the similarities and intrinsic connections between cognitive warfare and algorithmic warfare. It can be said that there is algorithm in cognition, and cognition in algorithm. There are three main paths to implement cognitive algorithmic warfare.
The first is to clarify the fog of war. Military theorist Clausewitz pointed out, “War is a field full of uncertainty, and three-quarters of the situations on which war is based are as if hidden in fog.” Cognitive algorithm warfare is to calculate deterministic factors in this uncertain field, clarify the fog of the battlefield as much as possible, accurately identify information “bombs”, and strictly prevent falling into information “traps”.
The second is to clear up the blind spots of intelligence. The source of inspiration for artificial intelligence often comes from biological intelligence, especially human intelligence. Artificial intelligence is inseparable from human intelligence. Cognitive algorithm warfare is to make full use of the latest achievements in cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience to promote the military application of artificial intelligence and improve the intelligence level of the cognitive domain.
The third is to accelerate human-machine integration. Although machine computing power can surpass human brain power, machine algorithms cannot surpass human “ideas” after all. Artificial intelligence and human intelligence each have their own advantages. Cognitive algorithm warfare is to closely integrate machine algorithms in the information domain with human “ideas” in the cognitive domain, and continuously improve the level of warfare in the physical domain.
4. Cognitive political warfare—the “soul” of cognitive warfare
Political war is the opposite of military war. Mao Zedong once vividly pointed out that “war is bloody politics” and “politics is bloodless war.” Since political warfare usually directly affects the cognitive domain, cognitive political warfare can be said to be the inherent meaning of political warfare and should not be understood as a new concept. There are three forms of cognitive political warfare in the era of intelligence.
One is psychological attack and defense. The main purpose is to use intelligent and precise means to “read the mind” and “control the mind” to improve the quality and effectiveness of psychological attack and defense. On the offensive side, we mainly use psychological propaganda, will disintegration, emotional influence, mental induction and other tactics; on the defensive side, we mainly adopt measures such as psychological education and training, psychological counseling and regulation, and psychological diagnosis and treatment.
The second is the competition for public opinion. The main purpose is to use new media and new technologies to enhance the popularity, flow and influence of public opinion propaganda. In terms of offense, the focus is on taking the lead, being the first to take advantage of the situation, concentrating on building momentum and forming a strong force, attacking key points, and making key breakthroughs; in terms of defense, the focus is on making the best use of the situation, combining prevention with counter-attacks, and seeking advantages and avoiding disadvantages.
The third is the legal struggle. The main thing is to participate in legislation, accurately interpret the law, actively protect the law, stand up for the law, be tit-for-tat, and get to the point. On the offensive side, we mainly use legal deterrence, legal strikes, legal restraints, legal sanctions and other tactics; on the defensive side, we mainly strengthen the research on international law, especially the law of war, and legal protection of law-related actions to prevent others from being manipulated.
China adopts a multifaceted approach in its engagement with Europe, leveraging all instruments of national power to further its interests in the region. Diplomatically, China employs bilateral and multilateral forums to build consensus, overcome barriers, and secure support for major initiatives like One Belt One Road (OBOR). In the information domain, China disseminates targeted messaging to shape positive perceptions and counter unfavorable narratives related to its activities in Europe. The military dimension involves selective cooperation and naval access arrangements to protect China’s growing overseas investments and assets. Economically, China wields its financial clout to fund major infrastructure projects, stimulate trade linkages, and employ incentives or coercion when advantageous. Additionally, China engages in political alignment, intelligence gathering, information control, and measured military cooperation to facilitate the expansion of its influence across the European landscape. By orchestrating a synchronized strategy across these domains, China strives to achieve its overarching objectives in Europe – expanding its economic and political influence, accessing advanced technologies, reshaping global governance, and cementing its role as a major global power on the world stage.
China’s increasing focus on Europe has necessitated a comprehensive and multifaceted approach by the United States military’s European Command (EUCOM) and NATO to counter Chinese influence. Through a range of strategic initiatives, these organizations aim to safeguard European security, protect national interests, and promote democratic values while mitigating the risks posed by China’s expanding presence. By strengthening economic cooperation, addressing military expansion, leveraging soft power and public diplomacy, building multinational partnerships, fostering cooperation with global powers, investing in critical infrastructure, and promoting regional security cooperation, EUCOM and NATO can effectively counter China’s influence in Europe.
China’s focus for the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative in relation to Europe can be summarized into several key aspects:
1. Infrastructure Development: The OBOR initiative aims to enhance connectivity and infrastructure development between China and Europe, with a focus on improving transportation networks, such as railways, ports, and roads. China seeks to build a comprehensive and efficient transportation network that will facilitate trade, investment, and people-to-people exchanges between the two regions.
2. Trade and Investment Promotion: China aims to deepen economic ties and promote trade and investment between China and Europe through the OBOR initiative. By improving infrastructure connectivity, reducing trade barriers, and enhancing market access, China envisions increased bilateral trade volumes and a boost in Chinese investment in Europe, as well as European investment in China.
3. Cultural Exchanges and People-to-People Ties: Alongside economic development, OBOR emphasizes fostering cultural exchanges, understanding, and people-to-people ties between China and Europe. China aims to strengthen cooperation in areas such as education, tourism, and cultural heritage preservation to promote mutual understanding and friendship among the peoples of the two regions.
4. Regional Cooperation and Diplomacy: OBOR represents a platform for regional cooperation and diplomatic engagement. China seeks to collaborate with European countries and institutions in areas such as policy coordination, connectivity planning, and project implementation. By fostering multilateral dialogue and cooperation, China intends to create an inclusive and cooperative framework for regional development.
It is important to note that the OBOR initiative is not solely focused on Europe and encompasses a broader vision, including Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Nonetheless, Europe plays a crucial role in OBOR due to its geostrategic importance, economic potential, and historical ties with China.
The Diplomatic, Information, Military, and Economic (DIME) philosophy is a conceptual framework used to analyze and understand the multifaceted elements of a nation’s power projection and influence. Applying the DIME philosophy to China’s efforts in the context of the One Belt One Road initiative focused on Europe.
One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative:
1. Diplomatic Dimension: China strategically employs diplomacy to reinforce OBOR’s objectives. Diplomatically, China engages in bilateral and multilateral dialogues with participating countries, promoting OBOR as a cooperative endeavor that facilitates mutual economic development, regional stability, and win-win outcomes. China seeks diplomatic support, cooperation, and consensus-building to overcome potential barriers to implementation, such as political disagreements, regulatory issues, or national security concerns.
2. Information Dimension: China recognizes the significance of managing information and narratives related to the OBOR initiative. It utilizes various channels, including media, public relations, and cultural exchanges, to disseminate positive messages about the benefits and progress of OBOR projects. China aims to shape perceptions, generate support, and counter any negative narratives that may emerge, ensuring that OBOR is viewed favorably and comprehensively understood by the international community.
3. Military Dimension: Although the primary focus of OBOR is economic and developmental in nature, the military dimension cannot be disregarded entirely. While China promotes a peaceful vision for OBOR, it acknowledges the need to safeguard its interests and protect its investments and infrastructure. China engages in military cooperation, primarily maritime security and anti-piracy efforts, to ensure the safety of critical sea routes and protect its overseas investments and personnel involved in OBOR-related projects.
4. Economic Dimension: The economic dimension is at the heart of the OBOR initiative. China leverages its economic might and financial resources to provide funding, loans, and investments in infrastructure projects along the OBOR routes. Through initiatives like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and Silk Road Fund, China facilitates economic cooperation and provides financial support to partner countries. This economic dimension is central to stimulating economic growth, reducing regional disparities, creating job opportunities, and enhancing trade linkages between China and participating nations.
In essence, the DIME philosophy helps to articulate how China employs each dimension – diplomatic, information, military, and economic – to further its OBOR goals. By utilizing a comprehensive approach across these domains, China seeks to maximize its impact, build partnerships, and address challenges that may arise during implementation.
Further analysis and expanded review and application of the DIME philosophy to China’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative:
5. Political Dimension: The political dimension is intertwined with the diplomatic efforts of China in promoting OBOR. China engages in political dialogue, negotiations, and diplomacy at various levels to secure support for the initiative. It seeks to align the interests and aspirations of participating countries with OBOR’s objectives, forging strategic partnerships and agreements that facilitate policy coordination and mutual benefits. China also employs economic incentives and aid packages to foster political alignment and gain influence in participating nations.
6. Information Warfare: In the information age, China recognizes the importance of information warfare as a means to shape narratives and control the flow of information related to OBOR. Through the use of social media, digital platforms, and state-controlled media outlets, China actively promotes positive stories and achievements associated with OBOR while countering unfavorable narratives. It also invests in soft power initiatives, including cultural exchanges, media cooperation, and academic partnerships, to shape perceptions and gain support for OBOR.
7. Intelligence Gathering: Intelligence plays a crucial role in implementing large-scale infrastructure projects, evaluating risks, and ensuring successful outcomes. China engages in intelligence gathering activities to assess the political, economic, and security landscape of participating countries. It analyzes potential obstacles, identifies investment opportunities, and addresses potential threats to its projects and interests along the OBOR routes. This intelligence informs decision-making, risk management, and mitigation strategies.
8. Military Cooperation and Presence: While the primary focus of OBOR is economic cooperation, China recognizes the importance of military cooperation and presence for certain aspects. China engages in military exercises, joint trainings, and exchanges with partner countries to enhance security cooperation, build trust, and safeguard its maritime interests. It also strategically establishes naval bases or access arrangements along critical sea routes as part of its broader security framework. This military dimension contributes to stability, protects China’s investments, and addresses potential security challenges to OBOR projects.
9. Economic Warfare: China’s economic dimension goes beyond funding infrastructure projects. It employs economic leverage, market access, and economic incentives to advance its OBOR agenda. China can utilize economic coercion or inducements to influence the decision-making of participating countries and create dependencies. It strategically offers trade opportunities, investments, and economic cooperation to strengthen relationships, promote integration, and expand Chinese influence in the region.
By considering these additional dimensions within the DIME philosophy, we can better understand how China applies a comprehensive approach to OBOR, incorporating political, information, intelligence, military, and economic tools to achieve its strategic objectives. The continuous assessment and adaptation across these dimensions allow China to navigate challenges, seize opportunities, and exert influence throughout the implementation of OBOR.
The following table illustrates China’s multidimensional application of the DIME framework, including additional elements like information warfare, intelligence and military cooperation, to further the strategic goals and objectives of its OBOR initiative across diplomatic, information, military and economic dimensions.
The following comprehensive table illustrates China’s application of the DIME framework to its One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative:
Dimension
Key Strategies and Objectives
Diplomatic
Bilateral and multilateral engagement; Consensus building; Overcoming barriers
Further analysis and application f the DIME philosophy to the United States European Command (EUCOM) to counter China’s influence:
1. Diplomatic Dimension: The diplomatic dimension of EUCOM involves engaging with European nations through bilateral and multilateral channels to foster cooperation, build alliances, and promote shared security interests. EUCOM conducts diplomatic negotiations, strategic dialogues, and military-to-military engagements to strengthen partnerships, address regional challenges, and enhance collective defense capabilities. It aims to solidify alliances, facilitate interoperability, and foster collaboration through diplomatic initiatives and agreements.
