Tag Archives: #China #Cyber #Warfare #Information #Dominance

中國軍隊——揭開境外網路空間行動之謎

Chinese Military – Uncovering the Mysteries of Foreign Cyberspace Operations

原始中文國語:

隨著科學技術的不斷發展,戰爭形式已進入資訊化戰爭時代。 資訊已成為戰鬥力的主導要素。 雙方圍繞著資訊的收集、傳輸和處理展開了激烈的對抗。 網路空間是資料和資訊傳輸的通道。 現代作戰單位之間的橋樑。

美國軍方是第一個將網路空間軍事化的國家。 2008年,美國成立空軍網路司令部,將網路空間定義為整個電磁頻譜空間,將認知和實踐從狹隘的資訊域延伸到廣闊的網路域。 。 2018年1月,美國陸軍訓練與條令司令部(TRADOC)發布了《TP 525-8-6美國陸軍網路空間與電子戰作戰概念2025-2040》,描述了美國陸軍將如何在網路空間和電子戰中作戰。 在電磁頻譜中運行,以應對未來作戰環境的挑戰。 與其他傳統作戰領域相比,網路空間將對未來作戰產生哪些影響? 在未來一體化聯合作戰背景下,能為多域聯合作戰帶來哪些突破?

神秘-網路空間行動

第五大領域資訊化戰爭。 賽博空間一詞最早出現在1982年的加拿大科幻小說《全像玫瑰碎片》中,描述了網路與人類意識融合的賽博空間。 根據美國國防部軍事詞彙詞典,網路空間是資訊環境中的全球性領域,由獨立的資訊技術基礎設施網路組成,包括互聯網、電信網路、各種區域網路和電腦系統以及嵌入式處理器和控制器。 隨著網路技術的不斷發展,網路空間已從電腦網路擴展到不可見的電磁頻譜,即電磁環境中的實體場。 它不僅包括我們通常認識的電腦網絡,還包括使用各種電磁能量的所有物理系統。

此外,在現代戰爭中,網路空間是資訊戰的新領域。 已被美軍列為與陸、海、空、天同等重要、必須保持決定性優勢的五個領域之一。 涉及網路戰、資訊戰、電子戰、太空戰、指揮控制戰、C4ISR等領域。 它是超越傳統的陸、海、空、天四維戰鬥空間的第五維度戰鬥空間。 它既相對獨立又嵌入其他領域。 與傳統領域相比,網路空間具有邊界邊界模糊、覆蓋範圍廣、情勢複雜多變的特性。

網路空間作戰超越了時間和空間的限制。 由於電磁頻譜缺乏地理邊界和自然邊界,網路空間超越了地理邊界、時間和距離的限制,使得網路空間作戰幾乎可以在任何地方發生,跨越陸地、海洋、太空和空中作戰,將傳統的四種作戰方式融為一體。立體作戰空間領域,可瞬間對遠程目標進行攻擊。 由於資訊在網路空間的傳播速度接近光速,高速資訊傳輸將大幅提升作戰效率與能力,提供快速決策、指導作戰、達到預期作戰效果的能力。 更重要的是,根據作戰需要,在網路空間或透過網路空間實現軍事目標或軍事效果可以分為進攻性網路作戰和防禦性網路作戰兩種類型。

進攻性網路行動是指在網路空間預防、削弱、中斷、摧毀或欺騙敵方網絡,以確保己方在網路空間的行動自由。 其主要行動包括實施電子系統攻擊、電磁系統封鎖和攻擊、網路攻擊和基礎設施攻擊等。防禦性網路行動包括防禦、偵測、表徵、反擊和減輕網路空間威脅事件的活動,旨在保護美國國防部防禦網絡或其他友方網絡,維持被動和主動利用友方網路空間的能力,保護資料、網路和其他指定的系統能力。

網路空間電磁戰

戰略威懾,輿論制勝。 近年來,針對經濟、政治、軍事等目標的網路攻擊不斷增加。 由於具有規模大、隱蔽性好、攻擊基礎設施能力強等特點

網路攻擊已成為一些國家在政治衝突中的優勢。 優勢手段。 俄烏衝突期間,俄羅斯以網路空間為陣地,以無線電電子戰為輔助,切斷烏克蘭系統通訊,中斷烏克蘭指揮; 抵制輿論負面消息,發布正面消息; 它癱瘓了網路上的敵人。 利用敵方網站製造恐慌,然後配合部隊正面進攻,達到速勝的目的。

全球佈局,千里之外擒敵。 美國在建立以本國主導的網路空間安全框架的過程中,掌握了盟友的網路空間作戰能力,建立了全球軍事基地和網路空間互聯互通。 相關情報人員平時透過情報行動完成網路預設,例如利用網路等手段透過情報分析來監控和收集敵方網路資料。 透過網路預設,必要時可利用網路漏洞入侵敵方網路、控制系統、破壞資料等,實現「千里取敵性命」。 2010年7月,美國透過某種蠕蟲病毒入侵伊朗核電廠,並控制了其核心設備,大大拖延了伊朗的核計畫。

充分發揮非對稱作戰優勢,提高作戰效益。 「舒特」計畫是美國空軍為了壓制敵方防空能力而提出的。 它利用不對稱作戰理論來摧毀敵方的防空系統。 核心目標是入侵敵方通訊、雷達、電腦等網路電力系統。 戰爭中,「舒特」攻擊可以透過遠程無線電侵入敵方防空預警系統和通訊系統的電腦網絡,進而攻擊並癱瘓敵方防空系統,或攻擊敵方可用的電子系統和網路系統,突破敵人的網絡。 攔截,然後利用相應的專業算法(主要是“木馬”病毒)侵入敵方雷達或網絡系統,監聽或竊取相關信息,洩露敵方作戰計劃、部隊部署、武器裝備等重要信息,從而幫助調整己方的作戰計畫、作戰結構和武器配比,以最小的成本獲得最大的利益。

網路空間作戰的未來發展

各國日益重視,大力發展。 隨著各國意識的加深,發展網路能力、贏得網路戰爭已成為各國謀求軍事優勢、贏得未來戰爭的重要內容。 2015年,美軍根據「伊斯蘭國」組織成員在網路上發布的評論和照片,利用大數據分析和偵察定位,最終在22小時內摧毀了一個「伊斯蘭國」指揮所。 目前,美國已成立網路空間司令部,組成網路空間作戰部隊,深化作戰理論研究,初步形成網路空間作戰能力。 其他國家也開展了網路競賽。 為了加強網路空間作戰能力,法國成立了新的資訊系統安全局。 英國政府發布國家通訊安全戰略,宣布成立網路安全辦公室和網路安全行動中心。 日本建立了以電腦專家為主的網路戰部隊,顯示網路空間戰引起了越來越多國家的興趣。

融合多種技術,增強網路空間作戰能力。 隨著新技術的突破,大數據技術、5G技術、人工智慧技術可以應用於網路空間作戰。 大數據技術可以儲存大量數據、收集複雜類型的數據,並且可以快速計算並獲取有用的信息。 它可以加快網路空間戰爭各方面的執行速度並使其更加精準。 5G技術具有低時延、高傳輸、大容量的特點,使得網路空間戰爭在全球環境、多域協同作戰中更具威脅性。 此外,還可以利用人工智慧深度學習、推理等能力來模擬網路空間戰爭。 在這個過程中,可以發現自身武器系統的弱點並加以改進。 透過這些技術的深度融合,可以將網路空間打造為智慧化、高傳輸、高精度的網路環境,為未來資訊化聯合作戰打造智慧大腦。

並掌握未來經營的主動權。

有效推進聯合作戰。 利用跨域資訊化聯合作戰本質上是基於地理空間部署,建立穩定且有效率的網路空間資訊活動態勢,共同實現作戰目標的新型作戰形態。 聯合部隊有不同的資訊能力。 實現高度共享和深度融合,增強即時態勢感知,提高指揮效率,提高一體化戰鬥力。 網路能力不僅可以服務單一軍種或單位,還可以優先保障戰略級目標,高水準組織網路戰爭和各兵種作戰,規劃陸、海、空等網路作戰。空氣和空間維度。 戰鬥目標。

未來的戰爭將是智慧化、系統化的戰爭。 「聯合資訊環境」是實現「跨域協作」、打造「全球一體化作戰」能力的策略性舉措。 隨著科技的不斷改善與發展,網路空間作戰將成為核心作戰領域之一,將大幅提升未來系統作戰效能,為謀取資訊優勢、贏得戰爭提供重要支撐。

外文原版英文:

With the continuous development of science and technology, the form of war has entered the era of information warfare. Information has become the dominant element of combat effectiveness. Both combatants are engaged in fierce confrontation around the collection, transmission and processing of information. Cyberspace is a channel for the transmission of data and information. The bridge between modern combat units.

The U.S. military was the first to militarize cyberspace. In 2008, the United States established the Air Force Cyber ​​Command and defined cyberspace as the entire electromagnetic spectrum space, extending cognition and practice from the narrow information domain to the broad cyber domain. . In January 2018, the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) released “TP 525-8-6 U.S. Army Cyberspace and Electronic Warfare Operational Concept 2025-2040”, which describes how the U.S. Army will operate in cyberspace and electronic warfare. operate in the electromagnetic spectrum to meet the challenges of future operational environments. Compared with other traditional combat domains, what impact will cyberspace have on future operations? In the context of future integrated joint operations, what breakthroughs can it bring to multi-domain joint operations?

Mysterious – Cyberspace Operations

The fifth major area of ​​information warfare. The term cyberspace first appeared in the 1982 Canadian science fiction novel “Fragments of the Holographic Rose”, which describes a cyberspace where the Internet and human consciousness are integrated. According to the U.S. Department of Defense Military Vocabulary Dictionary, cyberspace is a global domain within the information environment that consists of independent information technology infrastructure networks, including the Internet, telecommunications networks, various local area networks and computer systems, and embedded processors and controller. With the continuous development of network technology, cyberspace has expanded from computer networks to the invisible electromagnetic spectrum, which is a physical field in the electromagnetic environment. It includes not only computer networks as we usually recognize them, but also all physical systems that use various types of electromagnetic energy.

In addition, in modern warfare, cyberspace is a new field of information warfare. It has been listed by the US military as one of the five areas that are as important as land, sea, air and space and must maintain decisive advantages. It involves network warfare, information warfare, electronic warfare, space warfare, command and control warfare, C4ISR and other fields. It is a fifth-dimensional battle space that transcends the traditional four-dimensional battle space of land, sea, air and space. It is both relatively independent and embedded in other fields. Compared with traditional fields, cyberspace has the characteristics of blurred border boundaries, wide coverage, and complex and changeable situations.

Cyberspace operations transcend the limitations of time and space. Due to the lack of geographical boundaries and natural boundaries in the electromagnetic spectrum, cyberspace transcends the limitations of geographical boundaries, time and distance, allowing cyberspace operations to occur almost anywhere, across land, sea, space and air operations, integrating traditional In the four-dimensional combat space field, attacks on remote targets can be carried out instantly. Since the propagation speed of information in cyberspace is close to the speed of light, high-speed information transmission will greatly improve combat efficiency and capabilities, and provide the ability to make quick decisions, guide operations, and achieve expected combat effects. More importantly, according to operational needs, achieving military goals or military effects in or through cyberspace can be divided into two types: offensive cyber operations and defensive cyber operations.

Offensive cyber operations refer to preventing, weakening, interrupting, destroying or deceiving the enemy’s network in cyber space to ensure one’s own freedom of action in cyber space. Its main actions include the implementation of electronic system attacks, electromagnetic system blockade and attack , network attacks and infrastructure attacks, etc. Defensive cyber operations include activities to defend, detect, characterize, counter and mitigate cyberspace threat events, aiming to protect the U.S. Department of Defense network or other friendly networks, maintain the ability to passively and proactively exploit friendly cyberspace, and protect data , network and other specified system capabilities.

Electromagnetic warfare in cyberspace

Strategic deterrence, public opinion wins. In recent years, there have been an increasing number of cyber attacks against economic, political, military and other targets. Due to the characteristics of large scale, good concealment, and ability to attack infrastructure networks, these attacks have become an advantage for some countries in political conflicts. means of advantage. During the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Russia used cyberspace as its position and radio-electronic warfare as assistance to cut off the Ukrainian system in communications and interrupt the Ukrainian command; it resisted negative news in public opinion and released positive news; it paralyzed the enemy on the Internet. Use the enemy’s website to create panic, and then cooperate with the frontal attack of the troops to achieve the goal of quick victory.

