Tag Archives: 網絡戰時代實現中國夢

Chinese Military Strategic Support Force – Skynet Army: It Will Change the Face of Cyberwar // 中國軍事戰略支援力量 – 天網軍隊將改變網絡戰的面貌

Chinese Military Strategic Support Force – Skynet Army: It Will Change the Face of Cyberwar //

中國軍事戰略支援力量 – 天網軍隊將改變網絡戰的面貌

Author: Source: Netease military

DTG: 2016-01-04 08:XX:XX

Strategic support forces are not logistical support or more powerful than the Rockets. Three tears on, how effective has China’s SSF become in the realm of cyber warfare?

Abstract: On December 31, 2015, the PLA Army Leadership, Rocket Army, and Strategic Support Forces were established. Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the CPC Central Committee, President of the State Council, and Chairman of the Central Military Commission, awarded the newly established three major units. The major steps marking the reform of the PLA’s army are beginning to be gradually implemented. Among the three new units, the strategic support force is definitely a brand new name, which naturally raises many questions. What kind of force is this?

The strategic support force should be called Skynet Army: it will change the war.

Strategic support is not logistical support

The newly established three units, the Army’s leading body is also the Army’s headquarters. The former PLA has always been the army’s boss. The mainland’s thinking is deeply rooted. Therefore, only the navy and air force headquarters, and no army command, the top leaders of the army are all from The army, the head of the navy and air force ranks among the members of the Central Military Commission, and it is more symbolic. The establishment of the Army Headquarters now means that the status of the Army will gradually be lowered and will be consistent with other services. This will lay the foundation for the model of the highest military leadership in the rotation of the heads of the Western military in the future, and further strengthen the synergy for the various services. The conditions.

The Rockets are no strangers to military fans. They are the former Second Artillery Corps, which is essentially a strategic missile force. The strategic missile unit of the former Soviet Union was called the Strategic Rocket Army. When the PLA established the strategic missile force, the international situation was surging. For the sake of low-key restraint, Zhou Enlai proposed the name of the Second Artillery. Now renamed the Rocket Army, the name is more prestige, more directly strengthen the significance of strategic deterrence.

Relative to the above two units, for those concerned about national defense construction, the strategic support force will be much more strange. When many people hear this name, the first reaction is the logistics support force, which is a big mistake! The strategic support force is actually a genuine combat force. It is nominally supportive. In many cases, it is the first open-minded pioneer to fight, even to enter the battlefield earlier than the land, sea, air force and rocket forces. According to the spokesman of the Ministry of National Defense, the strategic support force is a new type of combat force for safeguarding national security and an important growth point for our military’s new combat capability. It is mainly a strategic, basic, and supportive type. The support force is formed after the functional integration.

The strategic support force should be called Skynet Army: it will change the war.

Specifically, the strategic support force will include five parts: intelligence reconnaissance, satellite management, electronic countermeasures, cyber offense and defense, and psychological warfare. It is a combination of the most advanced corps, the net army, and other battlefields on the battlefield. More specifically, it is a combat force dedicated to the soft kill mission.

This is also the adjustment of the military reform at the military level. The PLA is divided into the traditional land, sea and air force, the strategic deterrent and the attacking rocket army and the most modern “sky-net” army. The three levels of division of labor are clear, and they can strengthen each other. The synergy between the two, to maximize the advantages of the overall war, is undoubtedly the highlight of this military reform.

Five major parts highlight high-tech content

Let’s take a closer look at the five major components of the Strategic Support Army. First, intelligence reconnaissance. This is not a spy war in the traditional sense. It is not like the old movie “The Crossing River Scout”, which disguise itself as a deep enemy. More is technical reconnaissance. With the increasing popularity of modern equipment, the leakage of various technical information is difficult to avoid, such as radio signals, electromagnetic signals, infrared signals, etc., through the collection and analysis of these signals, a large amount of valuable information can be obtained, strategic support forces The reconnaissance is mainly the technical reconnaissance in this respect, which can be carried out through modern equipment such as reconnaissance satellites, reconnaissance planes, drones, and sensors.