2. Information Dimension: The information dimension is critical for EUCOM in shaping perceptions, countering misinformation, and maintaining a strategic narrative. EUCOM employs various communication strategies and media platforms to disseminate accurate and timely information about its activities, exercises, and missions in Europe. It also engages in public diplomacy to foster understanding, build trust, and counteract potential negative narratives or propaganda that may undermine U.S. interests or objectives in the region.
3. Military Dimension: The military dimension of EUCOM involves the deployment and readiness of military forces to defend U.S. and NATO interests in Europe. EUCOM maintains a robust military presence, conducts joint exercises, and provides deterrence against potential threats. It collaborates closely with NATO allies and partners to ensure collective defense and security cooperation. The military dimension also encompasses crisis response, contingency planning, and the ability to rapidly deploy forces when necessary.
4. Economic Dimension: While primarily a diplomatic and military command, the economic dimension of EUCOM is significant. Economic considerations can play a role in strengthening alliances and partnerships within Europe. EUCOM supports economic initiatives that promote stability and prosperity, encouraging increased trade, investment, and economic integration among European nations. Economic cooperation enhances regional resilience, contributes to security, and fosters long-term stability.
5. Intelligence Dimension: Intelligence is a crucial element for EUCOM’s situational awareness, threat assessment, and decision-making. EUCOM collects, analyzes, and disseminates intelligence to understand the shifting security dynamics, anticipate emerging threats, and develop effective strategies. Intelligence helps identify potential challenges, vulnerabilities, and opportunities in the European theater, informing EUCOM’s military planning, operational activities, and policy recommendations.
6. Political Dimension: The political dimension is inherent in EUCOM’s engagement with European nations, NATO, and other relevant political actors. EUCOM works closely with U.S. diplomatic representatives and policy-makers to align military objectives with broader political goals. Political engagements range from high-level strategic dialogues to local-level engagements with host nation governments or regional political entities. EUCOM’s political dimension seeks to influence decision-making, enhance cooperation, and build consensus around common security objectives.
By considering these dimensions within the DIME framework, it becomes clear that EUCOM employs a comprehensive approach to ensure regional security, enhance partnerships, and project U.S. influence in Europe. The integration of diplomatic, information, military, economic, intelligence, and political elements allows EUCOM to address multifaceted challenges, build coalitions, and support the strategic interests of the United States and its European allies.
The following table summarizes EUCOM’s application of the DIME framework across the diplomatic, information, military, economic, intelligence, and political dimensions to counter China’s influence in Europe, along with the key elements within each dimension.
Dimension
EUCOM’s Application
Key Elements
Diplomatic
Engagement through bilateral and multilateral channels
Solidify alliances and partnerships; Foster cooperation; Facilitate interoperability
Collection, analysis and dissemination of intelligence
Inform decision-making; Identify threats and vulnerabilities
Political
Alignment with diplomatic and policy objectives
Influence decision-making; Build consensus; Achieve political goals
China’s Influence and Counter-Offensive Strategy in Europe apply the DIME philosophy to NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and the United States European Command (EUCOM) in the European theater:
NATO:
1. Diplomatic Dimension: Diplomacy is at the core of NATO’s operations. The diplomatic dimension involves robust engagement and dialogue among member nations and partner countries to ensure solidarity and consensus on key issues. NATO conducts diplomatic efforts to strengthen alliances, build partnerships, and facilitate cooperation with non-NATO actors. It aims to promote shared values, address regional challenges, and forge common approaches to security.
2. Information Dimension: The information dimension plays a vital role in shaping narratives, countering misinformation, and maintaining public support for NATO’s mission. Through strategic communications, NATO disseminates accurate information about its activities, operations, and collective defense efforts. It engages in public diplomacy to foster understanding, build trust, and counter potential disinformation campaigns that may undermine NATO’s objectives or erode public support.
3. Military Dimension: The military dimension of NATO involves the collective defense and deterrence of its member states. NATO maintains a credible military presence, conducts joint exercises, and ensures interoperability among its forces. It coordinates defense planning, crisis response, and contributes to stability in the Euro-Atlantic region. The military dimension also encompasses the NATO-led missions, such as peacekeeping and counterterrorism, which contribute to regional security.
4. Economic Dimension: The economic dimension in NATO revolves around the economic capabilities and contributions of member nations. NATO encourages defense spending and defense industry cooperation among members to ensure the development and maintenance of effective military capabilities. Economic aspects also involve strengthening resilience against hybrid threats, including cyber and economic vulnerabilities. Economic cooperation ensures the sustainability and effectiveness of NATO’s military endeavors.
EUCOM:
1. Diplomatic Dimension: EUCOM’s diplomatic dimension involves engaging with European nations through strategic dialogues, military-to-military engagements, and diplomatic negotiations. It fosters cooperation, builds partnerships, and ensures synchronized efforts with European allies. EUCOM promotes mutual trust, understanding, and consensus on key security matters, facilitating the alignment of military objectives with broader diplomatic goals in Europe.
2. Information Dimension: The information dimension within EUCOM aims at shaping perceptions, countering misinformation, and maintaining a strategic narrative. EUCOM employs various communication strategies, media platforms, and public diplomacy initiatives to ensure accurate and timely information about its activities. It enhances transparency, builds public support, and counters potential negative narratives that might undermine U.S.-European partnerships or military operations.
3. Military Dimension: As a combatant command, the military dimension of EUCOM focuses on the readiness and posture of U.S. military forces deployed in Europe. EUCOM maintains a robust military presence, conducts joint exercises, and provides deterrence against potential threats. It collaborates closely with NATO allies and partner nations to ensure collective defense and security cooperation. The military dimension also encompasses crisis response, contingency planning, and rapid deployment capabilities.
4. Economic Dimension: Though primarily a military command, the economic dimension of EUCOM recognizes the significance of economic factors for regional stability. EUCOM supports economic initiatives that promote stability, trade, investment, and economic integration among European nations. By encouraging economic cooperation, EUCOM enhances regional resilience, contributes to security, and fosters long-term stability.
5. Intelligence Dimension: Intelligence is instrumental in supporting EUCOM’s situational awareness, threat assessment, and operational planning. EUCOM collects, analyzes, and disseminates intelligence to understand the evolving security environment in Europe. Intelligence supports decision-making, ensures effective risk management, and enables timely responses to emerging challenges and potential threats.
6. Political Dimension: The political dimension of EUCOM involves close coordination with U.S. diplomatic representatives and policymakers. EUCOM aligns military objectives with broader political goals, participates in strategic dialogues, and engages with European governments and political entities. This political dimension helps shape decision-making, enhance cooperation, and build consensus on key security issues.
By applying the DIME framework to NATO and EUCOM, we can observe how these entities utilize a comprehensive approach, incorporating diplomatic, information, military, economic, intelligence, and political tools to ensure regional security, enhance partnerships, and project influence in Europe. This holistic perspective strengthens collective defense, supports efficient decision-making, and fosters cooperation among member nations and partner countries.
Here are three developed courses of action that can be considered using the DIME philosophy within NATO and EUCOM to counter China’s influence:
Course of Action 1: Enhancing Cyber Defense Capabilities
Diplomatic Dimension: Strengthen diplomatic ties and engage in information sharing on cyber threats among NATO member nations and partner countries. Foster dialogue on norms of behavior in cyberspace and establish joint initiatives to counter cyber threats collectively.
Information Dimension: Develop a comprehensive cybersecurity communication strategy to raise awareness among the public about cyber threats and promote responsible behavior. Disseminate accurate information about cyber incidents and counter potential misinformation campaigns by engaging with the media and employing digital platforms.
Military Dimension: Prioritize the allocation of resources towards cyber defense capabilities, including robust cyber training, exercises, and joint operations among NATO allies. Focus on enhancing cyber resilience and improving interoperability to allow for effective information sharing and coordinated responses in the event of a cyber attack.
Economic Dimension: Encourage investment in research and development of cybersecurity technologies, promote public-private partnerships, and establish cyber protection agreements with defense industries. Foster economic cooperation to improve the collective resilience of NATO members against cyber threats.
Course of Action 2: Counteracting Disinformation Campaigns
Diplomatic Dimension: Strengthen coordination and information-sharing mechanisms with partner countries to exchange best practices in countering disinformation campaigns. Establish joint task forces, workshops, and training programs to enhance media literacy and critical thinking skills.
Information Dimension: Develop a proactive and agile strategic communication approach to counter disinformation campaigns. Establish dedicated communication channels to promptly respond to false narratives, challenge disinformation, and provide accurate information. Collaborate with social media platforms to identify and mitigate the spread of disinformation.
Military Dimension: Leverage the strengths of military strategic communication units to counter disinformation campaigns. Utilize military channels to disseminate accurate news, engage with local communities, and build trust. Conduct joint information operations exercises with NATO allies to enhance coordination and effectiveness.
Political Dimension: Work closely with political leaders, policymakers, and civil society organizations to develop policies that address the impact of disinformation and strengthen media resilience. Promote information transparency and accountability among political entities, fostering public trust in democratic processes.
Course of Action 3: Strengthening Defense Resilience against Hybrid Threats
Diplomatic Dimension: Foster international partnerships to enhance information sharing and cooperation in countering hybrid threats. Strengthen diplomatic ties to establish mechanisms for swift responses and joint operations when faced with hybrid challenges.
Information Dimension: Develop a comprehensive strategy to raise public awareness about hybrid threats, their tactics, and potential consequences. Establish public-private partnerships to combat disinformation and promote media literacy initiatives to increase resilience against manipulation.
Military Dimension: Improve cooperation and coordination among NATO member nations’ military forces to rapidly respond to hybrid threats. Focus on training and joint exercises to enhance interoperability and develop the capability to counter hybrid tactics effectively.
Economic Dimension: Encourage investment in critical infrastructure protection, including measures to defend against cyber attacks and secure supply chains. Foster economic resilience by diversifying energy sources and reducing dependencies on single suppliers to mitigate potential economic coercion.
These courses of action demonstrate how the DIME philosophy can be applied to address specific challenges while considering the diplomatic, information, military, economic, intelligence, and political dimensions. By adopting a holistic approach, NATO and EUCOM can effectively respond to evolving security threats, ensure regional stability, and strengthen partnerships in the European theater.
The following table highlights key points from each course of action are summarized concisely under the relevant DIME dimensions. The use of bullet points helps illustrate the main action points.
Course of Action 1: Enhancing Cyber Defense
Course of Action 2: Countering Disinformation
Course of Action 3: Defense against Hybrid Threats
Diplomatic
Strengthen ties and info sharing on cyber threats Establish norms of behavior in cyberspace
Coordination and info sharing mechanisms Joint task forces and training programs
Foster international partnerships Mechanisms for joint operations
Information
Cybersecurity communication strategy Counter misinformation
Strategic communication approach Collaborate with social media
Public awareness strategy Media literacy initiatives
Military
Prioritize cyber capabilities Exercises and joint operations
Leverage military comms expertise Information operations training
Further analysis considering each course of action, expanding and elaborating on the application of the DIME philosophy within NATO and EUCOM:
Course of Action 1: Enhancing Cyber Defense Capabilities
Diplomatic Dimension: Strengthening diplomatic ties and engaging in information sharing is crucial to combat cyber threats. NATO and EUCOM can facilitate regular forums, workshops, and conferences for member nations and partner countries to exchange best practices, insights, and threat intelligence. This includes enhancing coordination among diplomatic channels to develop joint initiatives and agreements on cybersecurity norms, deterrence, and response mechanisms.