Global layout, capturing enemies from thousands of miles away. In the process of establishing a cyberspace security framework dominated by its own country, the United States has mastered the cyberspace operations of its allies and established global military bases and cyberspace interconnectivity. Relevant intelligence personnel complete network presets through intelligence operations in peacetime, such as using the Internet and other means to monitor and collect enemy network data through intelligence analysis. Through network presets, when necessary, network vulnerabilities can be exploited to invade the enemy’s network, control the system, destroy data, etc., to achieve “taking the enemy’s life thousands of miles away.” In July 2010, the United States invaded Iran’s nuclear power plant through a certain worm virus and took control of its core equipment, greatly delaying Iran’s nuclear program.

Give full play to the advantages of asymmetric combat and improve combat benefits. The “Shute” plan was proposed by the U.S. Air Force to suppress the enemy’s air defense capabilities. It uses asymmetric combat theory to destroy the enemy’s air defense system. The core goal is to invade the enemy’s communications, radar, computer and other network power systems. In war, the “Shute” attack can invade the computer network of the enemy’s air defense early warning system and communication system through remote radio, and then attack and paralyze the enemy’s air defense system, or attack the enemy’s available electronic systems and network systems to break through the enemy’s network. Block, and then use corresponding professional algorithms (mainly “Trojan horse” viruses) to invade the enemy’s radar or network system, monitor or steal relevant information, and leak important information about the enemy’s combat plan, troop deployment, and weapons and equipment, thereby helping Adjust the combat plan, combat structure and weapon ratio to your own side to obtain the maximum benefits at the minimum cost.

The future development of cyberspace operations

Paying increasing attention to it, countries are vigorously developing it. As countries’ understanding deepens, developing cyber capabilities and winning cyber wars have become an important part of countries seeking military advantages and winning future wars. In 2015, based on comments and photos posted online by members of an “Islamic State” organization, the U.S. military used big data analysis and reconnaissance positioning, and finally destroyed an “Islamic State” command post within 22 hours. At present, the United States has established a Cyberspace Command, organized a cyberspace combat force, deepened research on combat theory, and developed preliminary cyberspace combat capabilities. Other countries have also launched cyber competitions. In order to strengthen its cyberspace combat capabilities, France established a new Information Systems Security Agency. The British government released the National Communications Security Strategy and announced the establishment of a Cybersecurity Office and a Cybersecurity Action Center. Japan has established a cyber warfare force mainly composed of computer experts, which shows that cyber space warfare has aroused the interest of more and more countries.

Integration of multiple technologies to enhance cyberspace combat capabilities. With the breakthrough of new technologies, big data technology, 5G technology, and artificial intelligence technology can be applied to cyberspace operations. Big data technology can store large amounts of data, collect complex types of data, and can quickly calculate and obtain useful information. It can speed up the execution of all aspects of cyberspace warfare and make it more accurate. 5G technology has the characteristics of low latency, high transmission and large capacity, making cyberspace warfare more threatening in a global environment and multi-domain coordinated operations. In addition, artificial intelligence deep learning, reasoning and other capabilities can be used to simulate cyberspace warfare. In the process, the weaknesses of one’s own weapon systems can be found and improved. Through the deep integration of these technologies, cyberspace can be built into an intelligent A network environment with high transmission and precision can create an intelligent brain for future information-based joint operations and grasp the initiative in future operations.

Effectively promote joint operations. The use of cross-domain information-based joint operations is essentially a new combat form that jointly achieves operational goals by establishing a stable and efficient cyberspace information activity situation based on the deployment of geographical space. The joint forces have different information capabilities. Achieve a high degree of sharing and deep integration to enhance real-time situational awareness, improve command efficiency, and improve integrated combat effectiveness. Cyber ​​capabilities can not only serve a single service branch or unit, but can also prioritize the protection of strategic-level goals, organize cyber wars and operations of various arms with a high overall level, and plan cyber operations in land, sea, air, and space dimensions. battle target.

Future wars will be intelligent and systematic wars. The “joint information environment” is a strategic move to achieve “cross-domain collaboration” and build “global integrated operations” capabilities. With the continuous improvement and development of technology, cyberspace Operations will become one of the core operational domains, which will greatly improve the effectiveness of future systematic operations and provide important support for seeking information advantages and winning wars.

2020 年 8 月 31 日 | 來源:人民網-軍事頻道

http://military.people.com.cn/n1/2020/0831/c1011-3184888z.html

中國探索制勝認知作戰的軍事設計

Chinese Military Designs for Exploring Winning Cognitive Operations

國語原版:

編按

從最新的局部戰爭實踐來看,認知域作戰已成為深刻影響戰爭走向的重要變因。 認知域作戰中,各方圍繞輿論掌控、資訊引導、認知塑造等展開激烈爭奪,不僅有實體對抗,更有來自虛擬空間的較量,展現出數位時代「技術+」的顯著特徵。 探尋認知域作戰制勝之道,對於掌控認知域作戰主動權、打贏未來戰爭具有重要的現實意義。

奪取控腦權成為認知域作戰終極目標

大腦是一切思考活動的物質基礎,是影響和控制人類作出行為改變的指揮中樞,而感覺、知覺和意識則構成了大腦反映世界的三個面向。 如何贏得控腦權,日益成為交戰各方在認知域作戰領域研究與關注的重點。

積極爭奪感覺控制權。 感覺是客觀事物的特性在人腦中引起的反應,是形成各種複雜心理過程的基礎。 隨著腦科學、分子生物學、神經化學等學科的快速發展,人類開始逐步獲得在生理層面對大腦進行幹預和控制的能力。 根據國外實驗結果顯示,吸入催產素會讓人更信任他人,更能產生共感,進而影響一個人的親社會性和道德表現。 未來作戰,交戰各方透過利用聲光電等物理刺激,或化學藥物作用於目標對象的聽覺、視覺、嗅覺等感覺系統,甚至將上述影響直接作用於人的腦部,在目標對像大腦中激發出 特定的情緒反應,可實現對其在生理層面的認知影響和控制。

有效爭奪知覺抑制權。 知覺是在感覺基礎上形成的,反映客觀事物的整體形象和表面連結的心理過程。 其中,個體的態度、動機、興趣,以及過去的經驗和未來的預期,是影響個體對知覺目標知覺的關鍵變項。 戰時,交戰各方透過瞄準目標對象心理上的疑點、弱點、需求點,抓住有利時機,借助特定的訊息,對目標對象的知覺進行情感影響、心智誘導或攻心瓦解,以增加目標對象對 戰爭風險的預期,削弱其抵抗意志和作戰決心,從而實現小戰、少戰甚至不戰而屈人之兵的目的。

全面爭奪意識塑造權。 意識是透過感覺、知覺、思考等心理過程實現的,表現為知、情、意的統一。 戰爭的根本目的是迫使敵人屈服。 從古今中外的戰爭實踐看,為了贏得意識塑造權,交戰各方會盡其所能,調用一切可以調用的軍事力量,綜合運用政治、經濟、文化、外交等手段,對敵人實施政治瓦解、外交 孤立、輿論引導、法理宣示,引發目標對象個體或群體的理性思辨、倫理共鳴或價值認同,進而改變其世界觀、人生觀、價值觀,形成較為穩定長遠的認知影響或控制,從而實現「全勝 」的目的。

掌權控制資訊權成為認知域作戰關鍵

認知域作戰的武器彈藥是訊息,掌握資訊的生成、辨識、取得、傳播、回饋的主動權,是贏得認知域戰場優勢的關鍵。

主動實施強烈心理刺激,助推訊息滲透。 現代戰爭對抗激烈複雜,各種對抗要素在多維多域立體展開,戰機稍縱即逝。 作用於認知域的力量與手段必須緊跟戰場態勢發展變化,廣泛藉助閾下訊息植入、聲光電磁心理滋擾損傷、非接觸式情緒控制等強烈心理刺激手段,主動出擊,以誘導目標 對象的情感、意志、思想、信念等出現混亂、迷惘或激變,進而達成對目標對象認知系統控制與影響的目的。

廣泛運用智慧演算法,實現精準推送。 隨著網路滲入人類生活各個層面,所有人都會在網路上留下大量資料資訊。 戰時,交戰各方會藉助大數據、雲端運算、物聯網、區塊鏈等現代資訊技術,對目標對象的社交數據、軌跡數據、金融數據、網購記錄、搜尋記錄、個人通訊記錄等網路數據 資訊進行深度挖掘關聯,實現對目標對象的“認知畫像”,系統分析出目標對象的興趣偏好、行為趨勢、人際關係以及價值取向,從而立體掌握相關個體或特定群體的特徵。 而後藉助智慧演算法技術,將個人化客製化認知訊息向目標對象實施精準推送,進而影響目標對象對戰爭的態度、情感以及價值判斷,進而助推己方作戰目的與政治意圖的實現。

有效聚合社會支持系統,實現整體連結。 社會支持系統,是一個人在自己的社會關係網絡中所能獲得的、來自他人的物質和精神上的幫助和支援,是影響和決定個體獲得情感依賴和認知走向的關鍵因素。 可以說,認知域作戰能否成功,獲得目標對象社會支持系統的支持和協助至關重要。 借助現代資訊技術,可以有效關聯到目標對象的親人、朋友、同學、合作夥伴等特定社會關係人,透過對上述關係人施加針對性影響,取得對方的理解、支持和信任,動員特定關係人對 目標對象施加影響,更能贏得目標對象的信任與接納,更容易使目標對象產生認知改變,進而達成對目標對象的認知影響與控制的目的。

虛擬空間成為認知域作戰主戰場

在人類虛擬空間不斷拓展的趨勢下,虛擬空間正成為現代戰爭尤其是認知域作戰的主戰場,某種程度上決定未來戰爭的勝負。

新興傳播形態成為認知域作戰新手段。 隨著行動互聯技術的不斷發展,以社群媒體等為代表的新興傳播形態逐步成為認知對抗的全新平台和主流陣地。 從近幾場局部戰爭來看,社群媒體的地位作用越來越突出,交戰各方透過借助個人部落格、論壇等平台即時發布戰場圖文、錄影和評論跟帖,不僅成為全球行動網媒終端 的共議話題,也成為全球不同國家、不同勢力派別價值認知賽局的主陣。 社群媒體等新興傳播形態以其獨特的去中心化及互動性特點,打破了傳統傳播方式中的資訊壟斷與資訊控制,催生了眾多的產品樣態,在滿足人們資訊需求的同時,也在 不知不覺中改變人們的認知。 可以預見,未來認知域作戰中,社群媒體的地位角色將會越來越突出。

網路空間成為認知域作戰新空間。 在資訊化智慧化條件下,網路技術的門檻大大降低,全球即時觀戰成為可能。 現代戰爭已從電視時代的“起居室戰爭”,發展成今天全媒體時代的“掌上戰爭”。 網路直播比任何形式的戰地報道都更直觀更豐富,「全球共時性」成為突出的特點。 透過網路直播,交戰雙方激戰的影片、畫面和眾多燒毀的坦克、裝甲車,以及被戰火毀壞的家園、逃離家園的難民都可以直觀地呈現出來。 人們可以透過網路看到一個個具體的平民、雙方戰士的微觀狀態,戰場的「透明化」讓任何試圖掩蓋真相的努力和不實的虛假陳述變得愈來愈困難。 但另一方面,智慧語音克隆、視頻人像模擬替換等技術的出現,讓人們看到的不一定“誠如所見”,聽到的也不一定“真如所聽”,網絡直播下的認知 域作戰增添了更多可能和想像的空間。

智慧化網路軍團成為認知域作戰新生力量。 資訊網路的發展突破了人際溝通的真實性限制,我們難以確定網路另一端是不是真實存在的人。 基於大規模互動的需要,智慧化、自動化、規模化的網路空間機器人正異軍突起,它們廣泛活躍於網路空間的各個角落。 這些智慧化網路軍團具備智慧辨識、智慧應答甚至類腦思考的能力,並且不知疲憊、全時無休,智慧化網路軍團正成為未來認知域作戰的重要力量。 從當前相關技術發展趨勢來看,世界各主要國家甚至商業組織,正在把目光投向網路機器人在群組滲透、直播跟評、塑造輿論態勢、管控網路危機等方面的潛力前景,在網路智慧機器人柔性引導 技術群自動取得、自動培育和群組滲透等關鍵技術上加強研發力度,透過發現並有效利用網路使用者行為規律,為輿論引導、認知塑造、行為導控提供智慧、高效的技術支援。

現代外語:

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.