The strategic support force should be called Skynet Army: it will change the war.

Satellite management is the so-called “Heavenly Army”. This is a new type of force that has emerged with the rapid development of space technology, especially satellite information reconnaissance, tracking and surveillance, guided navigation and aerospace weapons. The United States established the National Space Command in 1985, marking the birth of the world’s first heavenly army. Russia subsequently separated the military space force and the space missile defense force from the strategic rocket army and established a space force with a total strength of about 90,000 people. Then with the military reform of the People’s Liberation Army, the “Heavenly Army” under the strategic support force was formally formed and became a force dedicated to space operations in the future. The significance is significant.

The history of electronic confrontation is much longer than that of the Tianjun. As early as in the First World War, both sides have had the information of the other party and the communication of the other party. To the Second World War, the means of electronic confrontation. Both the scale and the scale have been greatly developed. In July 1943, the British army used metal foil strips to interfere with the German radar in the bombing of Hamburg, Germany, which was considered the beginning of modern electronic confrontation. During the Middle East War in the 1960s, electronic confrontation played a decisive role. Under today’s technical conditions, there is no need to spend more on electronic countermeasures.

Network attack and defense is also called cyber warfare. It is the rise of the network, exploiting the loopholes and security flaws of the network to attack and destroy the data in the hardware, software and systems of the network system. In 2001, there was a large-scale civil hacking incident between China and the United States, which stimulated the United States to a certain extent. By 2009, the world’s first cyber command was established. Through the opportunity of military reform, China has set up a specialized cyber warfare force and began systematically investing and developing in the fields of information construction and network attack and defense. This is a milestone for the future war, which is bound to spread to the network. meaningful.


In the end, it is psychological warfare, that is, by applying the principle principle of psychology, taking human psychology as the battlefield, and systematically adopting various means, including the means of communication, such as the Internet, television, and broadcasting, which cannot be separated from modern life. Cognitive, emotional, and will exert influence, mentally disintegrating enemy military and civilian fighting spirits or eliminating the influence of enemy propaganda, thus combating the enemy’s mind, in exchange for the greatest victory and benefits at the least cost. Psychological warfare sounds very mysterious. In fact, as mentioned in “Sun Tzu’s Art of War·The Tactics”: “It is the victorious battle, the good ones who are not good, the soldiers who do not fight and the good, and the good ones.” The “war without a war” is the ultimate goal of today’s psychological war. In the Battle of Normandy in the Second World War, the Allies used a large number of psychological warfare methods, which seriously affected the judgment of the German commander-in-chief and made great contributions to the victory of the battle. Since then, from the Korean War, the Vietnam War, to today’s Iraq War and the Afghan War, the US military has had professional psychological warfare troops to participate in the war. Therefore, this is the most easily overlooked military means, but it is a high level of military struggle, and even more efficient and effective than advanced aircraft cannons.

Therefore, it can be said that the strategic support force is the highest in the five major services after the reform of the PLA’s army. It can even be said to be completely different from the traditional war style of the past, and it is more characterized by ultra-modern flow.


Soft killing

According to the strategy disclosed on the network, the armbands are supported on the network. The above is the eight-and-five-pointed star. Below is the triangular arrow and the electronic cloud orbit. Surrounded by the surrounding wheat ears, it can be seen from this pattern that the strategic support force is not a traditional one. In the sense of steel contest, you can’t see the scene of the smoke, and there is no such thing as a nuclear weapon to destroy the horror of the sea, but the soft kill of the soldiers. In a sense, soft killing is no less inferior than hard killing, and even playing a role is more important than hard killing.

In contrast, until today, the US military has only independent scattered Tianjun, Net Army and psychological warfare units, but the PLA Strategic Support Forces have integrated these units directly in the preparation, and they are able to cooperate and play the greatest combat effectiveness. . It can be said that this major reform of the military, especially the establishment of the strategic support force, is definitely a major improvement in the system.