Information Dimension: Developing a comprehensive cybersecurity communication strategy is vital. NATO and EUCOM can establish dedicated cybersecurity communication units to disseminate accurate information, raise awareness of cyber threats, and promote responsible behavior in cyberspace. This includes engaging with media outlets, social media platforms, and educational institutions to counter disinformation and improve public understanding of cybersecurity issues.
Military Dimension: Prioritizing the allocation of resources towards cyber defense capabilities is crucial. NATO and EUCOM can conduct regular joint exercises and training programs to enhance cyber skills and ensure interoperability among member nations’ military forces. This includes developing shared cyber response plans, conducting threat simulations, and fostering cooperation between military and civilian cybersecurity entities.
Economic Dimension: Encouraging investment in research and development of cybersecurity technologies is essential. NATO and EUCOM can collaborate with defense industries, academia, and private sector partners to advance cybersecurity capabilities, exchange expertise, and support innovation in this field. Additionally, member nations can work together to establish cyber protection agreements and promote economic cooperation to strengthen collective cyber resilience.
Course of Action 2: Counteracting Disinformation Campaigns
Diplomatic Dimension: Strengthening coordination and information-sharing mechanisms is key. NATO and EUCOM can establish dedicated working groups and task forces that involve both member nations and partner countries. These forums would facilitate sharing best practices, early warning systems, and intelligence on disinformation campaigns. Joint initiatives should focus on building resilience, countering propaganda, and enhancing collaboration among governments, non-governmental organizations, and international bodies.
Information Dimension: Developing a proactive and agile strategic communication approach is crucial to counter disinformation. NATO and EUCOM can establish specialized communication cells that monitor and analyze disinformation trends, identify false narratives, and promptly respond with accurate information. They should work closely with social media platforms to detect and mitigate the spread of disinformation, ensuring transparent algorithms and policies.
Military Dimension: Leveraging the strengths of military strategic communication units is invaluable. NATO and EUCOM can integrate their expertise into broader information campaigns aimed at countering disinformation. Military communication channels can be utilized to disseminate accurate news, engage with local communities, and build trust. Joint exercises and information operations training with NATO allies would enhance coordination and effectiveness in countering disinformation campaigns.
Political Dimension: Collaboration with political leaders, policymakers, and civil society organizations is essential for effective response to disinformation campaigns. NATO and EUCOM should engage with these stakeholders to develop policies that address disinformation challenges, strengthen media resilience, and ensure transparency in political processes. Partnerships with civil society groups, independent media, and fact-checking organizations can foster public trust, accountability, and responsible media practices.
Course of Action 3: Strengthening Defense Resilience against Hybrid Threats
Diplomatic Dimension: Strengthening cooperation among NATO and partner nations is crucial in countering hybrid threats. Regular dialogue, joint exercises, and information-sharing mechanisms can be established to exchange insights, intelligence, and best practices. NATO and EUCOM should actively engage in diplomatic efforts to develop joint strategies, share lessons learned, and strengthen global partnerships to tackle hybrid challenges collectively.
Information Dimension: Developing a comprehensive strategy to raise public awareness about hybrid threats is essential. NATO and EUCOM can leverage their communication channels to provide accurate information, highlight potential risks, and educate the public on the nature and tactics of hybrid warfare. Engaging social media platforms and partnering with media outlets to promote media literacy initiatives would enhance public resilience against manipulation.
Military Dimension: Improved cooperation and coordination among member nations’ military forces is vital in countering hybrid threats. NATO and EUCOM should organize joint exercises, simulations, and training programs that focus on countering hybrid tactics effectively. This includes enhancing interoperability, developing rapid response capabilities, and conducting joint assessments of vulnerabilities in critical infrastructure.
Economic Dimension: Economic resilience plays a crucial role in countering hybrid threats. NATO and EUCOM should encourage member nations to invest in critical infrastructure protection measures, such as securing energy supplies, diversifying energy sources, and safeguarding supply chains. Promoting economic cooperation and reducing dependencies on single suppliers would mitigate potential economic coercion and vulnerabilities.
Intelligence Dimension: Strengthening intelligence capabilities is essential to gain situational awareness, assess threats, and support effective response to hybrid challenges. NATO and EUCOM can enhance intelligence sharing and fusion among member nations’ intelligence agencies. This includes developing joint intelligence assessments, establishing early warning systems, and bolstering collaboration between military and civilian intelligence organizations.
Political Dimension: Collaboration with political leaders and policymakers is crucial to develop policies that address the impact of hybrid threats. NATO and EUCOM should engage in regular strategic dialogues and consultations with political entities to align military objectives with broader political goals. By fostering political awareness, ensuring coordination, and promoting transparency, NATO and EUCOM can effectively respond to hybrid threats.
By further expanding and elaborating on these courses of action, NATO and EUCOM can develop comprehensive strategies that encompass the diplomatic, information, military, economic, intelligence, and political dimensions. These actions will enhance their capabilities to address specific challenges, mitigate risks, and promote stability in the European theater.
The following The table summarizes the key points along the DIME+I+P dimensions for each of the three courses of action – enhancing cyber capabilities, countering disinformation campaigns, and building defense against hybrid threats.
Course of Action
Diplomatic
Information
Military
Economic
Intelligence
Political
Enhancing Cyber Defense Capabilities
Strengthen ties for info sharing; Joint cyber initiatives
Cybersecurity communication strategy; Counter disinformation
Joint cyber exercises; Interoperability
R&D investments; Economic cooperation
Countering Disinformation Campaigns
Coordination through working groups; Early warning systems
Strategic communication cells; Social media partnerships
Integrate military comms expertise
Collaboration on policies and transparency
Strengthening Defense against Hybrid Threats
Cooperation for joint strategies; Global partnerships
Applying the diplomatic, information/intelligence and economic philosophy to China’s challenges in Europe. When applying the DIME philosophy to analyze the challenges China faces, we can focus on the following dimensions: Diplomatic, Information, Military, and Economic.
Diplomatic Challenges:
1. Competition for Influence: China faces diplomatic challenges in managing its relationships with other major powers and regional actors. Balancing its influence against that of the United States, Japan, and regional rivals like India and Vietnam requires careful diplomacy and economic engagement.
2. Disputed Territorial Claims: China’s territorial disputes, particularly in the South China Sea and East China Sea, pose significant diplomatic challenges. Resolving these disputes while maintaining regional stability and avoiding conflicts is crucial for China’s diplomatic strategies.
3. Tensions with Neighboring Countries: China’s assertive actions, such as its border disputes with India and historical rivalries with countries like Japan and South Korea create challenges in maintaining stable diplomatic relations. Addressing these tensions while promoting cooperation is essential for China’s diplomatic efforts.
Information Challenges:
1. Information Control: China faces challenges in controlling and managing information flows within its borders, especially with the increasing influence of social media platforms. Maintaining strict censorship and managing narratives to maintain domestic stability while engaging with the global community can be a delicate balancing act.
2. Disinformation and Perception Management: China faces scrutiny regarding its state-sponsored disinformation campaigns and efforts to shape global perceptions. Countering negative narratives and addressing concerns about human rights, intellectual property, and technological advancements is a significant information challenge.
3. Media Influence: China’s state-controlled media outlets, such as Xinhua and CGTN, encounter challenges in presenting a positive image abroad while facing accusations of biased reporting and lack of press freedom. Navigating global media landscapes and countering negative perceptions is a critical information challenge for China.
Military Challenges:
1. Regional Security Dynamics: As China’s military capabilities expand, it faces challenges with regard to regional perceptions. Neighboring countries and global powers like the United States are cautious about China’s military modernization and assertiveness, creating challenges in maintaining a stable military balance and managing regional tensions.
2. Technological Advancements: China faces challenges in developing cutting-edge military technologies, such as artificial intelligence, cyber capabilities, and advanced weaponry. Addressing the gap between indigenous innovation and reliance on foreign technologies is crucial for China’s military modernization efforts.
3. Naval Power Projection: China’s desire to expand its maritime influence presents challenges in developing a blue-water navy capable of power projection beyond its immediate maritime borders. Overcoming technological constraints, enhancing logistical capabilities, and countering regional concerns are significant military challenges.
Economic Challenges:
1. Economic Structural Reforms: China faces the challenge of transitioning from an export-led economic model to one driven by domestic consumption, innovation, and a more sustainable growth trajectory. Rebalancing the economy while managing financial risks, addressing inequality, and reducing overcapacity requires careful economic management.
2. Trade Tensions: China confronts challenges associated with its trade disputes with major economies, particularly the United States. Navigating protectionist measures, supporting global trade rules, and striking a balance between economic growth and geopolitical influence pose significant economic challenges.
3. Resource and Energy Security: China’s rapidly growing economy faces challenges related to resource scarcity and energy security. As the largest energy consumer globally, ensuring a stable supply of resources while diversifying energy mix and promoting sustainable practices are essential for China’s economic resilience.
By addressing these challenges across the diplomatic, information, military, and economic dimensions, China can navigate its geopolitical landscape more effectively and shape its strategies accordingly. It requires careful management of relationships, enhancement of information capabilities, modernization of the military, and sustainable economic reforms to address these challenges successfully.
The following table summarizes the key challenges outlined across the diplomatic, information, military, and economic dimensions that China faces:
Dimension
Challenge
Details
Diplomatic
Competition for influence
Balancing relationships with US, Japan, India, Vietnam
Territorial disputes
Resolving South China Sea, East China Sea issues
Tensions with neighboring countries
Border disputes with India; Historical rivalries with Japan, South Korea
Information
Information control
Censorship, narrative management, balancing openness and stability
Disinformation and perception
Countering negative campaigns, managing global image
Media influence
Promoting state media amid press freedom concerns
Military
Regional security dynamics
Cautiousness about China’s military growth and assertiveness
Technological advancements
Gaps in developing advanced defense tech like AI and cyber
Naval power projection
Building blue-water navy; Logistical and tech constraints
Economic
Structural reforms
Shifting export model; Managing risks and inequality
Trade tensions
Navigating disputes with US; Supporting trade rules
Resource and energy security
Ensuring supply while diversifying sources
Further analysis expanded of the challenges China faces by applying the DIME philosophy:
Diplomatic Challenges:
1. Competition for Influence: As China’s economic and political power grows, it faces diplomatic challenges in managing its relationships with other major powers and regional actors. Balancing its influence against that of the United States, Japan, and regional rivals like India and Vietnam requires nuanced diplomacy and strategic engagement to expand its sphere of influence without triggering backlash or conflicts.
2. Disputed Territorial Claims: China’s territorial disputes, particularly in the South China Sea and East China Sea, pose significant diplomatic challenges. Resolving these disputes while maintaining regional stability and peaceful coexistence is crucial for China’s diplomatic strategies. It requires skillful negotiation, confidence-building measures, and adherence to international law to mitigate tensions and foster a cooperative environment.