中國軍事原文來源:http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-09/01/content_323888.htm

中國軍事認知域作戰:關注對手思想與情感衝突-認知域作戰的突出屬性

Chinese Military Cognitive Domain Operations: Focus on the Adversary Mind and Emotional Conflict – Prominent Attributes of Cognitive Domain Operations

要點提示

●實務證明,認知域作戰打破了傳統意義上的線上線下的資料壁壘,透過統合利用電信網路、網際網路、物聯網等管道,借助先進演算法,發起者可以有效切換各種空間,優選作戰樣式 ,甚至聚焦在私人空間、公共空間精準釋放乾擾訊息,以達到傳統作戰方式無法達到的效果。

●在未來的認知域作戰中,科學和邏輯等理性因素對個體認知的影響極有可能被削弱,認知對抗或將成為情感與情感的較量。

目前,智慧化科技的快速發展,正全方位變革訊息傳播的邏輯,使訊息對思維意識的影響更加深刻和全面,人的大腦認知真正上升為軍事對抗的重要場域。 智慧化時代,資訊傳播機制的不斷演進將從多面向體系化重塑認知對抗,進而推動認知域作戰發生根本性變革。

人工智慧成為認知域作戰的主要驅動力

智慧化時代,資訊傳播以數據為依托,人工智慧技術貫穿資訊收集、生產、回饋等全過程。 人工智慧這項顛覆性技術在軍事領域的廣泛深入應用,將是未來認知域作戰規劃和實施等整個過程的關鍵支撐。

人工智慧技術將貫穿未來認知域作戰多場景。 在認知域作戰行動部署、節奏把控等過程中,參戰各方依托先進算法作為行動的“調控者”“把關人”,來自各個作戰域的大量關於戰場行動的信息,為交戰各方 高效率決策和實施認知域作戰提供驅動力。 實踐證明,認知域作戰打破了傳統意義上的線上線下的資料壁壘,透過統合利用電信網路、互聯網、物聯網等管道,借助先進演算法,發起者可以有效切換各種空間,優選作戰樣式, 甚至聚焦在私密空間、公共空間精準釋放乾擾訊息,以達到傳統作戰方式無法達到的效果。

此外,人工智慧從賦能單環節朝向連結作戰各環節、全流程演變。 目前,人工智慧在資訊傳播中也局限於定位目標受眾,以提高資訊和信宿的匹配率。 未來認知域作戰,人工智慧將在認知域作戰規劃和實施各環節「一站式」發揮作用,並不斷強化各環節之間的耦合。 外軍認為,未來認知域作戰中,可利用數據差異化投送,啟動機器人瞬時製造輿論潮流,影響認知效果。 戰略戰役層面,可基於長期追蹤數據和不斷調整優化的演算法策略,計算不同地域、群體認知態勢,輔助決策者規劃核心敘事、主要議題等,從而調控行動實施和協同動作。

自主對抗成為認知域作戰的顯著特徵

隨著智慧程式從協同傳播、參與傳播到自主傳播,以及智慧終端的連結生態的不斷擴大,未來戰場上,官兵將越來越多地可以接收到智慧程式、智慧終端發送的各類訊息。 而在虛擬空間,數位孿生體、虛擬人之間的互動溝通,將會傳導作用於現實世界人的認知。 從智慧化條件下的認知域作戰的發展趨勢來看,人的介入度將逐漸降低,資訊彈藥的採集、合成、發送將更加自主高效,話語策略、行動策略的製定執行更趨自主化, 整個流程節奏空前快速。 但就結果而言,人仍是認知域作戰的最終目標,由自主化武器賦能加速的流程會持續強化對人認知的控制。

借助智慧程式、智慧終端、數位孿生體、虛擬人等自主對抗工具,參戰各方將在認知域作戰態勢佈設、時空運用、資訊內容設計等方面擁有更多彈性,資訊真偽對抗將更加 突出。 未來的認知域作戰,自主化武器將有可能突破力量與時空的限制,行動樣式更趨複雜。 外軍實踐表明,運用網路進行面向大眾的「噴灌式」傳播、面向特定群體的「滴灌式」傳播,將成為認知域作戰的常見樣式。 智慧程式、智慧終端機由於具有大量複製部署、不間歇運轉等特點,能夠支援開發更多更複雜的行動樣式。 如可圍繞特定議題、瞄準特定攻擊對象,迅即調動海量社交機器人,輪番集中擴散信息,或利用圍繞特定個體的智能設備採集相關數據,運用對話機器人、虛擬人與個體長期伴生互動、持續誘導,以 達成作戰目的。

未來認知域作戰,自主化武器隱蔽操控認知域戰場將成為常態,社交機器人可以根據需要製造假輿情、假熱點,從而產生更多的個體感知迷霧;智能合成技術將降低虛假信息製作門檻, 從而增加鑑偽成本和難度;機器人帳號、虛擬人信源將更難以甄別,而「一對一」的認知詐欺日益普遍。

情感衝突成為認知域作戰的突出屬性

智能化時代,新科技將拓寬人類的認知範圍、加深人們的感知程度。 擴展現實、元宇宙等技術將更全像、透明地呈現戰場環境、事件現場等,且場景可觸可感可交互,受眾在認知事件真相時將會更加受制於感性邏輯的影響。

得益於行動互聯網的發展,資訊傳播的迅捷度快速提高,透過大批次的資訊短時間內集中釋放,可極大壓縮個體的反應時間,使個體難以進行深度思考。 在事件全貌完整展現之前,受眾往往已形成立場傾向甚至將注意力轉向新焦點,依據碎片化線索輸出結論的模式加劇了對訊息的非理性、情緒化反應。 在未來的認知域作戰中,科學和邏輯等理性因素對個體認知的影響極有可能被削弱,認知對抗或將成為情感與情感的較量。 在訴諸理性與訴諸感性的抉擇中,參戰各方越發注重以情動人,透過感性手段激盪、佔據甚至極化目標對象心智,主導認知域對抗態勢。

智能化時代,認知撬動愈加倚重感性爭取。 一方面,以情緒喚醒策略增強認知共鳴。 未來的認知域作戰,行動發起者透過把殘酷激烈的交戰畫面、戰後慘像或參戰士兵傷亡過程與現狀有所選擇地呈現於受眾眼前,以此強烈刺激受眾情緒,喚醒受眾內心深處 的情感認同。 人作為傳播網絡的節點,透過智慧演算法可蒐集各類體徵數據,使行動發起者得以較準確地研判訊息所產生的情緒效果,進而動態調整內容,強化情緒反應。 行動發起者透過數據計算選定具有相似理解語境、相同情感特質的群體,或選定易受影響、具有較大影響價值的特定個體,透過靶向傳播同質化的信息流,從而激發其 群體認知共鳴。

另一方面,以道德裹挾策略激發價值認同。 面對累積加重的片段化、非理性認知反應模式,作戰行動發起者可透過二元對立的話語體系佔據道德高點、匯聚利己價值認知洪流,進而實現裹挾效果。 智慧傳播環境下豐富的呈現形態、直抵民眾的社群管道,為行動發起者運用此策略提供了便捷手段。 近年來的局部戰爭中,科技演進對道德裹挾策略的促進已逐步體現,如社群媒體將以往的秘密外交暴露於民眾面前,交戰各方首腦政要運用這一手段,直播或全程公開與別處決策 層、菁英群等的溝通細節,話語策略也愈發突顯道德仲裁與批判,進而影響、刺激國際民眾支持己方價值立場。

萬物互聯擴展認知域作戰的戰場空間

隨著資訊傳播技術的發展,社群媒體逐漸成為塑造認知的主要戰場,交戰各方的機構、個人與民眾透過社群媒體可以直接接觸並產生相互關聯,從而使全天候的認知爭奪成為可能。

智慧傳播時代,萬物互聯成為新的社會連結模式,傳播主體、傳播行為無所不在。 在此影響下,認知域作戰空間將擴展至智慧物聯終端、場景,並延伸至實體空間和虛擬空間兩個世界。 萬物互聯導致認知域作戰空間的泛在,將進一步推動作戰主體的泛在,自然人、具備資訊收發能力的智慧終端,甚至網路世界中的虛擬角色都有可能成為作戰主體,認知域作戰參戰 力量的類型將會大大拓展,認知域作戰的組織方式將會向分散式協同方向轉變。

未來的認知域作戰,深處衝突腹地的人與機器都將成為作戰的重要力量,在智慧化技術的支撐下,將協同繪製戰場圖景、參與「書寫」戰爭全過程。 前線士兵透過社群網路源源不絕地將個人戰場經歷,經過個人化包裝後適時推送展現給世人,單兵裝備、作戰平台將擔負戰場影像擷取、傳輸任務,並根據預設程序觸發自動處理和發布機制 ,以多種方式配合實體空間作戰行動,爭奪制資訊權和製腦權。 隨著通訊技術的不斷發展,前線士兵、智慧裝備還可以根據上級指令,有針對性地對所掌握的資訊進行再加工、再處理,從而更加便捷地、全景全像地呈現己方所要表達的戰場景象 ,實現認知域作戰攻心奪志的最終目標。

外語英語翻譯:

Important tips

●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.

中國軍事原文來源:http://www.81.cn/yw_208727/10208858.html

中國軍事認知戰—「以決策為中心的戰爭」思想與認知複雜性:武器化的複雜性

Chinese Military Cognitive Warfare – Thoughts of “decision-centered warfare” and cognitive complexity: Weaponized Complexity

繁體中文

——由「決策中心戰」與認知複雜性所想到的

中国军网-解放军报

編按 複雜性科學是當代科學發展的前沿領域之一。 英國物理學家霍金稱「21世紀將是複雜性科學的世紀」。 作為人類社會的社會現象,戰爭從來就是一個充滿蓋然性的複雜巨系統。 近年來,隨著戰爭形態的演變,傳統科學體系下的知識論越來越難以滿足戰爭實踐發展的需要。 關注複雜性科學原理和思維方法,或將成為開啟現代戰爭大門的鑰匙。 這篇文章從複雜性科學角度對「決策中心戰」作一研究探討。

「決策中心戰」是近年來出現的新概念。 緣何提出「決策中心戰」? 按美軍的說法,要「打一場讓對手看不懂的戰爭」。 進入21世紀以來,隨著戰爭形態的演變和作戰方式的不斷變革,美軍發現傳統意義上的網路中心戰越來越難以適應戰場實際,「決策中心戰」在此背景下應運而生。

一、創造複雜

所謂“決策中心戰”,就是在人工智慧等先進技術的加持下,透過對作戰平台的升級改造、分散式部署實現多樣化戰術,在保障自身戰術選擇優勢的同時,向敵方施加高複雜度 ,以乾擾其指揮決策能力,在新維度上實現對敵的壓倒性優勢。

為什麼「對手看不懂」? 其實就是要透過分散式部署、彈性組合、智慧化指控,讓對手在認知上就對戰場態勢和作戰機制不理解,無所適從。 這是將戰爭對抗從機械化戰爭中比誰“力量大”,到信息化戰爭中比誰“速度快”,再到在未來戰爭中比誰“決策對”的又一次轉變。 用中國古代軍事家孫子的話說就是,“不戰而屈人之兵,善之善者也”,通過巧妙地指揮控制和決策,使得戰場情況變得更加複雜,讓對手沒辦法打仗。

如何做到這一點呢? 簡單地說,就是利用複雜系統的性質,找到對手的「命門」加以利用和控制。 一個基本方法就是,透過增加複雜性重塑對手的決策流程,逼迫對手引入新的決策參量,導致其決策變得複雜,從而改變因果關係和決策流程,最終使其走向混亂。 過去對抗局面之所以能夠發揮平衡作用,是因為所有參與者都清楚博弈的結果,因而容易做出權衡,但複雜性往往會破壞這種平衡。 這也是為什麼複雜性能夠作為武器的原因。

需要注意的是,戰場對任何一方都是公平的。 在未來戰場上,要讓敵人單向感到決策複雜,而己方不被複雜所困擾,首先要在指揮控制能力上優於對手。 戰場決策的複雜度主要體現在「OODA」循環的判斷和決策環節。 在正常環境下,「OODA」循環可以走完從觀察、判斷、決策到行動的完整週期。 但如果有辦法讓戰場變得更複雜,使得對手始終無法及時作出有效判斷,進而無法進入決策和行動環節,就可以把對手的「OODA」循環始終限制在觀察和判斷環節上,無法形成閉環, 這或許就是「決策中心戰」試圖創造複雜性想要達到的結果。 因此,如何快速作出判斷,就成為首要關注的問題。 如果這個認知過程能夠在人工智慧等先進技術支援下快速完成的話,也就是實現所謂的智慧認知,就可以大幅加快「OODA」循環速度,奪取單邊優勢。

在觀察的基礎上得出正確的判斷,是做出正確決策的前提。 但這是建立在「具有認知能力」這個條件下才能做到的。 目前,在指揮資訊系統、兵棋推演系統等系統中,這些認知工作基本上都是由人來完成的。 由人工智慧系統自主地完成判斷及決策,過去的嘗試幾乎都不成功,因為智慧認知建模的問題始終沒有解決好。 各種模型表現出來的行為都或多或少帶有“機械味”,並不能真正顯示出智能的特徵。 外軍這些年也一直將「人的行為建模」作為研究重點,但目前來看仍然進展緩慢。 智能認知為什麼這麼難,又難在哪裡? 筆者認為,其實核心困難就在如何理解和處置複雜性上面。