Imagine that without the strategic support force’s satellites accurately positioned and navigated, without the electronic escaping forces and cyber warfare forces escorting, the Rocket’s strategic missiles will be difficult to function; if there is no strategic support for the technical reconnaissance intelligence support, Satellite communication links, then the land, sea and air forces on the vast battlefield are blind and deaf, and the combat effectiveness is greatly reduced. Therefore, the strategic support forces will play a major role in the invisible four-dimensional and five-dimensional battlefield space.

Original Mandarin Chinese:


















最后则是心理战,也就是通过运用心理学的原理原则,以人类的心理为战场,有计划地采用各种手段,包括现代生活须臾不能脱离的网络、电视、广播等传播手段,对人的认知、情感和意志施加影响,从精神上瓦解敌方军民斗志或消除敌方宣传所造成的影响的对抗活动,从而打击敌方的心志,以最小的代价换取最大胜利和利益。心理战听起来很是玄乎,其实《孙子兵法·谋攻篇》中所提到的:“是故百战百胜,非善之善者也;不战而屈人之兵,善之善者也。” 这里的“不战而屈人之兵”就是今天心理战所要达到的终极目标。在第二次世界大战中的诺曼底登陆战役,盟军就曾运用了大量的心理战手段,严重影响干扰了德军统帅部的判断,为战役的胜利做出了巨大贡献。此后,从朝鲜战争、越南战争,直到今天的伊拉克战争和阿富汗战争,美军都曾有专业的心理战部队参战。因此,这是最容易被忽视的军事手段,但却是军事斗争的高级层次,甚至要比先进的飞机大炮更有效率和作用。







Original Referring URL:  http://war.163.com/16/0104/08/

America Instigating Cyber Warfare – How China Will Realize the Chinese Dream in the Age of American Cyber ​​Warfare // 美國煽動網絡戰 – 中國如何在美國網絡戰時代實現中國夢

America Instigating Cyber Warfare – How China Will Realize the Chinese Dream in the Age of American Cyber ​​Warfare //

美國煽動網絡戰 – 中國如何在美國網絡戰時代實現中國夢

If a power-state wants to realize the dream of the empire, it was a world war 100 years ago, a nuclear war 50 years ago, and now it is a cyber war.

How does the United States face the cyber war era?


Core tips

In recent years, the United States has taken a number of measures to accelerate the development of cyber warfare. After the Obama administration took office, it continued to play the “eight-one” “combination boxing” to improve its cyber warfare capabilities.

Because the United States adheres to the concept of absolute security in cyberspace, this will not only aggravate the insecurity of the United States, but will also induce instability in the objective, resulting in instability of the cyberspace situation.

Recently, foreign media reported the latest progress of the US military in cyber warfare: the US military has spent five years developing advanced cyber weapons and digital combat capabilities, and these weapons may soon be deployed more publicly and will be considered for the next few years. “Network militia.” The US’s measures to accelerate the development of cyber war deserve our high attention and in-depth study.

The era of cyber war has arrived

Today, one-third of the world’s population uses the Internet, and billions of people accept the services provided by the Internet. The arrival of cyber warfare is an inevitable historical necessity. The network revolution is also reshaping the new pattern of world political, economic, social and cultural development.

Cyber ​​warfare in many fields. Cyber ​​warfare has broken through the traditional warfare field, making war a veritable development in economic, political, and military fields. First, the cyber warfare in the economic field is aggressive. In particular, cyber warfare in the financial sector has been described as “a modern version of the bank.” Second, the cyber war in the political arena has intensified. Social networking as a tool for political change represents an amazing power. From the turmoil in West Asia and North Africa to the “Autumn Wall Street”, social networks are everywhere to participate and help. Under the conditions of informationization, the destructive power of network penetration even exceeds military intervention. The third is the initial test of the cyber warfare in the military field. The network has changed the traditional war mode, from the Gulf War embedded virus attack to the Russian-Georgian conflict to use the network “bee colony” attack, each war has a network war “shadow.”