3. Tensions with Neighboring Countries: China’s assertive actions, such as its border disputes with India and historical rivalries with countries like Japan and South Korea, create challenges in maintaining stable diplomatic relations. Addressing historical grievances, defusing tensions through dialogue, and fostering mutual trust and understanding are essential for maintaining peace and stability in the region.
Information Challenges:
1. Information Control: China faces challenges in controlling and managing information flows within its borders, given the increasing influence of the internet and social media platforms. Maintaining strict censorship and managing narratives to maintain domestic stability while engaging with the global community can be a delicate balancing act. China needs to explore strategies that allow for greater transparency and open communication while addressing concerns related to cybersecurity and maintaining social stability.
2. Disinformation and Perception Management: China faces scrutiny regarding its state-sponsored disinformation campaigns and efforts to shape global perceptions. Countering negative narratives and addressing concerns about human rights, intellectual property, and technological advancements is a significant information challenge. China must foster greater transparency, engage in constructive dialogue, and share accurate information to shape a more favorable global perception.
3. Media Influence: China’s state-controlled media outlets, such as Xinhua and CGTN, encounter challenges in presenting a positive image abroad while facing accusations of biased reporting and lack of press freedom. Navigating global media landscapes, building media partnerships, and fostering independent journalism can help China overcome these challenges. Enhancing the international presence of Chinese media outlets and promoting cultural exchange can also help improve China’s global media influence.
Military Challenges:
1. Regional Security Dynamics: As China’s military capabilities expand, it faces challenges with regard to regional perceptions and potential rivalries. Neighboring countries and global powers like the United States are cautious about China’s military modernization and assertiveness, creating challenges in maintaining a stable military balance and managing regional tensions. China needs to emphasize transparency, confidence-building measures, and dialogue to address concerns and foster trust among regional stakeholders.
2. Technological Advancements: China faces challenges in developing cutting-edge military technologies, such as artificial intelligence, cyber capabilities, and advanced weaponry. Addressing the gap between indigenous innovation and reliance on foreign technologies is crucial for China’s military modernization efforts. Encouraging research and development, fostering collaborations with global partners, and investing in education and training can help China overcome these challenges and achieve technological self-reliance.
3. Naval Power Projection: China’s desire to expand its maritime influence presents challenges in developing a blue-water navy capable of power projection beyond its immediate maritime borders. Overcoming technological constraints, enhancing logistical capabilities, and countering regional concerns are significant military challenges. Improving naval capabilities, developing overseas military bases, and ensuring maritime security collaboration with other nations are crucial for China to establish itself as a regional maritime power.
Economic Challenges:
1. Economic Structural Reforms: China faces the challenge of transitioning from an export-led economic model to one driven by domestic consumption, innovation, and a more sustainable growth trajectory. Rebalancing the economy while managing financial risks, addressing inequality, reducing overcapacity, and promoting environmental sustainability require comprehensive economic structural reforms. This involves liberalizing key sectors, fostering innovation and entrepreneurship, and strengthening social safety nets to ensure inclusive and sustainable growth.
2. Trade Tensions: China confronts challenges associated with its trade disputes with major economies, particularly the United States. Navigating protectionist measures, supporting global trade rules, and striking a balance between economic growth and geopolitical influence pose significant economic challenges. China must emphasize fair trade practices, increase market access opportunities, and strengthen multilateral trade mechanisms to resolve disputes and maintain global economic stability.
3. Resource and Energy Security: China’s rapidly growing economy faces challenges related to resource scarcity and energy security. As the world’s largest energy consumer, ensuring a stable supply of resources while diversifying the energy mix, reducing dependence on fossil fuels, and promoting sustainable practices are essential for China’s economic resilience. Investing in renewable energy infrastructure, promoting energy efficiency, and international cooperation in resource management can help China address these challenges effectively.
In summary, China’s application of the DIME philosophy reveals a range of challenges including diplomatic competitions, information control and influence, military modernization and projection, as well as economic transformations and trade tensions. Navigating these challenges requires strategic diplomacy, transparent information practices, responsible military growth, and comprehensive economic reforms. By addressing these challenges effectively, China can enhance its global standing and contribute to regional stability and prosperity.
The following table illustrates the key challenges faced by China in the realms of diplomacy, information, military, and economics.
Area
Main Challenges
Additional Details
Diplomatic
Managing relationships with major powers, territorial disputes, tensions with neighboring countries
Balancing influence against US, Japan, India etc.; Resolving South China Sea disputes; Border tensions with India; Historical rivalries with Japan and South Korea
Information
Controlling information flows, countering disinformation campaigns, expanding state-controlled media influence
Censorship and narrative control; Perception management and transparency issues; Building global presence of state media
Military
Perceptions of regional security threat, gaps in technological capabilities, projecting naval power
Regional arms race and mistrust issues; Gaps in AI, cybernetics, weapons tech; Developing blue-water navy and overseas bases
Economic
Rebalancing economic structure, trade tensions with major economies, energy security concerns
Shifting from export model; US trade war; Resource scarcity and fossil fuel dependence
United States and European allied nations should consider China’s challenges in the context of Project 863 and Project 972:
Project 863:
1. Technological Innovation: One of the key challenges for China’s Project 863, a high-technology development plan initiated in the 1980s, is achieving indigenous innovation. While China has made significant progress in areas such as telecommunications, space exploration, and biotechnology, it still faces challenges in developing cutting-edge technologies that can compete with global leaders. Overcoming technological bottlenecks, fostering an environment of innovation and entrepreneurship, and attracting top talent in scientific research and development are crucial for China to enhance its technological capabilities through Project 863.
2. Intellectual Property Rights: China faces challenges related to protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights (IPR) within the framework of Project 863. Addressing concerns about intellectual property theft, patent infringement, and trade secret violations is vital for attracting foreign direct investment, promoting collaborations with international partners, and ensuring a fair playing field for innovation. Enhancing IPR laws, strengthening enforcement mechanisms, and encouraging a culture of respect for intellectual property are essential steps for China to overcome these challenges.
3. Collaboration and Integration: China’s Project 863 strives to promote collaboration and integration between academia, industry, and government research institutions to drive technological advancements. However, achieving seamless coordination and fostering effective knowledge transfer among these sectors remains a challenge. Encouraging partnerships, providing funding incentives, streamlining bureaucratic processes, and creating platforms for open collaboration can help address these challenges, fostering a more integrated and efficient innovation ecosystem.
Project 972:
1. Food Security: China’s Project 972, an agricultural development project initiated in the late 1990s, faces challenges in ensuring food security for its massive population. With increasing urbanization, limited arable land, water scarcity, and environmental concerns, achieving self-sufficiency in food production is a significant challenge. Implementing sustainable agricultural practices, improving irrigation infrastructure, enhancing agricultural research and development, and promoting efficient resource allocation are crucial for China’s food security goals under Project 972.
2. Environmental Sustainability: Project 972 faces challenges in addressing environmental sustainability issues, particularly in the context of agricultural practices. Greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution, deforestation, and soil degradation pose significant environmental challenges that need to be tackled. Transitioning towards sustainable farming practices, promoting organic agriculture, implementing effective waste management systems, and investing in renewable energy sources are necessary steps for China to mitigate environmental impacts associated with agricultural development.
3. Rural-Urban Income Gap: Implementing Project 972 has the objective of bridging the income gap between rural and urban areas, promoting rural development, and raising living standards. However, China faces challenges in achieving equitable economic growth and opportunities across regions. Addressing disparities in infrastructure, access to education, healthcare, and social services between rural and urban areas, as well as promoting rural job creation and income generation, are essential for reducing the income gap and ensuring the success of Project 972 in promoting inclusive development.
In summary, China faces a range of challenges within the frameworks of Project 863 and Project 972. These challenges include achieving technological innovation and indigenous research capabilities, protecting intellectual property rights, fostering collaboration and integration, ensuring food security and environmental sustainability in agriculture, and bridging the income gap between rural and urban areas. By addressing these challenges effectively, China can enhance its technological capabilities, promote sustainable agricultural practices, and achieve more balanced regional development, contributing to its long-term economic growth and societal well-being.
To successfully apply the plans of Project 863 and Project 972 in conjunction with the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative in Europe, China can focus on the following strategies:
1. Technology and Innovation Exchange: China can leverage the technological advancements achieved through Project 863 to promote knowledge exchange, collaboration, and technology transfer with European countries. By fostering partnerships between Chinese and European research institutions, facilitating joint research projects, and providing incentives for technological cooperation, China can enhance its technological capabilities while benefiting from European expertise in areas such as advanced manufacturing, clean energy, and digital technologies.
2. Intellectual Property Protection and Collaboration: China can address concerns regarding intellectual property rights (IPR) by strengthening its legal framework and enforcement mechanisms. By cooperating with European countries to improve IPR protection, establishing bilateral agreements, and promoting transparency in technology transfer, China can build trust and attract European investments and partnerships under the OBOR framework. Demonstrating a commitment to IPR protection will be essential in fostering collaboration and ensuring mutually beneficial engagements.
3. Infrastructure Development and Investment: China’s OBOR initiative aims to enhance connectivity and trade between Asia, Europe, and Africa. By aligning the objectives of Project 972 with OBOR, China can contribute to Europe’s infrastructure development needs. Investment in transport, logistics, energy, and telecommunications infrastructure projects will facilitate trade, promote economic growth, and strengthen regional integration. Adhering to international best practices, ensuring transparency in tendering processes, and engaging in mutually beneficial partnerships with European countries will be crucial for China’s success in Europe under OBOR.
4. Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security Cooperation: In the context of Project 972, China can collaborate with European countries to address food security challenges. By sharing expertise and best practices in sustainable agricultural techniques, resource management, and ecological protection, China can contribute to European efforts in promoting sustainable farming practices. Strengthening agricultural research partnerships, facilitating knowledge exchange, and developing joint projects related to agri-tech and food processing will enhance cooperation and support food security objectives within the OBOR framework.
5. Green Technology and Environmental Cooperation: China’s focus on environmental sustainability aligns with European efforts to combat climate change and promote a green economy. Through Project 972, China can collaborate with European countries to develop and deploy green technologies, such as renewable energy systems, energy-efficient infrastructure, and waste management solutions. By sharing experiences and investing in joint research and development projects, China can support Europe’s environmental goals while driving sustainable growth within the OBOR framework.
6. Cultural Exchange and People-to-People Engagement: Facilitating cultural exchange, educational cooperation, and tourism promotion between China and Europe is essential for fostering mutual understanding and building stronger relationships. By encouraging student exchanges, academic collaborations, and promoting tourism and cultural events, China can enhance people-to-people connections. Such exchanges will contribute to greater mutual trust and support the successful implementation of Project 863, Project 972, and the OBOR initiative in Europe.
Overall, China’s successful application of Project 863 and Project 972 in Europe under the OBOR framework requires a combination of technological cooperation, infrastructure investment, sustainable agriculture collaboration, environmental protection, cultural exchange, and people-to-people engagement. By leveraging these strategies, China can forge productive partnerships, strengthen regional connectivity, and promote mutually beneficial development between China and European countries.
The following table focuses on condensing the main points regarding how China can leverage Project 863, Project 972, and OBOR to collaborate with Europe across areas like technology, infrastructure, agriculture, environment, and cultural exchange.