二、理解複雜

本世紀之初,美國蘭德公司針對2005年前後某熱點地區可能發生的軍事衝突,曾利用模擬系統對美國空軍作戰需求進行了1700餘次推演,然後進行統計分析,最後得出了美空軍如何 在戰場上保持優勢的結論。 這種統計分析方法有一個基本的假設:每個試驗都是獨立且無序的,規則之間也不會相互影響。 這就像丟硬幣一樣,丟一次正面,丟第二次有可能也是正面。 但如果丟1萬次,結果某一面的機率就會越來越趨近50%。 這種方法用於物理研究時是科學準確的,但移植到人類社會問題例如戰爭問題研究時,情況就變得不同了。

人是有認知的,不會像物理實體那樣只遵從物理定律,指揮官在對作戰問題進行分析時也不會只是簡單地機械重複。 通常情況下,人在決策時,一定會考慮先前的結果,導致對下一步行動有所調整。 這樣就會出現人類行為固有的冪律特徵,也就是常說的「二八律」。 所以,我們不能簡單地複製物理思維去思考人類社會的事情。

之所以會這樣,主要還是因為我們常常習慣用還原論的簡單思考方法來思考問題。 簡單系統結構不變,結果具有確定性,因果對應清楚,可重複、可預測、可分解還原等,已成為我們預設的科學思考方法。 但世界上還存在著許多複雜系統,這些系統存在著整體性質,像是人體、社會、經濟、戰爭等,都屬於這一類。 什麼叫整體性質? 就是觀察局部得不到,但在整體上看卻又存在的,就是整體性質。 舉例來說,一個活人和一個死人從成分上來看都一樣,但一死一活,差別就在於是否有生命,生命就是一種整體性質。 複雜系統結構可變,具有適應性、不確定性、湧現性、非線性等特點,且結果不重複,也不可預測。 社會、經濟、戰爭、城市包括智慧系統,這些與人有關的系統都有這些特點,其實它們都是典型的複雜系統。 所以,戰爭具有「勝戰不復」的特點,其實反映的就是戰爭複雜系統的「不可重複」性質。

正是因為複雜系統存在複雜性,原因和結果不能一一對應,會導致相似性原理失效,所以也就無法用傳統方法進行建模和研究。 為解決複雜性問題,過去採取的主要是一些傳統物理學方法,例如統計方法,以及基於Agent的簡單生命體建模方法。 前面提到的蘭德公司研究就是如此,雖然能解決部分問題,但將其用於解決與人有關尤其是與認知相關的問題時,得到的結果卻與實際偏離很大,不盡如人意 。

為什麼會這樣呢? 這是因為戰爭複雜度與物理複雜性所產生的源點不一樣。 物理複雜性的來源往往在於其物理運動規律是複雜的;而戰爭複雜性卻來自人的認知。 因為人不是雜亂無章、沒有思想的粒子,也不是只有簡單生命邏輯的低等生物,而是具有判斷和決策認知能力的智慧生物。 人會透過因果關係對結果進行反思、總結經驗再調整,然後決定後面如何行動。 而且,人的認知還會不斷發展,這又會進一步影響後續的認知,但由於認知具有很大的不確定性,所以未來的行動也就難以預測。

可以這樣說,在目前的技術條件下,可預測的基本上都是物理世界的簡單系統規律,而人的認知對社會或戰爭的影響往往是難以預測的。 所以說,拿物理思維去思考人類社會的事情是我們常犯的錯誤。 基於認知的複雜性,與那些一成不變的物理規律截然不同,我們應對戰爭中的複雜性,就必須針對「認知」這個核心特點,在指揮控制方面下功夫。

三、應對複雜

「決策中心戰」的核心在於認知的加快。 因為戰爭中幾乎所有的變化,都可以看成是認知的升級和複雜化。 在筆者看來,應對“決策中心戰”,需要“以複雜對抗複雜”,從基礎工作做起。

一是要理解「決策中心戰」的核心理念。 即透過主動創造複雜性來掌握戰場主動權。 對己方來說,需要管理好自身的複雜性;對敵人來說,則是對對手施加更多的複雜性。 二是了解戰爭機理發生的改變。 作戰體系演化速度指數級提高,會導致複雜戰場的感知、控制和管理變得困難,智慧認知的角色將變得更加突出。 為此,需要瞄準「指揮與控制」這個重點,將戰場管理的能力作為關鍵。 三是找到應對的正確理念和方法。 從戰爭設計入手,以決策智能這個方向為突破口。

近年來,人工智慧領域的一系列成果,為解決指揮決策智慧問題帶來了曙光。 AlphaGo系列研究為決策智慧技術帶來了突破;而GPT大模型的出現,則更是進一步證實了決策智慧乃至通用人工智慧在未來具有實現的可能。 現在看來,人工智慧在未來深度參與戰爭,已經是必須面對的現實。 而這會為戰爭和戰場帶來更多的複雜性。

決策智能研究應該放在指揮控制層上。 要贏得戰爭,指揮控制決策需要體現「科學」和「藝術」兩個面向。 指揮控制的科學性主要體現在「知道怎麼做時」如何做,例如利用得到的指控資料(武器裝備、兵力編成、戰場環境、對手情報等),指控方法(任務、流程、程序、運籌 、規劃、最佳化等),制定出作戰規劃並加以實施。 指揮控制的藝術性則體現在「不知道怎麼做時」知道如何做,這才是真正的智能之所在。 方法無非是不斷試錯,累積經驗,找到解決問題的途徑,並形成新的科學知識。 事實上,現實中指揮者也是透過試誤不斷發現和總結制勝規律,而每個指揮者還都具有自己的直覺和經驗。

所以說,真正的智能其實是找到例外狀況的解決方法。 循規蹈矩不是智能,自己找到解題的方法才是關鍵。 也許這才是決策智能的核心,也是需要進一步努力的目標。

原汁原味的老外英語:

Complexity is also a weapon

——Thinking of “decision-centered warfare” and cognitive complexity

中国军网-解放军报

Editor’s Note Complexity science is one of the frontier fields of contemporary scientific development. British physicist Stephen Hawking said that “the 21st century will be the century of complexity science.” As a social phenomenon in human society, war has always been a complex giant system full of possibilities. In recent years, with the evolution of war forms, the epistemology under the traditional scientific system has become increasingly difficult to meet the needs of the development of war practice. Paying attention to the scientific principles and thinking methods of complexity may be the key to opening the door to modern warfare. This article studies and discusses “decision-centered warfare” from the perspective of complexity science.

“Decision-centered warfare” is a new concept that has emerged in recent years. Why was the “decision-centered war” proposed? According to the US military, it is necessary to “fight a war that the opponent cannot understand.” Since the beginning of the 21st century, with the evolution of war forms and continuous changes in combat methods, the US military has found that network-centric warfare in the traditional sense has become increasingly difficult to adapt to the reality of the battlefield. In this context, “decision-centered warfare” came into being.

1. Create complexity

The so-called “decision-centered warfare” is to achieve diversified tactics through the upgrading and transformation of combat platforms and distributed deployment with the support of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence. While ensuring its own advantages in tactical selection, it imposes high complexity on the enemy. , in order to interfere with its command and decision-making capabilities and achieve an overwhelming advantage over the enemy in a new dimension.

Why “the opponent can’t understand”? In fact, through distributed deployment, flexible combination, and intelligent command and control, the opponent will not understand the battlefield situation and combat mechanism cognitively, and will be at a loss as to what to do. This is another transformation of war confrontation from competing for “greater power” in mechanized warfare, to competing for “faster” in information-based warfare, to competing for “making the right decisions” in future wars. In the words of Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese military strategist, “One who subdues the enemy without fighting is a good person.” Through clever command, control and decision-making, the battlefield situation becomes more complicated, making it impossible for the opponent to fight.

How to do this? Simply put, it is to use the nature of complex systems to find the opponent’s “vital gate” to exploit and control. A basic method is to reshape the opponent’s decision-making process by increasing complexity, forcing the opponent to introduce new decision-making parameters, causing its decision-making to become complicated, thereby changing the causal relationship and decision-making process, and ultimately leading to chaos. Adversarial situations have been able to balance in the past because all participants knew the outcome of the game, making it easy to make trade-offs, but complexity often destroys this balance. This is why complexity can be used as a weapon.

It should be noted that the battlefield is fair to any party. In the future battlefield, in order for the enemy to feel the complexity of decision-making in one direction and not to be troubled by the complexity, we must first be superior to the opponent in command and control capabilities. The complexity of battlefield decision-making is mainly reflected in the judgment and decision-making links of the “OODA” loop. Under normal circumstances, the “OODA” cycle can complete the complete cycle from observation, judgment, decision-making to action. However, if there is a way to make the battlefield more complex so that the opponent cannot make effective judgments in a timely manner, and thus cannot enter the decision-making and action links, the opponent’s “OODA” loop can always be limited to the observation and judgment links, and a closed loop cannot be formed. This may be the result of “decision-centered warfare” trying to create complexity. Therefore, how to make quick judgments has become a primary concern. If this cognitive process can be completed quickly with the support of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, that is, so-called intelligent cognition can be achieved, the speed of the “OODA” cycle can be greatly accelerated and unilateral advantages can be achieved.

Drawing correct judgments based on observation is the prerequisite for making correct decisions. But this can only be done under the condition of “having cognitive ability”. Currently, in systems such as command information systems and war game deduction systems, these cognitive tasks are basically completed by humans. Past attempts to autonomously complete judgments and decisions by artificial intelligence systems have been almost unsuccessful because the problem of intelligent cognitive modeling has never been solved. The behaviors displayed by various models are more or less “mechanical” and cannot truly show the characteristics of intelligence. Foreign militaries have also been focusing on “human behavior modeling” in recent years, but progress is still slow at present. Why is intelligent cognition so difficult, and what is the difficulty? The author believes that the core difficulty lies in how to understand and deal with complexity.

2. Understand complexity

At the beginning of this century, the Rand Corporation of the United States used a simulation system to conduct more than 1,700 deductions on the combat needs of the U.S. Air Force in response to possible military conflicts in a certain hotspot area around 2005. It then conducted statistical analysis and finally concluded how the U.S. Air Force Conclusion to maintain superiority on the battlefield. This statistical analysis method has a basic assumption: each trial is independent and unordered, and the rules do not affect each other. It’s like tossing a coin. If you toss it heads once, it’s likely to be heads the second time. But if you throw it 10,000 times, the probability of the result being a certain side will get closer to 50%. This method is scientifically accurate when used in physical research, but when transplanted to the study of human social issues such as war, the situation becomes different.

Human beings are cognitive and do not just obey the laws of physics like physical entities. Commanders will not simply repeat mechanically when analyzing combat problems. Normally, when people make decisions, they will consider the previous results, which will lead to adjustments to the next action. In this way, the inherent power law characteristics of human behavior will appear, which is often called the “eight-eighth law”. Therefore, we cannot simply copy physical thinking to think about human society.

The reason for this is mainly because we are often accustomed to thinking about problems in a simple way of reductionism. The simple system structure remains unchanged, the results are deterministic, the cause and effect correspondence is clear, repeatable, predictable, decomposable and reducible, etc., have become our default scientific thinking method. But there are still many complex systems in the world, and these systems have a holistic nature, such as the human body, society, economy, war, etc., all fall into this category. What is the overall nature? That is, what cannot be seen locally, but exists when viewed as a whole, is the overall nature. For example, a living person and a dead person are the same in terms of composition, but the difference between a dead person and a living person lies in whether there is life, and life is a holistic quality. The structure of complex systems is variable and has characteristics such as adaptability, uncertainty, emergence, and nonlinearity, and the results are neither repetitive nor predictable. Society, economy, war, cities, including intelligent systems, these human-related systems all have these characteristics. In fact, they are all typical complex systems. Therefore, war has the characteristics of “no return after victory”, which actually reflects the “unrepeatable” nature of the complex system of war.

It is precisely because of the complexity of complex systems that causes and results cannot correspond one to one, which will lead to the failure of the similarity principle, so it cannot be modeled and studied using traditional methods. In order to solve complex problems, some traditional physics methods were mainly adopted in the past, such as statistical methods and simple life body modeling methods based on Agent. This is the case with the Rand Corporation study mentioned earlier. Although it can solve some problems, when it is used to solve problems related to people, especially cognition, the results obtained deviate greatly from reality and are unsatisfactory. .