Cyber ​​warfare has become the “atomic bomb” of the information age. The research of RAND Corporation puts forward: “The strategic war in the industrial era is nuclear war, and the strategic war in the information age is mainly cyber warfare.” Why can cyber warfare compare with nuclear war? Because the two have similarities in the “fission reaction” and the destruction effect. If the computer network is abstracted into the weaving of points and lines, the point is the computer and the router, the line is the network channel and the TCP/IP transmission protocol extending in all directions, and the network viruses such as Trojans and worms are the potential “uranium” in the network. Why do viruses in the network cause fission? There are two main reasons: First, the inherent defects of the computer architecture provide a “soil and hotbed” for the virus. The weapon of cyber warfare is a virus such as a Trojan, a worm (which is essentially a malicious code). The reason why malicious code can be raging is because there are exploitable vulnerabilities in the system, and the source of the vulnerability lies in the inherent shortcomings of the von Neumann architecture used by computers. The principle is to store data and programs in the read and write memory (RAM), the data can be read and written, and the program can be changed. In the cybersecurity incidents that occur in today’s world, more than 50% of the exploits that are exploited are mainly due to this mechanism. Second, the open shared Internet provides a path and bridge for the fission of the virus. “Network warfare: The next threat to national security and countermeasures” clearly states that there are five major flaws in the Internet: fragile domain name service systems, unverified routing protocols, malicious traffic without censorship, decentralized network structures, and Clear text transmission. Once these defects are exploited, they may form a flood of attacks on the network, which acts like a weapon of mass destruction, and is as powerful as the “atomic bomb” of the industrial age.

In the process of changing times and the evolution of war, who can take the lead in shifting the focus from the traditional field of human activities to new important areas, who can gain huge strategic benefits. It can be said that mastering the right to make nets in the 21st century is as decisive as mastering the sea power in the 19th century and mastering the air power in the 20th century.

Original Mandarin Chinese:










網絡戰成為信息時代的“原子彈”。蘭德公司研究提出:“工業時代的戰略戰是核戰爭,信息時代的戰略戰主要是網絡戰。”網絡戰為什麼能與核戰爭比肩?因為二者在“裂變反應”和破壞效果上極具相似之處。如果把計算機網絡抽象為點和線的編織,點就是計算機和路由器,線則是四通八達的網絡信道和TCP/IP傳輸協議,而木馬、蠕蟲等網絡病毒正是網絡中潛在的“鈾”。網絡中的病毒為什麼會產生裂變?主要有兩個原因:一是計算機體系結構的固有缺陷給病毒的產生提供了“土壤和溫床”。網絡戰的武器是木馬、蠕蟲(其實質是惡意代碼)等病毒。惡意代碼之所以能夠肆虐,是因為系統內存在可利用的漏洞,而漏洞的本源在於計算機採用的馮·諾依曼體系結構的先天不足。其原理是把數據和程序都統一存儲在讀寫存儲器(RAM)內,數據是可以讀寫的,程序也是可以改變的。當今世界發生的網絡安全事件,50%以上被利用的漏洞主要是源於這個機理。二是開放共享的互聯網為病毒的裂變提供了途徑和橋樑。 《網絡戰:國家安全的下一個威脅及對策》一書明確指出,互聯網存在五大缺陷:脆弱的域名服務系統、不經過驗證的路由協議、不進行審查的惡意流量、非集中式的網絡結構以及明文傳送。這些缺陷一旦被利用,就可能形成對網絡的攻擊洪流,其作用類似於大規模毀傷性武器,威力不亞於工業時代的“原子彈”。


The main measures for the United States to accelerate the development of cyber war

Obama, who relies on the success of the network operator, attaches great importance to the construction of cyberspace. He delivered a “5·29” speech when he came to power, and believed that protecting the network infrastructure would be the top priority for maintaining US national security. During his tenure, Obama successively launched the “eight-one” “combination boxing”, which made the US cyber war into a period of rapid development.

The first is to launch a report. In the “Network Space Security Policy Assessment Report”, it emphasizes that cyber war is related to national security, affects social stability, is related to economic development, and determines the outcome of war.

The second is to strengthen a strategy. It has established a “three-in-one” national security strategy supported by the deterrent strategy of nuclear weapons, the preemptive strategy of space, and the network’s control strategy.