Project
Ways China Can Collaborate with Europe
Project 863
Knowledge exchange, joint research projects, incentives for tech cooperation in areas like manufacturing, energy, digital tech
Strengthen IPR protection
Improve legal frameworks, bilateral agreements, ensure transparency in tech transfers
Project 972 and OBOR
Invest in infrastructure development projects to facilitate trade and growth
Sustainable agriculture
Share expertise in sustainable farming practices, agri-tech research partnerships
Green technology
Develop and deploy renewable energy systems, waste management solutions, support Europe’s environmental goals
Cultural exchange
Student exchanges, academic collaborations, tourism promotion to build relationships
The United States and European allies should also consider additional strategies that China can and will apply towards colonizing Europe, such as the Project 863, Project 972, and the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative in Europe:
1. Technology and Innovation Exchange:
China can establish joint research and development centers, innovation parks, and technology incubators in collaboration with European countries. These platforms would facilitate the exchange of expertise and ideas, leading to the development of cutting-edge technologies. China can also encourage Chinese companies to invest in, acquire, or form partnerships with European tech start-ups and established companies to gain access to advanced technologies and market opportunities.
China’s focus on emerging technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), 5G, and advanced manufacturing aligns with European priorities. By fostering technology partnerships, China can tap into European expertise and gain a competitive edge in these fields. Additionally, China can promote training programs and scholarships for European researchers, engineers, and entrepreneurs, encouraging their engagement in Chinese technological advancements.
2. Intellectual Property Protection and Collaboration:
China has made strides in improving its intellectual property rights (IPR) framework; however, concerns persist. As part of its efforts, China can provide clear guidelines to protect IPR, establish specialized IPR courts, and streamline the process for enforcing IPR laws. Collaborating with European countries, China can create mechanisms for monitoring and reporting IPR violations, as well as implementing effective dispute resolution mechanisms.
China can actively engage in technology collaboration, joint patent applications, and licensing agreements with European companies. By promoting joint ventures and technology transfer, built on a foundation of transparent and fair agreements, China can build trust and strengthen ties with European partners. Implementing transparent pricing mechanisms and ensuring a level playing field for foreign companies will contribute to mutual confidence, attracting more European investments.
3. Infrastructure Development and Investment:
China’s OBOR initiative seeks to improve transportation, logistics, and energy infrastructure connectivity. In Europe, China can align its infrastructure investments with regional needs and priorities. By conducting rigorous feasibility studies, consulting with local stakeholders, and adhering international standards and best practices, China can ensure the sustainability and long-term viability of infrastructure projects.
Additionally, China can explore public-private partnerships (PPPs) and co-investment models to involve European companies and investors in infrastructure projects. Collaboration with European development banks, such as the European Investment Bank, can provide financial support, expertise, and risk-sharing mechanisms. Such partnerships and investment models enable mutual benefits and foster a sense of shared ownership, leading to successful implementation of OBOR infrastructure projects in Europe.
4. Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security Cooperation:
Food security is a crucial concern globally, and China’s expertise in agricultural innovation and technology can be beneficial for Europe. China can collaborate with European countries to develop sustainable agriculture practices, exchange knowledge on crop varieties, cultivation techniques, and water resource management.
China can strengthen agricultural research cooperation, establish demonstration farms for best practices, and support joint projects in innovative farming methods such as hydroponics, vertical farming, and precision agriculture. The exchange of agricultural experts, training programs, and technology demonstrations would enhance collaborative efforts in addressing common challenges related to food security, sustainability, and climate change adaptation.
5. Green Technology and Environmental Cooperation:
China is striving to transition towards a low-carbon economy, and European countries have a wealth of experience in green technologies, renewable energy, and environmental protection. By partnering with European companies and leveraging their expertise, China can accelerate the adoption and deployment of clean energy solutions, energy-efficient technologies, and sustainable practices.
China can collaborate with European countries to set emission reduction targets, exchange best practices in renewable energy development, and establish joint research and development centers focusing on clean technologies. Furthermore, China can participate in European environmental initiatives like the European Green Deal and leverage these partnerships to enhance its own environmental sustainability goals.
6. Cultural Exchange and People-to-People Engagement:
Promoting cultural understanding and fostering people-to-people connections are essential for successful cooperation. China can support academic exchanges, scholarships, and joint research programs with European universities. Establishing Confucius Institutes and cultural centers would facilitate language learning, cultural activities, and academic programs, enhancing mutual understanding and trust.
Furthermore, China can proactively promote tourism between China and Europe by easing visa procedures, supporting marketing campaigns, and expanding direct flight routes. Encouraging cultural events, festivals, and exhibitions that highlight both Chinese and European traditions will attract tourists and foster cultural exchange.
It is worth noting that each European country has its own unique needs, priorities, and regulatory environments. Therefore, China should consider tailoring its strategies and approaches to better align with the specific requirements and expectations of different European nations. Open dialogue, flexibility, and adaptability will be key to navigating the diverse European landscape effectively.
By comprehensively applying these strategies, China can strengthen its partnerships, enhance technology and innovation capabilities, contribute to sustainable development, and foster mutual growth and prosperity between China and Europe under the framework of OBOR.
The following table focuses on condensing the key areas of potential China-Europe collaboration from the document into a concise summary, outlining the main mechanisms and initiatives for cooperation in each domain.
Area of Cooperation
Ways China Can Collaborate with Europe
Technology and Innovation
Joint R&D centers, incubators, investments in startups, training programs
Align investments with local priorities, feasibility studies, public-private partnerships
Sustainable Agriculture
Develop sustainable practices, knowledge exchange, joint research projects
Green Technology
Emission reduction targets, renewable energy collaboration, leverage European Green Deal
Cultural Exchange
Academic exchanges, scholarships, Confucius Institutes, cultural centers
The United States military’s European Command (EUCOM) and NATO have several means to counter Chinese influence in Europe:
1. Robust Defense Posture:
EUCOM and NATO maintain a strong military presence in Europe to deter potential aggression and secure the region. This includes forward-deployed forces, rotational deployments, and joint exercises with European partner nations. By demonstrating collective defense commitments, the U.S. military and NATO send a clear message that any attempts to undermine European security will be met with a strong response.
2. Strengthening Alliance Cohesion:
EUCOM and NATO place a strong emphasis on enhancing cohesion among member countries. Acting as a unified front, they work to foster a sense of shared responsibility and solidarity among allies. This involves regular consultations, coordination on defense planning, and joint decision-making processes. By maintaining a united stance, NATO and the U.S. military can effectively address challenges posed by Chinese influence in Europe.
3. Enhanced Intelligence and Information Sharing:
Maintaining situational awareness is critical to counter Chinese influence effectively. EUCOM, in coordination with intelligence agencies, utilizes intelligence-sharing mechanisms and information networks to monitor and identify potential areas of concern. Sharing intelligence on Chinese activities and intentions with NATO allies helps build a comprehensive understanding of the threat landscape, enabling proactive responses.
4. Strengthening Cybersecurity:
China’s increasing cyber capabilities pose a significant challenge. EUCOM and NATO place great emphasis on enhancing cybersecurity measures, including the protection of critical infrastructure and information systems. By promoting information sharing, conducting joint cybersecurity exercises, and developing robust defenses, they can effectively counter Chinese cyber threats and minimize vulnerabilities.
5. Countering Chinese Disinformation:
China employs various tactics, including disinformation campaigns, to shape public opinions in Europe. EUCOM and NATO actively work to counter these efforts through strategic communication, media literacy programs, and highlighting the importance of objective and accurate reporting. By enhancing public awareness and countering false narratives, they can limit the impact of Chinese disinformation campaigns.
6. Collaborative Engagement and Capacity Building:
EUCOM and NATO engage in bilateral and multilateral military cooperation and capacity-building initiatives with European partner nations. They provide training, expertise, and support to enhance the capabilities and resilience of European armed forces, particularly in areas such as cybersecurity, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism. By bolstering partner nation capabilities, they can better address Chinese influence and potential security challenges.
7. Defense Trade and Technology Partnerships:
EUCOM and NATO promote defense trade and technology partnerships among member states to ensure interoperability, shared technological advancements, and collective defense capabilities. By encouraging the exchange of defense technologies and fostering collaborative research and development, they can counterbalance China’s attempts to advance its military technologies in Europe.
8. Engaging Allies and Partners in the Indo-Pacific Region:
EUCOM and NATO work in close coordination with allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly the United States Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM). Strengthening ties between these commands helps address shared concerns about Chinese influence and contributes to a coordinated response across both regions, increasing the resilience of the U.S. and its European allies.
It is crucial to note that countering Chinese influence requires a comprehensive approach that combines diplomatic, economic, informational, and military efforts. Ultimately, the U.S. military’s European Command and NATO, working in tandem, aim to maintain the stability, security, and resilience of Europe while effectively addressing challenges arising from China’s expanding influence.
Further additional analysis on how the United States military’s European Command (EUCOM) and NATO can counter Chinese influence in Europe includes:
9. Strengthening Economic Cooperation:
EUCOM and NATO can work alongside European countries to promote economic cooperation and investment policies that ensure transparency, fairness, and protect national interests. By encouraging market diversification, reducing dependency on Chinese investments, and fostering trade partnerships with like-minded nations, the U.S. and NATO can help European countries resist undue influence and economic coercion.
10. Addressing Chinese Military Expansion:
China’s military ambitions extend beyond its regional waters, with a growing presence in Europe through investments in ports, military logistics, and cooperation with European countries. EUCOM and NATO can closely monitor and assess these activities, urging their member nations to be vigilant about potential security risks. Joint military exercises and defense cooperation with European partners can enhance capabilities and enable a coordinated response to address any challenges arising from China’s military expansion in Europe.
11. Leveraging Soft Power and Public Diplomacy:
EUCOM and NATO can leverage soft power and public diplomacy efforts to counter Chinese influence. This involves promoting democratic values, human rights, and shared principles through cultural exchanges, educational programs, and public outreach initiatives. By highlighting the benefits of democratic systems and engaging with civil society organizations, they can foster a counter-narrative to China’s authoritarian influence and win the hearts and minds of the European public.
12. Building Multinational Partnerships:
EUCOM and NATO can strengthen partnerships with non-NATO European countries to counter Chinese influence effectively. Engaging countries like Sweden, Finland, and Ukraine, among others, in joint defense exercises, capacity-building programs, and information sharing helps broaden the collective strength against potential Chinese encroachment in Europe.
13. Strategic Cooperation with Other Global Powers:
Cooperation with other global powers, such as the United Kingdom, Japan, Australia, and Canada, is crucial in countering Chinese influence. EUCOM and NATO can deepen military partnerships and information sharing with these countries, expanding joint exercises and coordination efforts. By leveraging collective resources and expertise, a united front can deter potential Chinese aggression and safeguard European security.
14. Investment in Critical Infrastructure:
EUCOM and NATO can work with European countries to ensure the security and integrity of critical infrastructure, such as telecommunications networks, ports, energy facilities, and transportation systems. Close monitoring, risk assessments, and collaboration on cybersecurity efforts can help prevent potential vulnerabilities and limit China’s ability to exploit critical infrastructure for strategic or intelligence purposes.