Why is this happening? This is because the origins of war complexity and physical complexity are different. The source of physical complexity often lies in the complex laws of physical motion; while the complexity of war comes from human cognition. Because humans are not chaotic particles without thoughts, nor are they lower creatures with simple life logic, but are intelligent creatures with cognitive abilities of judgment and decision-making. People will reflect on the results through causal relationships, sum up experiences and make adjustments, and then decide how to act next. Moreover, human cognition will continue to develop, which will further affect subsequent cognition. However, because cognition is highly uncertain, future actions are difficult to predict.

It can be said that under the current technological conditions, what can be predicted are basically simple systematic laws of the physical world, while the impact of human cognition on society or war is often difficult to predict. Therefore, it is a common mistake we make to use physical thinking to think about human society. Based on the complexity of cognition, which is completely different from those immutable physical laws, when we deal with the complexity of war, we must focus on the core feature of “cognition” and work hard on command and control.

3. Coping with Complexity

The core of “decision-centered warfare” lies in the acceleration of cognition. Because almost all changes in war can be seen as cognitive upgrades and complications. In the author’s opinion, to deal with the “decision-centered battle”, we need to “fight complexity with complexity” and start from the basic work.

The first is to understand the core concept of “decision-centered warfare”. That is to seize the initiative on the battlefield by actively creating complexity. For one’s side, one needs to manage one’s own complexity; for one’s enemy, it means imposing more complexity on the opponent. The second is to understand the changes in the mechanism of war. The evolution speed of combat systems is increasing exponentially, which will make it difficult to perceive, control and manage complex battlefields, and the role of intelligent cognition will become more prominent. To this end, it is necessary to focus on the focus of “command and control” and regard battlefield management capabilities as the key. The third is to find the correct concepts and methods of coping. Starting from war design, we take the direction of decision-making intelligence as a breakthrough.

In recent years, a series of achievements in the field of artificial intelligence have brought hope to solving the problem of intelligent command and decision-making. The AlphaGo series of research has brought breakthroughs to decision-making intelligence technology; and the emergence of the GPT large model has further confirmed that decision-making intelligence and even general artificial intelligence are possible in the future. It now seems that artificial intelligence will be deeply involved in wars in the future, which is a reality that must be faced. And this will bring more complexity to war and battlefields.

Decision intelligence research should be placed at the command and control level. To win a war, command and control decisions need to embody both “science” and “art.” The scientific nature of command and control is mainly reflected in how to do it “when you know how to do it”, such as using the obtained command data (weapons and equipment, force formation, battlefield environment, opponent intelligence, etc.), command methods (tasks, processes, procedures, operations planning, etc.) , planning, optimization, etc.), formulate a combat plan and implement it. The artistry of command and control is reflected in knowing how to do it “when you don’t know how to do it.” This is where true intelligence lies. The method is nothing more than continuous trial and error, accumulating experience, finding ways to solve problems, and forming new scientific knowledge. In fact, in reality, commanders continue to discover and summarize winning rules through trial and error, and each commander also has his own intuition and experience.

Therefore, true intelligence is actually finding solutions to exceptions. Following rules is not intelligence, finding your own way to solve problems is the key. Perhaps this is the core of decision-making intelligence and a goal that requires further efforts.

中國軍事原文來源:http://www.81.cn/yw_208727/162348888.html

中國解放軍認為軍事人工智慧是一把雙面刃

China’s PLA Considers Military Artificial Intelligence a Double-Edged Sword

原軍國語:

隨著智慧時代的到來,人工智慧正以超乎人們想像的速度走近,不僅影響著各行各業,也正在改變我們的認知和觀念。 作為對技術變革天生敏感的領域,人工智慧的軍事發展和應用正在蓬勃發展。

目前,隨著資訊科技、感測器、大數據、物聯網的快速發展,人工智慧軍事應用正迎來新一輪機會。 滲透到軍事應用各個領域,具有高效指揮、精準打擊、自動化操作、智慧行為的人工智慧武器裝備將為未來戰場貢獻獨特的「機器智慧和力量」。

恩格斯曾說過,尖端科技的應用首先始於軍事領域。 當新科技顯著增強軍事作戰能力時,就會帶來新的軍事變革。 美國、俄羅斯等傳統軍事強國預見了人工智慧技術在軍事領域的廣泛應用前景。 他們都將人工智慧視為「改變戰爭遊戲規則」的顛覆性技術,並認為未來的戰爭將是智慧化戰爭和未來軍備。 這場比賽將是一場智慧軍備競賽,並已提前規劃,希望抓住人工智慧軍事應用的機遇,力爭與潛在對手產生「代溝」。 幾個月前,美國國防部副部長沙納漢正式發布了關於建立「聯合人工智慧中心」的備忘錄,將進一步加大人工智慧在美軍軍事計畫中的應用。 俄羅斯也將人工智慧視為未來軍事競爭的製高點,正在加緊研發能夠駕駛車輛的人形機器人以及組成能夠與人類士兵並肩作戰的機器人部隊。

需要看到的是,人工智慧的軍事應用是一把「雙面刃」。 “這可能成為人類發生過的最好的事情,也可能成為最糟糕的事情。” 霍金對人工智慧的評價啟示我們面對人工智慧「來勢洶洶」的軍事應用要保持足夠的謹慎。 小心。 未來,隨著智慧無人系統大量應用於戰場,戰爭成本將大幅降低,戰鬥人員「零傷亡」有望成為現實。 這很容易導致軍事大國更隨意地使用武力。 在複雜的戰場環境下,高智慧無人作戰系統極有可能遇到辨識錯誤、通訊劣化,甚至在敵方電磁、網路攻擊後「叛逃反擊」等問題。 濫殺無辜、系統失控的情況更是有可能發生。 為智慧武器的軍事應用帶來了無盡的隱憂。

可見,與戰爭有關的重大問題絕不能輕易交給機器來決定。 即使人工智慧的軍事應用日益成熟,我們也不能允許智慧武器的「野蠻生長」。 我們需要警惕人工智慧可能帶來的安全隱憂。 法律、道德和許多其他問題。 加強社會保障監管,形成適應人工智慧時代的社會治理模式; 積極參與人工智慧國際軍控討論和談判,為人工智慧帶來的安全、法律和倫理問題貢獻中國智慧和中國方案; 牢固地建立人類是人機關係的主導思想,才能安全有效地掌控人工智慧,讓其為人類和平發展服務,而不是讓人工智慧成為「魔鬼的幫兇」。

對於這種有望深刻改變未來戰爭形態的技術形態,我們不僅要保持清醒的頭腦,還要充分激發其活力。 從軍事變革的歷史來看,科學技術在歷次變革中都扮演了拉動動作用和基礎支撐作用。 誰對技術變革有敏感度,誰先實現技術突破,誰就能掌握戰爭新規則,掌控戰爭。 贏得未來戰爭的製高點。 對軍隊來說,無法正確預判軍事技術突破方向、掌握戰爭格局變化,不僅會導致「技術氾濫」。

差異”,但也導致核心能力、國家安全等危機。

今天,面對科技發展的“大變革”和“大突破”,我們應該從設計戰爭、掌握規則的角度,深刻把握人工智能對戰爭形態演變的內在驅動影響的勝利,真正掌握贏得未來戰爭的主動權。 我們要牢牢掌握人工智慧發展重大歷史機遇,做好戰略規劃,突顯人工智慧的目標牽引和規劃引領,密切追蹤前沿技術,積極主動行動,切實維護國家安全。

現代外國人英語:

With the dawn of the intelligent era, artificial intelligence is approaching at a speed beyond people’s imagination, not only impacting all walks of life, but also changing our understanding and concepts. As a field that is inherently sensitive to technological changes, the military development and application of artificial intelligence is booming.

Currently, with the rapid development of information technology, sensors, big data and the Internet of Things, the military application of artificial intelligence is ushering in a new round of opportunities. Penetrating into all fields of military applications, artificial intelligence weapons and equipment with efficient command, precise strike, automated operation and intelligent behavior will contribute unique “machine intelligence and power” to the future battlefield.

Engels once said that the application of cutting-edge technology first began in the military field. When new technologies significantly enhance military combat capabilities, they will lead to new military changes. Traditional military powers such as the United States and Russia foresee the broad application prospects of artificial intelligence technology in the military field. They all regard artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology that “changes the rules of the war game” and believe that future wars will be intelligent wars and future armaments. The competition will be an intelligent arms race, and has been planned in advance, hoping to seize the opportunity of artificial intelligence military applications and strive to create a “generation gap” with potential opponents. A few months ago, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Shanahan officially issued a memorandum on the establishment of a “Joint Artificial Intelligence Center”, which will further increase the application of artificial intelligence in U.S. military military projects. Russia also regards artificial intelligence as the commanding heights of future military competition, and is stepping up the development of humanoid robots that can drive vehicles and the formation of robot troops that can fight side by side with human soldiers.

It should be noted that the military application of artificial intelligence is a “double-edged sword.” “It may become the best thing that has ever happened to mankind, or it may become the worst thing.” Hawking’s evaluation of artificial intelligence enlightens us to maintain sufficient caution in the face of the “menacing” military applications of artificial intelligence. careful. In the future, as a large number of intelligent unmanned systems are used on the battlefield, the cost of war will be greatly reduced, and “zero casualties” of combatants are expected to become a reality. This can easily lead to more casual use of force by military powers. In a complex battlefield environment, highly intelligent unmanned combat systems are very likely to encounter problems such as recognition errors, communication degradation, and even “defection and counterattack” after enemy electromagnetic and network attacks. Indiscriminate killing of innocent people and loss of control of the system are even more likely to occur. It brings endless worries to the military application of smart weapons.

It can be seen that major issues related to war must not be easily left to machines to make decisions. Even if the military application of artificial intelligence becomes increasingly mature, we cannot allow the “barbaric growth” of smart weapons. We need to be alert to the security and safety risks that artificial intelligence may bring. Legal, ethical and many other issues. Social security supervision and control should be strengthened to form a social governance model adapted to the era of artificial intelligence; actively participate in discussions and negotiations on international arms control of artificial intelligence, and contribute Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to the security, legal and ethical issues brought by artificial intelligence; firmly establish The idea that humans are the leaders in the human-machine relationship enables safe and effective control of artificial intelligence and allows it to serve the peaceful development of mankind, rather than letting artificial intelligence become an “accomplice of the devil.”

Regarding this technological form that is expected to profoundly change the form of future warfare, we must not only keep a clear mind, but also fully stimulate its vitality. Judging from the history of military changes, science and technology have played a stimulating and basic supporting role in previous changes. Whoever has the sensitivity to technological changes and achieves technological breakthroughs first can master the new rules of war and control the war. The commanding heights to win future wars. For an army, the inability to correctly predict the direction of military technological breakthroughs and grasp changes in war patterns will not only lead to “technological generational differences”, but also lead to crises such as core capabilities and national security.

Today, in the face of “big changes” and “big breakthroughs” in the development of science and technology, we should deeply grasp the intrinsic driving influence of artificial intelligence on the evolution of war forms from the perspective of designing wars and mastering the rules of victory, and truly seize the initiative to win future wars. We need to firmly grasp the major historical opportunities for the development of artificial intelligence, do a good job in strategic planning, highlight the goal traction and planning leadership of intelligence, closely track cutting-edge technologies, and take proactive actions to effectively safeguard national security.