The third is to form a headquarters. In 2009, the US military established the Cyberspace Command, which is the main function of commanding cyber warfare. In May 2013, the US military set up a “joint network center” at each theater headquarters, and its cyber warfare command system was gradually improved. At the same time, the US military also plans to upgrade the Cyberspace Command to a formal combatant command, making it a level of organization with other theater headquarters. This will directly shorten the chain of command of the US cyber warfare forces and the military.

The fourth is to develop a road map. In 2010, the US Army officially issued the “Network Space Combat Capability Conception”, which is considered to be the first roadmap for the development of cyber warfare capabilities developed by the US military.

The fifth is to start a shooting range. In 2009, the US Department of Defense launched the “National Network Shooting Range” project, which was officially delivered in 2012. The US cyber warfare training and weapon evaluation have a realistic environment.

The sixth is to develop a series of weapons. The US military has developed and stocked more than 2,000 virus weapons, and these weapons are gradually moving toward a systemic direction. There are mainly anti-smuggling weapons represented by “seismic net” virus and “digital cannon”, intelligence warfare weapons represented by “flame” and “Gauss” virus, and psychology represented by “shadow network” and “digital water army”. War weapons.

The seventh is to plan a series of exercises. From 2006 to the present, the United States has organized several cross-border cross-border “network storm” exercises. Every time, the Internet is listed as an offensive and defensive target, targeting key infrastructure such as finance, transportation, electricity, energy, and communications. This reveals the main battlefield of cyberspace, which is an open Internet rather than a closed tactical network.

Eight is to support a number of social networking sites. A number of social networking sites such as “Twitter” and “Facebook” have become strategic tools to interfere in his internal affairs. This is a punch in the combination punch. In February 2013, after the overthrow of the opposition government in Tunisia and Egypt, Obama fully affirmed the important role played by Internet companies such as “Twitter” and “Facebook”. According to statistics, only “Facebook” social networking sites have more than 1.3 billion users worldwide.

Published the “Network War Declaration.” Obama’s move after the ruling shows that the United States has officially incorporated cyber warfare into the category of war and classified cyberspace as a new operational domain, reflecting the US’s advanced forecast and preemptive design for future wars. There are two main reasons for its deep motivation: First, to ensure its own network security – reflecting the United States’ concerns about its information security. The second is to ensure global cyber hegemony – reflecting the new concept of the American war.

In 2014, the US military actually promoted the “Network Space Warfare Rules” and “Network Space Warfare Joint Order”, which led to the international strategic competition to focus on the new global public domain of the Internet. The actions of the United States from the domestic to the international, the slave network to the use of force, from the declaration to the action, from the colonial land to the colonial thinking reflect the United States attempting to format the whole world with American values ​​through the Internet. As one reporter said: “Modern American colonization is thought, not land.”

In April 2015, the United States released a new version of the Network Strategy Report, which comprehensively revised the 2011 Cyberspace Action Strategy Report issued by the US Department of Defense. It has the following new changes:

First, it provides a new basis for enhancing the important position of network power construction. The report further raises the threat of US cyberspace to a “first-tier” threat. At the same time, the report also regards China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea as potential “network opponents” in the United States. This is the latest and most serious judgment on the cyber threat situation.

The second is to provide new guidance for speeding up the construction of cyber warfare forces. The report focused on the three major tasks and five major goals of the Ministry of Defense in cyberspace, and further refined the construction goals of 133 cyber warfare detachments.

The third is to create a new pillar for maintaining a comprehensive military advantage. The report clearly stated that when the United States faces an attack against the interests of the United States or the United States in cyberspace, the US military can conduct cyber operations and implement cyber attacks. This is the most important adjustment to this cyberspace strategy. In the future, the US military will use cyber attacks as an important means of warfare. This is the main manifestation of the United States’ concept of “moving the Internet with the use of force” in cyberspace.

The fourth is to create new conditions for reshaping the international network system. The report emphasizes the emphasis on strengthening the coordination between the military and the civilians; the key external development and cooperation with allies. The main goal of the cooperation is to share the costs and risks, promote the international code of conduct that is beneficial to the United States, and seize the right to speak and lead in the formulation of cyberspace rules.