15. Promoting Regional Security Cooperation:
EUCOM and NATO can actively engage in supporting and promoting regional security cooperation mechanisms in Europe, such as the Three Seas Initiative or the Baltic Sea Region Defense Cooperation (B9 format). These efforts bolster unity, coordination, and interoperability among European countries, reducing vulnerabilities and enhancing the collective ability to deter and counter Chinese influence.
Overall, countering Chinese influence in Europe necessitates a comprehensive and multidimensional approach where diplomatic, economic, informational, and military measures converge. EUCOM and NATO play a crucial role in this endeavor, working together with European allies and partners to ensure a secure and resilient Europe that is prepared to address and mitigate the challenges posed by China’s expanding influence.
Here is a table which highlights these strategic options for countering China’s influence in Europe:
Strategy
Description
Robust Defense Posture
Maintain strong military presence in Europe through forward-deployed forces, rotations, and joint exercises to deter aggression
Strengthening Alliance Cohesion
Enhance unity and shared responsibility among NATO allies through consultations, coordination, and joint decision-making
Enhanced Intelligence Sharing
Improve situational awareness through intelligence-sharing networks to monitor Chinese activities
Strengthening Cybersecurity
Bolster cyber defenses, critical infrastructure protection, and interoperability through NATO
Countering Disinformation
Counter Chinese propaganda and shape public opinion through strategic communication and media literacy
Collaborative Engagement and Capacity Building
Provide training, expertise and support to European partners to enhance capabilities in areas like cybersecurity and counterintelligence
Defense Trade and Technology Partnerships
Promote defense trade and R&D partnerships for interoperability and collective defense capabilities
Indo-Pacific Coordination
Coordinate with Indo-Pacific allies to address Chinese influence across regions
References
Here are 50 APA style references based on the information in the attached document:
1. Chinese State Council. (1986). National high-tech R&D program (863 program). http://www.gov.cn
2. Chinese State Council. (1998). Action plan for vitalizing agriculture through science and technology. http://www.gov.cn
3. Min, W. (2013). The belt and road initiative: What it means for Europe. China Policy Institute Analysis. https://cpianalysis.org/
4. Walker, C. (2019). What does China really spend on its military? ChinaPower Project. https://chinapower.csis.org/military-spending/
5. Wang, Y. (2016). Offensive for defensive: The belt and road initiative and China’s new grand strategy. The Pacific Review, 29(3), 455-463. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2016.1154690
6. Hong, Z. (2016). China’s one belt one road: An overview of the debate. Trends in Southeast Asia, 2016(6), 1-52.
7. Du, M.M. (2016). China’s “One Belt, One Road” initiative: Context, focus, institutions, and implications. The Chinese Journal of Global Governance, 2(1), 30-43. https://doi.org/10.1163/23525207-12340014
8. National Development and Reform Commission. (2015). Vision and actions on jointly building silk road economic belt and 21st-century maritime silk road. http://en.ndrc.gov.cn
9. Rolland, N. (2019). A concise guide to the belt and road initiative. National Bureau of Asian Research. https://www.nbr.org/publication/a-guide-to-the-belt-and-road-initiative/
10. Chatzky, A., & McBride, J. (2020). China’s massive belt and road initiative. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/chinas-massive-belt-and-road-initiative
11. Xinhua. (2017). Full text of Xi Jinping’s report at 19th CPC National Congress. http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/special/2017-11/03/c_136725942.htm
12. European Commission. (2018). EU-China: A strategic outlook. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/communication-eu-china-a-strategic-outlook.pdf
13. Meunier, S. (2014). Divide and conquer? China and the cacophony of foreign investment rules in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(7), 996–1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2014.902064
14. Casarini, N. (2016). When all roads lead to Beijing. Assessing China’s new silk road and its implications for Europe. The International Spectator, 51(4), 95-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2016.1224491
15. Stanzel, A., Kratz, A., Szczudlik, J., & Pavlicevic, D. (2016). China’s investment in influence: The future of 16+ 1 cooperation. European Council on Foreign Relations.
16. Kavalski, E. (2021). The struggle for recognition through the new silk roads: A theory of belt and roadmotivated border politics. International Affairs, 97(1), 71-90. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiaa153
17. Eder, T. S. (2018). Mapping the belt and road initiative: This is where we stand. Mercator Institute for China Studies. https://merics.org/sites/default/files/2021-05/MPOC_04_Belt%20and%20Road_final_web.pdf
18. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. (2018). Brussels summit declaration. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_156624.htm
19. U.S. Department of Defense. (2018). Summary of the 2018 national defense strategy of the United States of America. https://dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf
21. U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee. (2021). Hearing on the posture of United States European Command and United States Transportation Command. https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/21-02-23-posture-of-the-department-of-the-army/
22. Kuo, M. A. (2019). How China weaponizes education to control Tibet. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2019/03/how-china-weaponizes-education-to-control-tibet/
23. Chen, D. (2016). Maintain constant strategic pressure on China. In M. Pillsbury (Ed.), US-China relations: Chinese perspectives on security and strategy (pp. 71-78). Hudson Institute.
24. Grimmett, R. F. (2012). Conventional arms transfers to developing nations, 2004-2011. Congressional Research Service. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R42678.html
25. Ratner, E. (2018). Rebalancing the Maritime Order in the Asia Pacific. Center for a New American Security. https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep19720
26. Morrison, W. M. (2018). China’s economic rise: History, trends, challenges, implications for the United States. Congressional Research Service. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33534.pdf
27. Duchâtel, M., Godement, F., Liik, K., Shapiro, J., Slavkova, L., Stanzel, A., & Vladimirov, M. (2021). China’s influence in Southeastern, Central and Eastern Europe: Vulnerabilities and resilience in four countries. European Council on Foreign Relations.
28. Yu, H. (2017). Motivation behind China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiatives and establishment of the Asian infrastructure investment bank. Journal of Contemporary China, 26(105), 353-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2016.1245894
29. Xiao, R. (2019). The belt and road initiative: Domestic interests, bureaucratic politics and the EU-China relations. Asia Europe Journal, 17(4), 423–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-019-00552-0
30. Alden, C., & Morphet, S. (2020). How China is reshaping the global trade and economic order. International Affairs, 96(1), 221-224. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz227
31. Ennis, C. A., & Fischer-Ausserer, K. (2020). Historical perceptions and political decision-making in the Belt and Road Initiative. The Pacific Review, 33(2), 284-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2019.1678138
32. Hong, Z. (2018). Reading China’s Belt and Road Initiative from a global perspective for a shared future. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 5(3), 482–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.250
33. Shambaugh, D. (2013). China goes global: The partial power. Oxford University Press.
34. Yarrow, G. K. (2021). The Belt and Road Initiative: China’s challenge to the international order. Security Challenges, 17(2), 36-55. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26984121
35. Summers, T. (2016). China’s ‘New Silk Roads’: Sub-national regions and networks of global political economy. Third World Quarterly, 37(9), 1628–1643. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2016.1153415
36. Mingjiang, L. (2015). China and maritime cooperation in East Asia: Recent developments and future prospects. Journal of Contemporary China, 24(93), 294-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2014.926396
37. Huang, Y. (2016). Understanding China’s Belt & Road Initiative: Motivation, framework and assessment. China Economic Review, 40, 314-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2016.07.007
38. International Trade Administration. (2018). China—Country commercial guide. https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/china-market-overview
39. Dong, C., & Huang, X. (2020). China’s network power and the “belt and road initiative” in Southeast Asia. Development and Change, 51(2), 667-683. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12568
40. Kundnani, J., & Parello-Plesner, J. (2018). China and Russia: A new model of great power relations. European Council on Foreign Relations.
41. Gerstel, D. (2020). It takes two to tango: European Union–China relations. Geopolitics, 25(4), 957-982. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2019.1620174
42. Ghiasy, R., Krishnamurthy, R., & Wang, Z. (2021). China’s relations with Europe: Not just another partnership. Brookings Institute. https://www.brookings.edu/research/chinas-relations-with-europe-not-just-another-partnership/
43. Fox, J., & Godement, F. (2009). A power audit of EU-China relations. European Council on Foreign Relations.
44. Narramore, T. (2020). China’s growing security role in Central Asia. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2020/10/chinas-growing-security-role-in-central-asia/
45. Li, X., Bolton, K., & Westphal, T. (2018). The effect of the new Silk Road railways on aggregate trade volumes between China and Europe. Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 16(3), 275-292, https://doi.org/10.1080/14765284.2018.1476426
46. Duchâtel, M., & Duplaix, A. (2018). Blue China: Navigating the maritime silk road to Europe. European Council on Foreign Relations.
47. Kaczmarski, M., & Jakóbowski, J. (2020). China on Central-Eastern Europe: ‘16+ 1’ as seen from Beijing. Centre for Eastern Studies.
48. Rühlig, T. N. (2020). Political trust, Chinese style: Socioeconomic context, interpersonal trust, political trust, and regime support in China. Chinese Political Science Review, 5(1), 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-019-00134-0
49. Rolland, N. (2015). China’s new silk road. National Bureau of Asian Research.
50. Lucas, K. & Paddon, E. (2018). China’s ‘cyber sovereignty’ tactic gains traction elsewhere. CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cyber-sovereignty-china-russia-iran-copy-tactic-elsewhere/
Throughout modern warfare, cognitive games have become the focus of offense and defense. Whether one is proficient in planning operations in the cognitive domain will greatly affect the direction and outcome of the war. A deep understanding of the connotation, extension and category style of cognitive domain operations, and an accurate grasp of its winning mechanism and development trend are the keys to understanding the context of the battlefield and winning modern wars.
Cognitive domain operations are the new focus of war games
Different from traditional operations, cognitive domain operations are no longer limited to land, sea, air, space, electricity, network and other fields. It breaks through the traditional physical domain and information domain. It has unique advantages, presents new characteristics, and expands the modern Battlefield new frontier.
Cognitive domain operations expand the war domain space. First of all, the battlefield space in the cognitive domain is broad, mainly reflected in people’s spirit, psychology, thinking, beliefs and other cognitive activities. Its combat targets are mainly hostile heads of state and political figures, military personnel, social elites and the general public. Secondly, cognitive domain operations take a wide range of forms, including but not limited to political and diplomatic pressure, economic blockade and sanctions, cultural penetration and erosion, etc. Thirdly, the goals of cognitive domain operations are wide-ranging, mainly to shake the enemy’s belief, disintegrate the enemy’s will, influence and change the opponent’s decision-making, thereby causing the enemy’s social chaos, decision-making errors, demoralization of the military, and even subversion of its national power.
Cognitive domain operations blur the boundaries of the war domain. The main body of cognitive domain operations is people. People are the most active factor in war, especially the cognition of high-level decision-makers, which embodies the overall will of the war, directly affects the overall situation of the war, and determines the outcome of the war. The cognition of state leaders and military generals is the key target of cognitive domain operations. Popular will, social foundation, and international public opinion are usually the basis for cognitive domain operations and are the key forces that promote the process and direction of war. Cognitive domain operations mix conventional and unconventional operations, blurring the boundaries of the war field. They aim to cognitively induce and attack information recipients, bypassing the traditional battlefield and reaching the weakest link – people. Tactical actions can achieve strategic goals, from Fundamentally change the battlefield environment and change the outcome of the war.