人民解放軍 來源:http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2018-11/08/content_88888.htm

中國軍隊:解放軍淺析智能化時代認知域作戰方式

Chinese Military: People’s Liberation Army’s Brief Analysis of Cognitive Domain Combat Styles in the Era of Intelligence

随着现代战争加速向智能化方向发展,底层的物理域、中层的信息域和顶层的认知域呈现多域联动的特点,认知域作战正逐渐成为战争舞台的焦点。认知域作战的目的主要是夺取制脑权,为夺取陆海空天制权和网电制权奠定坚实基础。准确把握、充分运用认知域作战主要样式,是在未来战争中抢占先机、赢得主动的必然要求。

一、认知电子战——认知战的“触角”

认知电子战是电子战与人工智能技术结合的产物,是争夺制电磁权的主要作战样式,也是战术与技术融合的典范。美国是最早开展认知电子战研究的国家,其国防部高级研究计划局(DARPA)和陆海空军开展了包括自适应雷达对抗和自适应电子战行为学习等项目。实施认知电子战需要重点把握好三个环节。

一是认知电子侦察。主要是利用电子手段,快速、准确、全面地获取战场数据,及时发现威胁信号、识别目标特征信号,建立并动态更新信号数据库,为指挥员判断情况、定下决心、评估效能等提供必要的信息支撑。

二是认知电子建模。主要是针对战场及周边电磁辐射源种类杂、功率大、数量多等特点,对辐射源的频率、带宽、波形特征、防护模式、到达方向等信息,区分动态和静态两个类别,建立统一的信息描述模型架构,进而为电磁感知提供依据。

三是认知电子干扰。主要是针对战场电子战装备复杂多样、抗干扰能力强的特点,将有源干扰与无源干扰、压制干扰与欺骗干扰结合起来,灵活实施自适应干扰样式决策、自适应干扰波形优化和自适应干扰资源调度,从而确保干扰质效。

二、认知情报战——认知战的“血脉”

国际电气与电子工程师协会曾提出“认知情报学”的概念;国内有学者将认知情报学定义为,从心理角度研究人们在情报生产及利用等各个环节中的认知结构、过程与特点的领域或学科。这里提出“认知情报战”概念,符合认知逻辑和情报本质,并且可以借用认知情报学的概念和原理。根据获取和利用情报的动因,实施认知情报战可运用三种策略。

一是基于个体认知获取和利用情报。主要是以作战主体的认知为中介进行情报协调,坚持战场用户驱动而不是作战系统驱动,以“意义构建理论”“知识非常态假说”为基础,改善情报服务主体认知结构,实现主体认知与情报服务的良性互动。

二是基于群体认知获取和利用情报。主要是突出关注用户群体所处的战场环境、社会背景等因素影响而形成的共同认知结构,充分利用情景分析、领域分析以及价值分析等先进分析方法,着力提高群体情报服务的针对性、适用性。

三是基于脑体认知获取和利用情报。主要是把人体大脑的认知结构和认知活动理解为计算逻辑和计算活动,充分利用机器智能认知和智能计算能力,着力改善战场人机融合环境,畅通情报到认知的信息链路,实施程序化、规模化的情报服务。

三、认知算法战——认知战的“大脑”

2017年美国国防部在一份备忘录中首次正式提出“算法战”,明确组建“算法战跨功能小组”。算法战与认知战一样贯穿于战争各领域全过程,体现了智能化战争的核心要求。这里提出“认知算法战”概念,是基于认知战与算法战的共同之处与内在联系。可以说,认知中有算法,算法中有认知。实施认知算法战主要有三种路径。

一是廓清战争迷雾。军事理论家克劳塞维茨指出,“战争是充满不确定性的领域,战争中所依据的情况有四分之三像隐藏在迷雾中一样”。认知算法战就是要在这种不确定性的领域中算出确定性的因素,尽可能廓清战场迷雾,准确识别信息“炸弹”,严防坠入信息“陷阱”。

二是扫清智能盲区。人工智能的灵感之源往往来源于生物智能特别是人类智能,人工智能离不开人类智能。认知算法战就是要充分运用认知心理学和认知神经科学的最新成果,推动人工智能的军事运用,提高认知域的智能化水平。

三是加快人机融合。机器算力虽然可以超越人类脑力,但是机器算法终究难以超越人类“想法”,人工智能与人类智能各有优长。认知算法战就是要把信息域的机器算法与认知域的人类“想法”紧密结合起来,不断提高物理域的战法水平。

四、认知政治战——认知战的“灵魂”

政治战是与军事战是相对的。毛泽东曾形象地指出“战争是流血的政治”“政治是不流血的战争”。由于政治战通常直接作用于认知域,认知政治战可以说是政治战的固有之意,不应被理解为一个新的概念。智能化时代实施认知政治战,无外乎三种形式。

一是心理攻防。主要是利用智能化、精准化手段“读心”“控心”,提高心理攻防质效。在进攻方面,主要运用攻心宣传、意志瓦解、情感影响、心智诱导等战法;在防御方面,主要采取心理教育训练、心理疏导调控和心理诊断治疗等措施。

二是舆论争夺。主要是运用新媒体和新技术增强舆论宣传的热度流量和影响力渗透力。在进攻方面,重在先声夺人、先入为主,集中造势、形成强势,抨击要害、重点突破;在防御方面,重在因势利导、防反结合、趋利避害。

三是法理斗争。主要是参与立法、精准释法、积极护法,挺法在前、针锋相对、切中要害。在进攻方面,主要是利用法律威慑、法律打击、法律约束、法律制裁等战法;在防御方面,主要是加强国际法尤其是战争法的研究和涉法行动法律防护,防止授人以柄。

图片来源于网络,转载请注明来源

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.


中文原文出處:淺析智慧時代認知域作戰方式. (2023). (Internet). Accessed:  https://www.secrss.com/articles/68888

中國軍事技術戰術:以認知為中心的戰爭:應對複雜戰爭的作戰概念

Chinese Military Technical Tactics: Cognition-centered Warfare: Operational Concepts for Dealing with Complex Wars

現代繁體中文:

複雜性科學是當代科學發展的前沿領域之一,是認識、理解、探索戰爭現象、規律、機制的新工具。 隨著戰爭形態由資訊化戰爭向智慧化戰爭演變,戰爭的複雜性呈現指數級增長趨勢,奪取制資訊權變得越來越困難,作戰的關鍵是使敵方陷入“決策困境”,使其即使 擁有資訊優勢,也不能正確決策,因而失去作戰優勢。 作戰重心將從「以資訊為中心」轉變為「以認知為中心」,制勝機理將從「資訊制勝」轉變為「認知制勝」。
「三個之變」揭示戰爭複雜性成長動因
戰爭是充滿蓋然性的領域,變是貫穿其始終的基本特徵。 習主席強調,要緊盯科技之變、戰爭之變、對手之變。 科技之變是基礎,戰爭之變是主體,對手之變是關鍵,科技之變引發戰爭之變,戰爭之變促使對手之變。 「三個之變」促使戰爭形態演變、戰爭領域拓展、戰爭目標轉變、戰爭影響擴大,揭示了戰爭複雜性成長動因。
科技之變顛覆戰爭制勝基礎。 科學技術是核心戰鬥力,是軍事發展中最活躍、最具革命性的因素。 縱觀世界軍事發展史,每一次重大科學技術創新,都開啟了一場新的軍事變革,而每一場軍事變革都把軍事發展推向一個新的時代,科技創新成為提高軍隊戰鬥力的巨大引擎 。 目前,新一輪科技革命和軍事革命加速發展,現代戰爭資訊化程度不斷提高,智慧化特徵日益顯現,對軍事革命驅動作用愈發凸顯,一些前沿技術飛速發展,可能從根本上改變戰爭面貌和 規則,大國軍事博弈更體現為技術上的顛覆和反顛覆、突襲和反突襲、抵銷和反抵銷。 美海軍「復仇女神」項目,包括偵察、誘餌、幹擾等系統,誘餌類系統涵蓋空中、水面和水下,可在分散式人工智慧引擎的調度、指控下,互相補充,協同欺騙,真實營造出 一個“幽靈航母編隊”,徹底顛覆了傳統的電子欺騙手段,將資訊欺騙提升到前所未有的高度。 可以說,科技從來沒有像今天這樣深刻影響國家安全和軍事戰略全局,深刻介入、支持、主導戰爭形態演變和作戰樣式創新,甚至顛覆戰爭制勝機制。

美海軍「復仇女神」計畫基於網路化協同電子戰
概念,將不同系統集成,利用無人分散式
電子戰平台的集群實現大規模協同電子戰

戰爭之變突顯戰爭複雜性特徵。 現代戰爭正在發生深刻變化,呈現前所未有的多樣性和複雜性。 這種超級複雜性源自於多種原因:一是各種先進技術或武器不斷湧現,帶來許多不確定性;二是戰場覆蓋陸、海、空、天、網、電和認知等多個 領域;三是多種作戰對象、作戰樣式、作戰領域、作戰方式交叉關聯與組合,構成複雜的「混合戰爭」;四是人工智慧演算法將大量作戰要素建構到一個複雜的邏輯中,並以人類 思維所不及的機器速度促使各種要素組合、解構、再組合。 2022年烏克蘭危機中,表面上看來是俄羅斯和烏克蘭兩國之間的對抗,實質上是美西方國家和俄羅斯之間進行的「混合戰爭」;俄烏兩軍廣泛使用軍事、民用無人機,拓展 「無人+」運用模式,展現出未來無人智能作戰雛形;烏軍在美北約空天態勢情報的支持下,頻繁使用低成本的無人裝備對俄軍重要武器平台實施突襲,凸顯新質 作戰力量對傳統作戰體系大型武器裝備的不對稱破襲優勢。 科技之變最終將引發戰爭之變,單一要素對戰爭的影響越來越弱,多個要素構成的聯合作戰體系將對戰爭產生複雜影響,戰爭的非線性、不確定性、混亂性、開放性 、適應性、對抗性等複雜性特徵將呈指數級增長趨勢,這將導致人們對戰爭進展和勝負的認知判斷更加困難。
對手之變加速戰爭複雜性成長。 戰爭之變促使對手之變。 目前,我們正經歷百年未有之大變局,主要軍事強國積極進行戰略調整,推進新一輪軍事變革,呈現出以下特點:一是體制編制的聯合化、小型化、自主化趨勢更加明顯;二 是武器裝備呈現數位化、精確化、隱形化、無人化、智能化的發展趨勢;三是作戰形態向“四非”(非接觸、非線形、非對稱和非正規)和“三無” (無形、無聲、無人)作戰方向發展;四是軍隊指揮形態朝向扁平化、自動化、網路化、無縫化方向發展。 美國將我視為最主要的戰略對手,竭力對我打壓遏制,大力加強作戰概念創新,先後提出「混合戰爭」「多域戰」「馬賽克戰」等新型作戰概念,聲稱要打一場讓對手 「技術看不懂、打擊難預測、速度跟不上」的高端戰爭。 美軍「馬賽克戰」的核心是無人、低成本、快速、致命、靈活、可重組,基於分散式態勢感知,借助智慧化輔助決策工具,借鑒搭積木、構拼圖的概念,自適應制定任務規劃 ,動態重組作戰兵力,將作戰平台的功能分解到更多數量、單一功能的節點,大量功能節點建構作戰體系。 以“殺傷網”取代“殺傷鏈”,若干個節點失效或缺失,作戰體係可自適應重組。
戰爭複雜性成長推動戰爭制勝機理轉變
隨著國防科技的快速發展、武器裝備的更新換代和戰爭形態的快速嬗變,現代戰爭呈現指數式、爆炸性的複雜變化。 這些變化看起來眼花撩亂,但背後是有規律可循的,根本的是戰爭的勝利機理變了。 只有搞透現代戰爭制勝機理,才能準確識變、科學應變、善於求變,牢牢掌握未來戰爭主動權。
戰爭形態由冷兵器戰爭轉變為智慧化戰爭。 戰爭形態是關於戰爭的整體性認知。 迄今為止,人類戰爭形態大致經歷了冷兵器戰爭、熱兵器戰爭、機械化戰爭、資訊戰爭四個歷史階段,正朝向智慧化戰爭邁進。 認知戰的歷史幾乎和人類戰爭史一樣久遠。 在冷兵器戰爭、熱兵器戰爭、機械化戰爭時代,認知戰更多是以輿論戰、心理戰形式出現。 隨著人類進入資訊化時代,網路空間科技的發展大大拓展了認知戰的空間,豐富了認知戰的戰技術手段,使認知戰的滲透性、時效性、震懾性大大增強,認 知戰的地位和作用得到空前提高。 未來,戰爭形態將進入智慧化戰爭,大量智慧化的武器系統和平台將裝備軍隊、投入作戰。 認知戰不僅可對敵方人員的認知實施幹擾、欺騙,也能透過「對抗性輸入」「資料中毒」等演算法欺騙手段對智慧裝備的認知實施攻擊,其應用場景和範圍將進一步擴大 ,地位和作用也將進一步提高。