Original Mandarin Chinese:





三是組建一個司令部。 2009年,美軍成立了以指揮網絡戰為主要職能的網絡空間司令部。 2013年5月,美軍在各戰區總部組建“聯合網絡中心”,其網絡戰指揮體係日漸完善。同時,美軍還計劃將網絡空間司令部升格為正式的作戰司令部,使其成為與其他戰區司令部平級的機構。此舉將直接縮短美國網絡戰部隊與軍方最高層的指揮鏈。

四是製定一個路線圖。 2010年,美陸軍正式出台《網絡空間作戰能力構想》,這被認為是美軍制定的首份網絡作戰能力發展路線圖。

五是啟動一個靶場。 2009年,美國防部啟動了“國家網絡靶場”項目,2012年正式交付使用,美國網絡戰演習訓練、武器測評擁有了逼真環境。



八是扶持一批社交網站。把“推特”“臉書”等一批社交網站變為乾涉他國內政的戰略利器。這是組合拳中的一記重拳。 2013年2月,在突尼斯、埃及政府被反對派推翻後,奧巴馬充分肯定了“推特”“臉譜”等網絡公司在其中發揮的重要作用。據統計,僅“臉譜”社交網站的全球用戶已超過13億。








The three key pillars of the United States to accelerate the development of cyber war

There are three key pillars for the United States to accelerate the development of cyber warfare:

Technical pillar. The “Prism Gate Incident” further confirms that the United States has been monitoring the global network to the point of pervasiveness. The United States occupies the upstream of the industrial chain. From basic chips to hardware applications, from operating systems to commercial software, Midea has an absolute technological advantage, forming a complete set of industrial chains, supply chains and information chains. The overwhelming advantages of technology and the monopoly in many core markets are key to the acceleration of cyber warfare in the United States.

Discourse pillar. The powerful ability of the United States to act in cyberspace determines its strong voice in online diplomacy. No matter what double standards it exhibits in cyberspace, it can influence the global public opinion space under the support of powerful discourse. Without the emergence of the “Prism Gate Incident,” the United States has created two “lie” that have become truths around the world: first, the West is a victim of cyberattacks; and second, China is a source of cyberattacks. This has greatly damaged China’s national image, reputation and international status in the international community, seriously affecting China’s high-tech exports, and achieving the “four-two-pound” effect that is difficult to achieve using trade protection and WTO rules. Even if the “Prism Gate Incident” tears open the “fair of justice” of the United States, it still shows superior combat capability, claiming to be monitored by itself, and placing national security on the basis of personal privacy in the name of counter-terrorism. Firmly control the right to speak in cyberspace.

Strategic pillar. A higher level than the technical pillar and discourse pillar is the strategic pillar. The core of the US strategic pillar is reflected in the pre-emptive global strategy and the overall layout of the game power. First, the advantages of multiple forces complement each other. At present, the United States is actively cultivating cyber security companies such as “Fire Eyes”, using their technological advantages and unofficial background to globally control, long-term tracking, collecting evidence, and acting as a pioneer, while the government and the military are hiding behind the scenes. This has earned the US diplomacy a flexible space for attack and retreat. Second, the network attack and defense and theft of intelligence are clear. The clear strategic division of labor has brought the benefit to the United States. Even if the “Prime Gate Incident” broke the news, the National Security Agency was “spoken” by the world, but there was no such thing as its cyberspace command. Instead, the cyberspace command made the cyberspace command The maintenance of national security is an excuse to accelerate the expansion of the army and develop at a high level. The United States has two clear main lines in cyberspace, namely: the National Security Agency is in charge of the network, and the Cyberspace Command is in charge of the network. This clear strategic thinking has provided strong support for the United States to accelerate the development of cyber warfare.