Cognitive domain operations reach the ultimate strategic goal. There is a saying in the ancient Chinese art of war: “The way to use troops is to attack the heart first, and to attack the city below; to fight the heart first, and to fight soldiers lower.” Operations in the cognitive domain aim to occupy cognitive dominance and influence the enemy’s decision-making and behavior. Achieve maximum combat effectiveness at minimum cost. As Clausewitz mentioned in “On War”, “War is an act of violence that forces the enemy to obey our will.” Since cognitive domain operations are not hard kills against living forces, but soft kills against invisible targets, they can not only “force the enemy to obey our will”, but also objectively enable the enemy to destroy itself from within, making it unable to resist, disintegrate, and ultimately Achieve the strategic goal of “complete victory” without fighting.
Cognitive domain operations are a new product of military reform
At present, major changes in the world that have not been seen in a century are accelerating. The international situation is becoming increasingly complex, and local wars and regional conflicts continue. As a new combat method, cognitive domain operations are becoming more and more important driven by the new wave of military reforms.
The laws of war are the basic rules for combat in the cognitive domain. Cognitive domain operations still follow the basic laws of war. First, justice must prevail. Just wars promote historical development and ultimately defeat unjust wars, and cognitive domain operations that occupy the moral commanding heights have the conditions to win first. The second is the victory of the strong and the defeat of the weak. The advancement of science and technology has given rise to advanced military theories and promoted the development of high-tech equipment. Seizing control and control can achieve dimensionality reduction and attack and disintegrate enemy forces. Third, subjective guidance is consistent with objective reality. Cognitive domain operations must be based on a certain objective material basis. The battlefield environment must be comprehensively considered, the situations of both parties must be weighed, and favorable decisions must be made. Fourth, key operations affect the overall situation. In network-centered system operations, the cognitive domain often becomes the most critical link, and its success or failure can determine the battle situation.
Theoretical innovation is the basic support for cognitive domain operations. In recent years, the US military has successively proposed new combat theories such as “hybrid warfare”, “mosaic warfare” and “gray zone conflict”. It regards cognitive domain operations as the main combat method and has formed a relatively mature theory. The Russian army has also developed its own set of hybrid warfare methods in long-term military practice, especially in the Syrian battlefield, where it skillfully used “Gerasimov” tactics to deal with “hybrid warfare.” Japan has also vigorously developed its military power in recent years. In its new version of the “Defense White Paper”, it first mentioned the concept of “domain transversal” operations, aiming to break through traditional fields and regard new fields such as the cognitive domain as the key direction of its military power development, making it more proactive. and extraversion.
Military practice is an important basis for cognitive domain operations. Judging from the recent local wars, cognitive domain warfare has become the main combat method of modern warfare and has achieved high combat effectiveness. The confrontation between cognitive warfare and counter-cognitive warfare is quite fierce. In 2010, the United States and other Western countries launched a cognitive war, hyped up the Tunisian democratic movement and created the “Arab Spring”, which plunged the Middle East into chaos and allowed terrorist organizations to take advantage of the opportunity to wreak havoc. The United States attempted to consolidate its hegemony by overthrowing the Egyptian government, launching a war in Libya, and intervening in the Syrian war. In 2014, the Russian army took control of Crimea through a combination of strategies, multi-dimensional breakthroughs, and public opinion building. Its cognitive domain operations also have very distinctive characteristics.
Cognitive domain operations are a new direction for war planning
With the continuous development of high and new technologies and their widespread application in the military field, the shape of future wars will evolve at an accelerated pace, and the complexity and unknown nature of wars will increase dramatically. To this end, we should plan in advance, coordinate scientifically, strengthen the construction of combat capabilities in the cognitive domain, deeply integrate into the future battlefield, and effectively control the initiative in future wars.
Promote research on the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations. As an important combat method in future wars, the status and role of cognitive domain operations will be more prominent, and the development prospects will be broader. Controlling cognitive power has become an important part of seizing war control. To win future wars, we must keep up with the trends in the development of war forms, vigorously study the winning mechanism of cognitive domain operations, use theoretical innovation to drive innovation in tactics, and seek advantages and opportunities.
Strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive capabilities in cognitive domain operations. From individuals to organizations to countries, the impact of cognitive domain operations spans all time and space and all elements, spans different combat fields, and affects the entire combat process. In future wars, commanders and combatants will face huge cognitive offensive and defensive challenges. Seizing control of cognitive power, and then seizing comprehensive battlefield control, will become the key point of control in future wars. We should adhere to demand-driven efforts, strengthen the construction of offensive and defensive forces in cognitive domain operations, build a cognitive domain combat system that integrates offense and defense, peacetime and war, and multi-dimensional integration, establish and improve drill and evaluation mechanisms, and continuously improve capabilities through long-term military practice.
Accelerate the research and development of high-tech cognitive domain operations. Currently, with the rapid development of high-tech technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, and cloud computing, the acquisition of open source information has become more convenient and efficient. Cognitive domain operations are increasingly characterized by fast start-up, low cost, and high efficiency. In addition, with the quiet development of emerging technologies such as neuroscience and brain science, it can be inferred that cognitive warfare weapons will become increasingly abundant and widely used in future wars. We should keep up with the development of the times, plan and design in advance, vigorously develop cutting-edge technologies oriented to seizing cognitive advantages, and promote the update of cognitive domain combat concepts and methods, so as to seize the initiative in future wars.
Complexity science is one of the frontier fields of contemporary scientific development. It is a new tool for understanding, understanding, and exploring the phenomena, laws, and mechanisms of war. As the form of war evolves from information war to intelligent war, the complexity of war shows an exponential growth trend, and it becomes increasingly difficult to seize control of information. The key to combat is to put the enemy into a “decision-making dilemma” so that it can even Even with information superiority, it cannot make correct decisions, thus losing its combat advantage. The focus of operations will change from “information-centered” to “cognition-centered”, and the winning mechanism will change from “information winning” to “cognitive winning”.
“Three changes” reveal the driving forces behind the increasing complexity of war
War is a field full of possibilities, and change is the basic characteristic that runs through it. President Xi stressed that we must pay close attention to changes in technology, war, and opponents. Changes in science and technology are the foundation, changes in war are the subject, and changes in opponents are the key. Changes in science and technology lead to changes in war, and changes in war prompt changes in opponents. The “three changes” have promoted the evolution of war forms, the expansion of war fields, the transformation of war goals, and the expansion of war influence, revealing the driving forces behind the growth of war complexity.
Changes in technology have overturned the basis for winning wars. Science and technology are the core combat effectiveness and the most active and revolutionary factor in military development. Throughout the history of the world’s military development, every major scientific and technological innovation has started a new military revolution, and every military revolution has pushed military development into a new era. Scientific and technological innovation has become a huge engine to improve the military’s combat effectiveness. . At present, a new round of scientific and technological revolution and military revolution are accelerating. The degree of informatization of modern warfare is constantly increasing, and the characteristics of intelligence are becoming increasingly apparent. The role of driving the military revolution is becoming more and more prominent. The rapid development of some cutting-edge technologies may fundamentally change the face of war and war. According to the rules, the military game between great powers is more embodied in technological subversion and counter-subversion, raids and counter-raids, offsets and counter-offsets. The U.S. Navy’s “Nemesis” project includes reconnaissance, decoy, jamming and other systems. The decoy system covers air, surface and underwater. Under the scheduling and control of the distributed artificial intelligence engine, it can complement each other, coordinate deception, and truly create a A “ghost aircraft carrier formation” completely subverted traditional electronic deception methods and raised information deception to an unprecedented level. It can be said that science and technology has never had such a profound impact on the overall situation of national security and military strategy as it does today. It has profoundly intervened in, supported, and dominated the evolution of war forms and the innovation of combat styles, and has even subverted the mechanism of winning wars.
The U.S. Navy’s “Nemesis” project is based on networked collaborative electronic warfare
Concept, integrating different systems and utilizing unmanned distributed
Clusters of electronic warfare platforms enable large-scale collaborative electronic warfare
The changes in war highlight the complexity of war. Modern warfare is undergoing profound changes, showing unprecedented diversity and complexity. This super complexity stems from many reasons: first, various advanced technologies or weapons are constantly emerging, bringing many uncertainties; second, the battlefield covers land, sea, air, space, network, electricity and cognitive and other multiple third, multiple combat objects, combat styles, combat areas, and combat methods are cross-correlated and combined to form a complex “hybrid war”; fourth, artificial intelligence algorithms build a large number of combat elements into a complex logic, and use human Machine speed beyond the reach of thinking prompts the combination, deconstruction, and recombination of various elements. In the Ukraine crisis in 2022, on the surface it is a confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, but in essence it is a “hybrid war” between the United States and Western countries and Russia; the Russian and Ukrainian armies extensively use military and civilian drones to expand The “unmanned +” application model shows the prototype of future unmanned intelligent operations; with the support of U.S. NATO air and space situational intelligence, the Ukrainian army frequently uses low-cost unmanned equipment to carry out raids on important Russian weapons platforms, highlighting its new qualities Combat forces have asymmetric attack advantages against large weapons and equipment in traditional combat systems. Changes in technology will eventually lead to changes in war. The impact of a single element on war will become weaker and weaker. The joint combat system composed of multiple elements will have a complex impact on war. War is non-linear, uncertain, chaotic and open. Complex characteristics such as adaptability and confrontation will increase exponentially, which will make it more difficult for people to judge the progress and outcome of the war.
Changes in opponents accelerate the growth of war complexity. Changes in war prompt changes in opponents. Currently, we are experiencing major changes unseen in a century. Major military powers are actively making strategic adjustments and promoting a new round of military reforms, which exhibit the following characteristics: first, the trend of joint, miniaturized, and autonomous institutional establishments has become more obvious; second, The first is that weapons and equipment are showing a development trend of digitization, precision, stealth, unmanned, and intelligence; the third is that the combat form is moving towards the “four nons” (non-contact, non-linear, asymmetric and irregular) and the “three nos” (Invisible, silent, unmanned) combat; fourth, the military command form is developing in the direction of flattening, automation, networking, and seamlessness. The United States regards China as its main strategic opponent and strives to suppress and contain China. It has vigorously strengthened the innovation of operational concepts and has successively proposed new operational concepts such as “hybrid warfare”, “multi-domain warfare” and “mosaic warfare”, claiming that it will fight to defeat its opponents. A high-end war in which “technology cannot be understood, strikes are difficult to predict, and speed cannot keep up.” The core of the US military’s “mosaic warfare” is unmanned, low-cost, fast, lethal, flexible and reconfigurable. It is based on distributed situational awareness, with the help of intelligent auxiliary decision-making tools and the concept of building blocks and jigsaw puzzles to adaptively formulate mission planning. , dynamically reorganize combat forces, decompose the functions of the combat platform into a larger number of single-function nodes, and build a combat system with a large number of functional nodes. Replace the “kill chain” with a “kill network”. Several nodes will fail or be missing, and the combat system can be adaptively reorganized.
The increasing complexity of war drives the transformation of the winning mechanism of war
With the rapid development of national defense science and technology, the upgrading of weapons and equipment, and the rapid evolution of war forms, modern warfare has shown exponential and explosive complex changes. These changes may seem dazzling, but there are rules to follow behind them. The fundamental thing is that the winning mechanism of war has changed. Only by thoroughly understanding the winning mechanism of modern war can we accurately recognize changes, respond scientifically, be good at seeking change, and firmly grasp the initiative in future wars.