無人機逐漸成為戰爭的主角,
作戰複雜性進一步增加
戰爭目的由武力征服更多向精神征服轉變。 現代戰爭的致勝機制與以往相比發生了很大變化,戰爭的暴力性得到遏制,作戰目的由原來的攻城略地、殲滅敵有生力量,轉變到使對方服從己方意志,作戰手段從武力征服更多地向 著重心理和精神征服轉變,這使得認知戰在現代戰爭中的地位、角色日益凸顯。 近年來,「混合戰爭」成為大國競爭的主要手段,越來越多的國家開始專注於利用新型領域、新型手段來達到傳統作戰難以達到的政治、軍事、經濟目的。 「混合戰爭」是國家、非國家行為體以及個人等戰爭主體的混合,是常規戰爭、非常規戰爭等戰爭樣式的混合,是作戰、維穩、重建等軍事行動的混合,是政治、軍事、經濟 、民生等多領域的混合,是擊敗敵軍、爭取民心等多種作戰目標的混合,這與認知戰高度契合。 「混合戰爭」的作戰領域由軍事領域拓展到了政治、經濟、文化、民生等領域;作戰方式由火力戰、兵力戰向外交戰、經濟戰、網路戰、心理戰、輿論戰等多方向拓展, 這與認知戰高度一致,其核心要義都是“亂中取利”,主要目的都是爭奪人心,作戰指導都是以巧取勝。
戰爭制勝域由物理域資訊域轉變為認知域。 現代戰爭同時發生在物理、資訊和認知三個領域,物理域和資訊域是從物質域中脫離出來的,認知域是從精神域中脫離出來的。 物理域是傳統的戰爭領域,由作戰平台和軍事設施等構成,為資訊化戰爭提供物質基礎。 資訊域是新崛起的戰爭領域,即資訊產生、傳輸和共享空間,是資訊化戰爭較量的重點。 認知域是人類認知活動涉及的範圍和領域,既是人類感覺、知覺、記憶和思考活動的空間,也是知識生成、交換、關聯、儲存和運用的空間,也是作戰活動中感知、判斷、決策 和指揮與控制的空間。 認知域存在於作戰人員的意識領域之中,影響其判斷與決策,是正在崛起的戰爭領域。 隨著網路資訊和人工智慧等技術的發展,認知域的範圍大大拓展,正在從人的意識領域向現代認知工具和人工智慧領域拓展。 軍事技術的發展拓展了認知域的範圍,為認知戰提供了更先進、更快捷、更有效的物質技術手段,使認知戰的滲透性、時效性、震懾性大大增強,從根本上 改變了認知戰,使得認知域成為超越物理域、資訊域的新的致勝領域,成為大國博弈、軍事對抗的終極之域。
戰爭制勝機理由資訊制勝向認知制勝轉變。 戰爭對抗歸根究柢是認知的博弈與對抗,掌握了製認知權很大程度上就掌握了戰爭主動權,喪失了製認知權就會在戰爭中處於被動挨打的境地。 獲得更高、更強的製認知權是製勝強敵的關鍵。 想辦法掌握制認知權進而奪取戰場綜合製權,從而以最小代價獲得最大勝利,是現代戰爭特別是認知戰的重要機理和內在規律。 近年來,美軍先後提出以「決策中心戰」「馬賽克戰」等為代表的未來戰爭新理念,意圖將複雜性作為一種為對手製造多重困境的武器,要求在保障自身戰術「選擇優勢」的 同時,透過給敵方製造高複雜度決策影響,幹擾其決策能力,在認知域實現對敵顛覆性優勢。 在資訊化戰爭的初級和中級階段,作戰的關鍵是奪取制網權和製資訊權,貫穿著「網路優勢→資訊優勢→決策優勢→作戰優勢」的遞進模式。 在資訊化戰爭進入高級階段後,奪取制資訊權變得越來越困難,作戰的關鍵是使敵方陷入“決策困境”,使其即使擁有資訊優勢,也不能正確決策,從而失去作戰優勢,擁有認 知優勢才能擁有作戰優勢。 未來戰爭,認知優勢是最重要的戰略優勢,認知對抗是最主要的對抗形式,可謂「無認知不戰爭」。
因應複雜戰爭催生認知中心戰作戰概念
為因應現代戰爭複雜性特徵指數級增長趨勢,我們必須運用複雜性科學的理論與方法,轉變以住平台中心戰火力至上、殺傷為王的觀念,確立以認知為中心的作戰思想。 認知中心戰,指以認知域為致勝領域,以奪取認知優勢為作戰目標,圍繞幹擾認知手段、壓制認知管道、影響認知產生,對敵人員和智慧裝備的認知進行 幹擾、壓制、欺騙和誘導,透過奪取和維持認知優勢來獲取作戰優勢的一種新型作戰概念。 其主要製勝機理有以下幾點。

《孫子兵法》中提到」故兵無常勢,
水無常形;能因敵變化而取勝者,謂之神「
以網路威懾摧毀敵方作戰意志。 針對敵政治、經濟、軍事、外交、文化中的矛盾弱點,透過網路空間散播威懾性訊息,或透過網路發布閱兵、大規模軍事演習、新式武器裝備研發等訊息,使對手認知與心理產生極 大的恐懼和震撼,遏止敵不利於我的行動舉措執行。 綜合運用網電攻擊手段,對敵重要網電目標和關鍵核心節點實施點穴式打擊和警示攻擊,破壞敵體係作戰能力,影響敵武器裝備效能的正常發揮,對敵實施心理威懾。 美軍「灰色地帶作戰」理論,就是依靠自身技術優勢,主要採取網電反制等行動,應對對手“灰色地帶挑釁”,威懾對手要么放棄“對抗”,要么衝突升級,使之陷入兩難境地。
以資訊欺騙誘導敵方錯誤判斷。 針對敵方的偵察設備、情報機構和指揮系統,透過網路攻擊、電子欺騙等手段隱藏己方軍事企圖、軍事行動和軍事目標,向敵方傳送有關己方的錯誤和虛假的作戰企圖、部隊配置、作戰 能力、作戰方案以及戰場態勢等方面的訊息,或借敵方指揮資訊系統發送虛假命令和訊息,達到誘敵錯誤判斷,擾敵作戰指揮的目的。 針對人工智慧演算法實施「對抗性輸入」「資料中毒」等新型攻擊,使其透過深度學習訓練得到我預設結論,或使其陷入局部最優解中而忽略全局最優。 利用電腦影像、視訊合成、虛擬實境和人工智慧等技術,將聲音、視訊、影像、文字訊息等進行合成,或利用「深度造假」技術,產生以假亂真、真假難辨的虛假訊息,並透過網路 大量傳播,以迷惑欺騙對手,影響其決策和行動。
以資訊壓制阻塞敵方認知手段。 針對敵重要網路目標,以及核心路由器、交換器、網關、重點伺服器等,使用「軟體」「硬」攻擊手段,摧毀其網路節點。 針對敵指揮控制網、通訊傳輸網、武器鉸鍊網和預警探測網等無線鏈路的組網特點,綜合運用電子乾擾、GPS欺騙攻擊、指控鏈路接管、數據劫持控制等技術和手段,壓制其 數據通信,阻斷其通信鏈路,幹擾其作戰指揮。 對敵指揮控制、軍事通訊、預警偵測、空天資訊等軍事網路實施網電致癱攻擊,毀癱影響其作戰的核心網絡,削弱其作戰能力。
以輿論宣傳營造有利輿論環境。 配合國家政治、軍事、外交鬥爭,大力宣傳己方在戰爭中的正義性,激發全體民眾全力支持戰爭的熱情。 借助即時通訊工具、網路論壇、播客、推特、微信等新媒體平台,有計劃地散佈打擊敵方弱點的信息,取得廣泛關注和普遍共鳴後,再適時報料、製造新的熱點,反复造勢 增強影響,形成共振效應擴大效果。 透過巧妙設定議程來進行宣傳“定調”,透過強勢媒體進行輿論造勢,掀起“沉默的螺旋”,控制和引導輿論,改變人們的看法和行為。

以法理鬥爭取得法理道義支持。 運用法律武器,遏止敵可能或將會發生的違法行為,宣告我方行動的合法性,申明我方軍事反擊權力,宣布我方追究戰爭責任的堅定性,給敵以震懾。 透過揭露敵方挑釁行為的違法性,抨擊敵方作戰行動的法律依據,譴責敵方的違法行徑,造成敵方戰略上的失利和己方戰略上的獲利。 運用法律手段,制約敵方的可能行動,限制第三人的可能干涉,阻滯其他方對己方行動的干擾。 制定我方作戰所需的法律、法規,為我方行動提供法律防護,或採取法律補救措施降低我方行動可能附帶的負面影響,保障作戰行動依法展開。

現代英語:

Cognition-centered warfare: operational concepts for dealing with complex 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.

Technological changes have subverted 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.

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, and 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 will. The means of combat have shifted from military conquest to focusing more on psychological and spiritual conquest, which 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. 

War confrontation is ultimately a game and confrontation of cognition. If you have the right to control cognition, you will have the initiative in war to a large extent. If you lose the right to control cognition, you will be passive in the war. The situation of being beaten. 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.

Use cyber deterrence to destroy the enemy’s will to fight. 

Targeting at 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 , causing great fear and shock to the opponent’s cognition and psychology, and 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 wrong judgments. 

Aiming at the enemy’s reconnaissance equipment, intelligence agencies and command systems, conceal one’s military intentions, military operations and military objectives through cyber attacks, electronic deception and other means, and transmit to the enemy errors and information about one’s own False information on combat intentions, troop configurations, combat capabilities, combat plans, and battlefield situations, 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. 

Aim at 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.

Create a favorable public opinion environment through public opinion propaganda.

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. 

Widely disseminate processed and processed information through the Internet, promote one’s own justice, demonstrate one’s strength, will and determination, vilify the enemy politically and morally, and internally Gather the thoughts and will of the military and civilians, strive for the legal and moral commanding heights externally, and spiritually “soften” and “weaken” the enemy. 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 the combat capability. . 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.

Watch legal and moral support through legal struggle. 

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 give To intimidate 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.


中國原始軍事參考資料 http://www.81it.com/2023/1109/88888.html

中國人民解放軍認知域作戰的重要方式:價值守攻

An Important Way for China’s People’s Liberation Army to Fight in the Cognitive Domain: Value Defense and Offense

原始國語:

引言

價值攻防是從戰略層面進行認知域作戰的重要方式,通常價值攻防是透過幹預人的思維、信念、價值觀等,以達成瓦解敵方共識,摧毀敵方意志,進而掌控戰場綜合控制權的目的 。 精準掌握價值攻防的特性、機制、手段,對奪取未來認知域作戰優勢至關重要。

價值攻防作用認知域的特點

價值攻防是指透過引發個體或群體的深層邏輯思辨、價值判斷改變,完成其對相對穩定的認知結果的干預和影響,以期重構人的意志、思維、心理、情感等認知能力。 價值攻防主要有以下幾個特點:

軟性對抗。 傳統戰爭主要依賴暴力手段來削弱瓦解敵方的軍事能力,通常具有較強的戰爭強度。 認知域作戰將不再侷限於攻城略地等硬性對抗,而更著重於圍繞價值陣地展開滲透與逆滲透、攻擊與反攻擊、控制與反控制,透過爭奪認知域對抗的主導權,進一步激發物理域 和資訊域的作戰效能,從而奪取戰場主動,甚至達到不戰而屈人之兵的效果。 在實踐中,價值攻防往往著眼於一個國家、民族的文化傳統、價值觀念和社會心理展開,最終達到對敵方意志摧毀、認知操縱、精神控制的目的。

全維度釋放。 現代戰爭日益呈現整體性、多域性、全時性特徵。 認知域作戰旨在透過幹預人的意識進而影響戰場效果,而意識的相對穩定決定了人的世界觀、信仰等價值觀念一般情況下往往較為穩固,因此價值攻防需要長期的、不間斷的、全息 全維度地進行。 從時間上看,價值攻防模糊了平戰邊界,常態在戰、隨時在戰,持續積累、逐步釋放作戰效能;從空間上看,價值攻防模糊了作戰前後方界限,在有形空間與無形空間全 方位展開;從領域上看,價值攻防模糊了軍事與非軍事的界限,不僅發生在軍事領域,也存在於政治、經濟、外交、文化等領域,呈現出全局覆蓋的特徵。

科技賦能。 認知域作戰是一項技術密集的複雜系統工程。 人工智慧、腦科學、量子運算等新興技術手段全流程滲透,正在引發認知域作戰的迭代升級與深刻變革。 智慧化工具從根本上增強了認知域作戰人員操縱對手思想和乾預對手思維的能力,人機混合作為作戰力量新手段新樣式將改變未來戰爭主體,自主對抗、雲腦制勝或成為主流攻防模式 。 近年來,北約推出的認知電子戰設備,旨在透過資訊攻防來改變對手價值認知及行為。 科技發展也引發了認知革命,資訊的快速傳播進一步加速了大眾價值認知差異,認知孤島加劇了不同主體之間的價值鴻溝,智能化帶來的社會結構變遷則深刻改變著政治文化格局 。 從這點出發,在未來認知域作戰中,牽住科技創新的“牛鼻子”,掌握關鍵核心技術,對於奪取戰場主動至關重要。

價值攻防作用認知域的機理

價值攻防是認知域作戰的高階對抗,作用對象指向的是人的深層認知。 意識是社會存在在大腦中的反映,對社會存在的調節、對大眾意識的引導和人腦作用的改變,都能強化或扭轉人的意識。 要在攻防對抗中製勝對手,就要遵循思考認知規律,掌握價值攻防制勝機理。