Original Mandarin Chinese:



技術支柱。 “棱鏡門事件”進一步證實美國對全球網絡的監控達到了無孔不入的程度。美國占據了產業鏈上游,從基礎芯片到硬件應用,從操作系統到商用軟件,美都具有絕對的技術優勢,形成了一整套完整的產業鏈、供應鍊和信息鏈。技術領域的壓倒性優勢和在眾多核心市場的壟斷地位是美國能加快網絡戰發展的關鍵。



Absolute Security: Double Standards and Realistic Paradox of American Cybersecurity Concept

It can be seen that on the issue of network security, the United States pursues the concept of absolute security and attempts to use force to move the military to achieve absolute control over cyberspace. It can be seen from Snowden’s breaking news that the US network monitoring of the international community is systematic, large-scale, and uninterrupted, but it requires other countries to strictly control itself, and it cannot be half-step. This is an asymmetrical mindset and a double standard.

Is it feasible? The problem of cyberspace is very complicated, and the processing methods cannot be too simple. To deal with these problems, new rules, new methods, and new thinking are needed. First, there are many kinds of cyberspace actors, and they are mixed. Second, the attack path and source can be virtual forged, and the source of evidence must rely on multiple parties. Due to the complexity and uncertainty of virtual space, many rules of armed conflict law for physical space are difficult to use in cyberspace. For example: How to define war and peace in cyberspace? How to distinguish between military targets and civilian targets? How does the neutral concept apply? In a country that declares neutrality, it is difficult to control the computer malicious code of others without flowing through the network equipment in its own territory, and it is difficult to avoid the control and utilization of the network facilities of the belligerents. For example, in the case of cyber attacks in foreign countries, network equipment in China has also been used by hackers as “broilers” and “springboards”. China is an innocent victim. If “the state responsibility of cyberattacks launched through the country is not properly prevented by “neutral state standards” and “the destruction of cyberattacks by force”, China may suffer innocent blame. And the United States has such a strong technology that it is difficult to completely prevent being exploited, attacked, and controlled. Cyberspace cannot easily be judged or written. Management methods and patterns suitable for physical space may not be suitable for virtual space. Feel free to reduce the trajectory of cyberspace, and at the same time push up the risk of conflict escalation. Therefore, any dispute arising out of cyberspace should be resolved in a peaceful manner and should not be threatened by force or by force.

Is the effect controllable? There are two situations in which a consequence assessment is required. First, what should I do if I misjudge? Simplifying the threshold of attack can make a neutral country or an innocent suffer a disaster. Second, can you solve the problem? In 2014, local conflicts such as the Ukrainian crisis and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict led to cyber conflicts, and large-scale cyber attacks continued to take place. Western countries headed by the United States have imposed sanctions on Russian banks and enterprises, resulting in a clear upward trend in cyberattacks against the US financial industry. It can be seen from the effect evaluation that it cannot be said that deterrence and force have no effect on the solution of the problem, but it is not a panacea. If a big country like the United States and Russia uses force in cyberspace, what kind of negative effects and consequences will this bring to world peace?

Is it desirable to think? Although the United States has the most powerful army and the most advanced technology in the world, it is still constantly looking for opponents, rendering crises and exaggerating threats. This makes the whole world lack of security, objectively induces unstable factors, and stimulates negative energy and potential threats. It is precisely because the United States pays too much attention to its own national interests and is unwilling to adjust its strategic demands for the sound development of the international system. This has led the United States to continually fall into the “security dilemma” and “more anti-terrorism” circles since the “9.11” incident. This phenomenon deserves the United States to ponder.

(The author is the vice president of the National Innovation and Development Strategy Research Association)

Original Mandarin Chinese:




效果上是否可控?有兩種情況需要作後果評估。第一,誤判了怎麼辦?簡單化地降低打擊門檻可能會讓中立國或無辜者蒙受災難。第二,能否解決問題? 2014年,烏克蘭危機、巴以沖突等局部地區對抗導致網絡衝突不斷,大規模網絡攻擊事件持續上演。以美國為首的西方國家對俄銀行、企業進行製裁,導致對美金融行業的網絡攻擊呈明顯上升趨勢。由此可見,從效果評估看,不能說威懾和武力對問題的解決沒有效果,但它不是萬能的。如果美俄這樣的大國在網絡空間動武,這會給世界和平帶來什麼樣的負面效應和惡果?



Original Referring URL:  http://www.81.cn/wjsm/2016-02/17/