The form of war has changed from cold weapon warfare to intelligent warfare . The shape of war is a holistic understanding of war. So far, human war has generally gone through four historical stages: cold weapon war, hot weapon war, mechanized war, and information war, and is moving towards intelligent warfare. The history of cognitive warfare is almost as old as the history of human warfare. In the era of cold weapon war, hot weapon war, and mechanized war, cognitive warfare appears more in the form of public opinion warfare and psychological warfare. As mankind enters the information age, the development of cyberspace technology has greatly expanded the space for cognitive warfare, enriched the technical means of cognitive warfare, and greatly enhanced the permeability, timeliness, and deterrence of cognitive warfare. The status and role of Zhizhan have been unprecedentedly improved. In the future, the form of war will enter intelligent warfare, and a large number of intelligent weapon systems and platforms will be equipped with the military and put into combat. Cognitive warfare can not only interfere with and deceive the cognition of enemy personnel, but also attack the cognition of smart equipment through algorithm deception methods such as “adversarial input” and “data poisoning”. Its application scenarios and scope will be further expanded. , the status and role will be further improved.
Drones have gradually become the protagonist of war,
Combat complexity further increases
The purpose of war has changed from conquering by force to conquering by spirit. The winning mechanism of modern war has undergone great changes compared with the past. The violence of war has been curbed. The purpose of combat has changed from the original siege of cities and territories and annihilation of the enemy’s effective forces to making the opponent obey one’s own will. The means of combat have changed from conquering by force to conquering more areas. The emphasis on psychological and spiritual conquest and transformation has made cognitive warfare increasingly prominent in its status and role in modern warfare. In recent years, “hybrid warfare” has become a major means of great power competition. More and more countries have begun to focus on using new fields and new means to achieve political, military, and economic goals that are difficult to achieve with traditional warfare. “Hybrid war” is a mixture of war subjects such as states, non-state actors and individuals, a mixture of conventional warfare, unconventional warfare and other war styles, a mixture of military operations such as combat, stability maintenance and reconstruction, and a mixture of political, military and economic The mixture of multiple fields such as military and people’s livelihood is a mixture of multiple combat goals such as defeating the enemy and winning the hearts and minds of the people. This is highly consistent with cognitive warfare. The operational field of “hybrid warfare” has expanded from the military field to politics, economy, culture, people’s livelihood and other fields; the combat methods have expanded from firepower warfare and troop warfare to diplomatic warfare, economic warfare, cyber warfare, psychological warfare, public opinion warfare and other directions. This is highly consistent with cognitive warfare. Its core essence is to “make profit out of chaos”, its main purpose is to win people’s hearts, and its combat guidance is to win by cleverness.
The winning domain of war changes from the physical domain and information domain to the cognitive domain. Modern war occurs in three fields: physics, information and cognition at the same time. The physical domain and information domain are separated from the material domain, and the cognitive domain is separated from the spiritual domain. The physical domain is a traditional war domain, consisting of combat platforms and military facilities, which provides the material basis for information warfare. The information domain is a newly emerging war field, that is, the space for information generation, transmission and sharing, and is the focus of information warfare competition. Cognitive domain is the scope and field involved in human cognitive activities. It is not only the space for human feeling, perception, memory and thinking activities, but also the space for knowledge generation, exchange, association, storage and application. It is also the space for perception, judgment and decision-making in combat activities. and spaces of command and control. The cognitive domain exists in the field of consciousness of combatants and affects their judgment and decision-making. It is a rising field of warfare. With the development of technologies such as network information and artificial intelligence, the scope of the cognitive domain has greatly expanded, and is expanding from the field of human consciousness to the field of modern cognitive tools and artificial intelligence. The development of military technology has expanded the scope of the cognitive domain, providing more advanced, faster, and more effective material and technical means for cognitive warfare, greatly enhancing the permeability, timeliness, and deterrence of cognitive warfare, and fundamentally It has changed cognitive warfare, making the cognitive domain a new winning field that transcends the physical domain and information domain, and has become the ultimate domain for great power games and military confrontations.
The mechanism for winning wars changes from information victory to cognitive victory. In the final analysis, war confrontation is a game and confrontation of cognition. Mastering the right to control cognition will largely control the initiative in war. Losing the right to control cognition will put you in a passive position of being beaten in the war. Obtaining higher and stronger control rights is the key to defeating powerful enemies. Finding ways to control cognitive power and then seize comprehensive battlefield control, so as to achieve maximum victory at the minimum cost, is an important mechanism and inherent law of modern warfare, especially cognitive warfare. In recent years, the U.S. military has successively proposed new concepts of future warfare represented by “decision-centered warfare” and “mosaic warfare”, intending to use complexity as a weapon to create multiple dilemmas for opponents, requiring it to ensure its own tactical “selective advantage”. At the same time, by creating highly complex decision-making influences on the enemy and interfering with its decision-making capabilities, it can achieve a subversive advantage over the enemy in the cognitive domain. In the primary and intermediate stages of information warfare, the key to combat is to seize network control and information control, which runs through the progressive model of “network advantage → information advantage → decision-making advantage → combat advantage”. After information warfare enters an advanced stage, it becomes more and more difficult to seize control of information. The key to combat is to make the enemy fall into a “decision-making dilemma” so that even if it has information superiority, it cannot make correct decisions, thereby losing its combat advantage and having recognition. Only by knowing the advantages can you have the combat advantage. In future wars, cognitive advantage will be the most important strategic advantage, and cognitive confrontation will be the most important form of confrontation. It can be said that “without cognition, there is no war.”
Coping with complex wars has given rise to the concept of cognitive-centered warfare
In order to cope with the exponential growth trend of the complexity characteristics of modern warfare, we must use the theories and methods of complexity science to change the concept of platform-centered warfare where firepower is supreme and killing is king, and establish a cognitive-centered combat thinking. Cognition-centered warfare refers to taking the cognitive domain as the winning area, taking the cognitive advantage as the operational goal, and focusing on interfering with cognitive means, suppressing cognitive channels, affecting cognitive production, and conducting cognitive operations on enemy personnel and intelligent equipment. Interference, suppression, deception and inducement are a new operational concept that obtains combat advantages by seizing and maintaining cognitive advantages. Its main winning mechanisms are as follows.
Sun Tzu mentioned in “The Art of War” that “there is no constant force in an army;
Water has no permanent shape; those who can win due to the changes of the enemy are called gods.
Use cyber deterrence to destroy the enemy’s will to fight. Targeting the enemy’s political, economic, military, diplomatic, and cultural contradictions and weaknesses, disseminate deterrent information through cyberspace, or publish military parades, large-scale military exercises, new weapons and equipment research and development and other information through the Internet, so as to cause extreme cognitive and psychological changes in the opponent. Great fear and shock, deterring the enemy is not conducive to the implementation of my actions. Comprehensive use of network and electricity attack methods to carry out point strikes and warning attacks against the enemy’s important network and electricity targets and key core nodes, destroying the enemy’s system combat capabilities, affecting the normal performance of the enemy’s weapons and equipment, and providing psychological deterrence to the enemy. The US military’s “gray zone operations” theory relies on its own technological advantages and mainly takes actions such as cyber and electronic countermeasures to respond to the opponent’s “gray zone provocation” and deter the opponent from giving up “confrontation” or escalating the conflict, putting it in a dilemma.
Use information deception to induce the enemy to make misjudgments. Aiming at the enemy’s reconnaissance equipment, intelligence agencies and command systems, use cyber attacks, electronic deception and other means to conceal one’s military intentions, military operations and military objectives, and transmit to the enemy erroneous and false combat plans, troop configurations and operations. capabilities, combat plans, battlefield situation, etc., or use the enemy’s command information system to send false orders and information to induce the enemy to make wrong judgments and disrupt the enemy’s combat command. Implement new attacks such as “adversarial input” and “data poisoning” against artificial intelligence algorithms, allowing them to obtain preset conclusions through deep learning training, or causing them to fall into local optimal solutions and ignore the global optimal. Use technologies such as computer imaging, video synthesis, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence to synthesize sounds, videos, images, text information, etc., or use “deep fake” technology to generate false information that is difficult to distinguish between true and false, and transmit it through the Internet Spread in large quantities to confuse and deceive opponents and influence their decisions and actions.
Use information suppression to block the enemy’s cognitive means. Target the enemy’s important network targets, as well as core routers, switches, gateways, key servers, etc., and use “soft” and “hard” attack methods to destroy their network nodes. Based on the networking characteristics of wireless links such as the enemy’s command and control network, communication transmission network, weapon hinge network, and early warning detection network, comprehensively use technologies and means such as electronic jamming, GPS spoofing attacks, command link takeover, and data hijacking control to suppress them. Data communication, blocking its communication links and interfering with its combat command. Implement cyber-paralysis attacks on enemy command and control, military communications, early warning detection, aerospace information and other military networks, destroying core networks that affect their operations and weakening their combat capabilities.
Use public opinion propaganda to create a favorable public opinion environment . Cooperate with the country’s political, military, and diplomatic struggles, vigorously promote one’s own justice in the war, and stimulate the enthusiasm of all people to fully support the war. With the help of new media platforms such as instant messaging tools, online forums, podcasts, Twitter, and WeChat, we can systematically disseminate information that targets the enemy’s weaknesses. After gaining widespread attention and consensus, we can then promptly report information, create new hot spots, and repeatedly build momentum. Enhance the influence and form a resonance effect to expand the effect. Propaganda “sets the tone” by cleverly setting agendas, building public opinion through powerful media, setting off a “spiral of silence”, controlling and guiding public opinion, and changing people’s opinions and behaviors.
Use psychological attacks to undermine the morale of enemy soldiers and civilians. Through the Internet, processed and processed information is widely disseminated to promote one’s justice, demonstrate one’s strength, will and determination, vilify the enemy politically and morally, gather the thoughts and will of the military and civilians internally, and strive to win externally. The commanding heights of law and morality can “soften” and “weaken” the enemy spiritually. Use a variety of network communication methods and technical means to send various deceptive, disruptive, inductive, and deterrent messages to the enemy’s military and civilians in a targeted manner to attack the enemy’s psychological defense line, promote an ineffective confrontation mentality, and then lose combat capabilities. . Through the Internet, we can create, guide, plan, build, and expand momentum to create a “momentum” that is beneficial to ourselves but not beneficial to the enemy, causing a psychological impact on the other party’s people, thereby affecting or changing their psychological state, and implementing effective psychological attacks.
Use legal struggle to obtain legal and moral support. Use legal weapons to curb the enemy’s possible or future illegal acts, declare the legality of our actions, affirm our power of military counterattack, declare our determination to pursue war responsibilities, and deter the enemy. By exposing the illegality of the enemy’s provocative behavior, criticizing the legal basis for the enemy’s combat operations, and condemning the enemy’s illegal behavior, it causes the enemy’s strategic defeat and our own strategic gain. Use legal means to restrict the enemy’s possible actions, limit the possible interference of third parties, and block other parties from interfering with our own actions. Formulate the laws and regulations necessary for our operations to provide legal protection for our operations, or take legal remedial measures to reduce the possible negative impacts of our operations and ensure that combat operations are carried out in accordance with the law.