衝擊價值「保護帶」。 佔領價值制高點是開展價值攻防的邏輯起點。 社會意識往往由相對穩定的核心價值觀念和外圍的輔助性理論所構成,經濟、政治、宗教、文化等各種理論都能被建構調適以用來保護核心價值觀念免受外來衝擊,因此也承受著 其他價值觀的衝擊挑戰。 在外軍看來,價值攻防就是要透過文化滲透、宗教衝突、戰略傳播等手段,配合物理域和資訊域的行動,不斷衝擊對手意識形態的「保護帶」領域。 這往往需要抓住影響對手認知的價值觀念、政治態度、宗教信仰等,透過擾亂其社會群體心理,誘發價值困惑,動搖作戰意志,摧毀文化認同,甚至改變瓦解其原有的認知體系, 從而灌輸或植入新的、於己有利的價值觀念,以實現作戰目的。

點燃衝突“引爆點”。 認知域作戰涉及歷史文化、政治制度、民族情感、宗教信仰等多個範疇,戰爭主體也從單純軍事人員拓展到一般民眾。 透過炒作話題爭端、公共事件,激發一般民眾的認知衝突,將成為認知領域作戰的重要手段。 在近幾場局部衝突中,交戰各方透過有目的性的敘事點燃國家民族情緒,引發政治危機進而影響戰局已屢見不鮮。 未來戰爭,一些國家利用熱點敏感事件引爆輿論,依托網路技術對一般民眾進行聚攏吸附、煽動動員、精準操控和誘導塑造,從而推動一般性衝突上升為信仰之爭、制度之爭、價值之爭將 成為常態。

控制認知「斷裂面」。 認知空間作為觀念層面的存在,由全部作戰個體的主觀認知空間疊加而成,是分化的、差異性的乃至衝突性的價值集合體。 然而,意識形態具有「縫合」功能,透過認知塑造、話語建構,可以把斷裂的認知有效地「縫合」起來,把分散的價值凝聚起來,形成相對穩固的認知體系。 二戰後法國對戰敗創傷曾進行過有效的認知“縫合”,其運用一整套獨立敘事邏輯,闡述戰爭如何為法國提供了“新的機會”,極大地凝聚了法國人民對政府的政治認同。 在認知域作戰中開展價值陣地爭奪,應注重敵方內部的認知斷裂面,尋找敵我之間的認知連接點進行認知“縫合”,最大限度地團結各方力量,孤立瓦解敵人。

價值攻防作用認知域的主要手段

價值攻防使認知對抗從輿論、心理等層面拓展到思維空間,從軍事領域拓展到整體全局,從而實現了對敵方深層的政治認同的打擊。 當前世界軍事強國都在加強戰略預置,瞄準目標主體、戰法手段的深刻變化,變革作戰思維,積極掌控認知域作戰的主動權。

以深層摧毀為目標。 認知域作戰直接作用於人的大腦認知,相較於物理域作戰,更容易實現深層的戰略意圖。 特別是人的語言層級、思維層級和文化層級的「高階認知」一旦被突破,有助於從戰略上扭轉戰場態勢,實現戰爭的政治目的。 基於此,認知域作戰往往始於未戰,透過幹預對手內政外交,動搖其意識形態和價值觀基礎等;戰時則注重影響敵方戰爭決策、戰役指揮、戰鬥實施的價值判斷,打擊或削弱 作戰人員的決策能力和抵抗意誌等。 敵對各方都試圖做到“維繫自己的世界,同時增加對手的破壞性壓力”,以通過爭奪認知優勢實現決策優勢,進而取得行動優勢的目標。

以普通個體為中心。 未來認知域作戰的主體將不再局限於軍事人員,廣義上講,可以進行資訊交流傳播的個體都可能成為參戰力量。 相較於社會領域的精英,一般民眾更容易接受和傳播多元價值,其認知空間被操縱的機率更大。 目前,網路媒體正成為社會領域資訊交流傳播的主要管道,透過有針對性的訊息引導、訊息傳遞,進而達到認知塑造的目的。 外軍實踐證明,借助對一般個體的認知塑造,可以造成從下到上的遞進滲透和認知幹擾,使一般民眾與社會決策層之間的意識觀念產生背離,在關鍵行動中無法達成 有效共識。

以持久作戰為形式。 與物理域軍事鬥爭直接打擊摧毀「硬」目標不同,認知域作戰的潛在目標為人的認知,價值攻防指向的是改變作戰對象的觀念、信念、意志、情感等,往往需要潛移默化、步步為營。 有效的認知進攻一般在作戰準備階段就發起,並貫穿戰爭始末,透過收集對手的認知態勢、決策習慣、思考模式等情況,有針對性地進行營造態勢、改變氛圍等行動。 因此,認知域作戰更需要加強整體設計,尤其要注重協調多方力量,在輿論場營造、外交等多個陣地多點強化預置準備,進而形成整體作戰合力。

(作者單位:軍事科學院軍事政治工作研究院)

Introduction

Value offense and defense is an important way to carry out cognitive domain operations from a strategic level. Usually, value offense and defense involves interfering with people’s thinking, beliefs, values, etc., in order to achieve the purpose of disintegrating the enemy’s consensus, destroying the enemy’s will, and then gaining comprehensive control of the battlefield. . Accurately grasping the characteristics, mechanisms, and methods of value attack and defense is crucial to gaining operational advantages in the cognitive domain in the future.

Characteristics of the cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value attack and defense refers to the intervention and influence on relatively stable cognitive results by inducing deep logical thinking and value judgment changes in individuals or groups, in order to reconstruct people’s will, thinking, psychology, emotion and other cognitive abilities. Value offense and defense mainly have the following characteristics:

Soft confrontation. Traditional war mainly relies on violent means to weaken and disintegrate the enemy’s military capabilities, and usually has a strong war intensity. Cognitive domain operations will no longer be limited to hard confrontations such as siege of cities and territories, but will focus more on penetration and counter-infiltration, attack and counter-attack, control and counter-control around value positions. By competing for dominance in cognitive domain confrontations, the physical domain will be further stimulated. and information domain combat effectiveness, thereby seizing the initiative on the battlefield and even achieving the effect of defeating others without fighting. In practice, value offense and defense often focus on the cultural traditions, values ​​and social psychology of a country or nation, and ultimately achieve the purpose of destroying the enemy’s will, cognitive manipulation, and mental control.

Full dimensional release. Modern warfare increasingly exhibits overall, multi-domain, and all-time characteristics. Cognitive domain operations aim to affect battlefield effects by intervening in people’s consciousness. The relative stability of consciousness determines that people’s worldview, beliefs and other values ​​are generally relatively stable. Therefore, value attack and defense require long-term, uninterrupted, holographic Proceed in all dimensions. From a time point of view, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between peacetime and war, and is always in war, at any time, continuously accumulating and gradually releasing combat effectiveness; from a space point of view, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between front and rear of operations, and creates a full range of physical and intangible space. Directional expansion; from a field perspective, value offense and defense blurs the boundaries between military and non-military. It not only occurs in the military field, but also exists in political, economic, diplomatic, cultural and other fields, showing the characteristics of full coverage.

Technology empowers. Cognitive domain operations are a technology-intensive and complex system engineering. The penetration of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, brain science, and quantum computing into the entire process is triggering iterative upgrades and profound changes in cognitive domain operations. Intelligent tools have fundamentally enhanced the ability of combatants in the cognitive domain to manipulate and intervene in the opponent’s thinking. As a new means and new style of combat power, human-machine hybridization will change the subject of future wars. Independent confrontation and cloud-brain victory may become the mainstream offensive and defensive model. . In recent years, NATO has launched cognitive electronic warfare equipment aimed at changing the opponent’s value perception and behavior through information offense and defense. The development of science and technology has also triggered a cognitive revolution. The rapid spread of information has further accelerated the differences in public value cognition. Cognitive islands have intensified the value gap between different subjects. The changes in social structure brought about by intelligence have profoundly changed the political and cultural landscape. . Starting from this point, in future cognitive domain operations, holding the “nose” of technological innovation and mastering key core technologies will be crucial to seizing the initiative on the battlefield.

The mechanism of cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value offense and defense is a high-level confrontation in the cognitive domain, and its target is people’s deep cognition. Consciousness is the reflection of social existence in the brain. Regulation of social existence, guidance of public consciousness and changes in the function of the human brain can strengthen or reverse human consciousness. If you want to defeat your opponent in an offensive and defensive confrontation, you must follow the laws of thinking and cognition and grasp the winning mechanism of value offense and defense.

Shock value “protection zone”. Occupying the commanding heights of values ​​is the logical starting point for carrying out value offense and defense. Social consciousness is often composed of relatively stable core values ​​and peripheral auxiliary theories. Various theories such as economics, politics, religion, culture, etc. can be constructed and adapted to protect core values ​​from external impacts, and therefore also bear the burden of external impact. The impact of other values ​​​​challenges. From the perspective of foreign military forces, value offense and defense means to continuously impact the “protective zone” of the opponent’s ideology through cultural penetration, religious conflict, strategic communication and other means, in conjunction with actions in the physical and information domains. This often requires grasping the values, political attitudes, religious beliefs, etc. that affect the opponent’s cognition. By disrupting their social group psychology, inducing value confusion, shaking the will to fight, destroying cultural identity, and even changing and disintegrating their original cognitive system, Thereby instilling or implanting new values ​​that are beneficial to oneself in order to achieve the purpose of combat.

Ignite the “tipping point” of conflict. Cognitive domain warfare involves history, culture, political systems, national emotions, religious beliefs and other categories, and the subjects of the war have also expanded from simple military personnel to ordinary people. Stimulating cognitive conflicts among ordinary people by hyping up topic disputes and public events will become an important means of cognitive domain warfare. In recent local conflicts, it is not uncommon for warring parties to use purposeful narratives to ignite national emotions, trigger political crises, and then affect the war situation. In future wars, some countries will use hot-button and sensitive events to ignite public opinion, and rely on network technology to gather, attract, mobilize, precisely manipulate and induce and shape ordinary people, thereby promoting general conflicts to escalate into battles over beliefs, systems, and values. Become the norm.

Controlling cognitive “fracture surfaces.” As an existence at the conceptual level, cognitive space is superimposed by the subjective cognitive space of all combat individuals. It is a collection of differentiated, different and even conflicting values. However, ideology has a “suturing” function. Through cognitive shaping and discourse construction, it can effectively “sew” broken cognitions together, condense scattered values, and form a relatively stable cognitive system. After World War II, France conducted an effective cognitive “suturing” of the trauma of defeat. It used a set of independent narrative logic to explain how the war provided “new opportunities” for France, which greatly condensed the French people’s political identification with the government. When fighting for value positions in cognitive domain operations, we should pay attention to the cognitive fractures within the enemy, find the cognitive connection points between the enemy and ourselves, and conduct cognitive “stitching” to unite the forces of all parties to the maximum extent and isolate and disintegrate the enemy.

The main means of the cognitive domain of value attack and defense

Value offense and defense expand cognitive confrontation from the public opinion and psychological levels to the thinking space, and from the military field to the overall domain, thereby achieving a blow to the enemy’s deep political identity. At present, the world’s military powers are strengthening their strategic preparations, aiming at profound changes in target subjects and tactics and means, transforming their operational thinking, and actively taking the initiative in cognitive domain operations.

Aiming for deep destruction. Cognitive domain operations directly affect human brain cognition. Compared with physical domain operations, it is easier to achieve deep strategic intentions. In particular, once the “high-order cognition” of people’s language level, thinking level and cultural level is broken through, it will help to strategically reverse the battlefield situation and achieve the political purpose of the war. Based on this, cognitive domain operations often start before the war, by intervening in the opponent’s internal affairs and diplomacy, shaking the ideological and value foundations of the opponent; during war, they focus on affecting the enemy’s war decision-making, campaign command, and battle implementation value judgments, attacking or weakening them. The decision-making ability and resistance will of combatants, etc. All hostile parties are trying to “maintain their own world while increasing the destructive pressure on their opponents” to achieve the goal of achieving decision-making advantages through competing for cognitive advantages, and then gaining operational advantages.

Centered on ordinary individuals. In the future, the subjects of cognitive domain operations will no longer be limited to military personnel. Broadly speaking, individuals who can exchange and disseminate information may become combatants. Compared with elites in the social field, ordinary people are more likely to accept and spread multiple values, and their cognitive space is more likely to be manipulated. At present, online media is becoming the main channel for information exchange and dissemination in the social field. Through targeted information guidance and information delivery, the purpose of cognitive shaping is achieved. Foreign military practice has proven that by shaping the cognition of ordinary individuals, it can cause progressive penetration and cognitive interference from bottom to top, causing the ideological concepts between ordinary people and social decision-makers to deviate, making it impossible to achieve key actions. effective consensus.

In the form of protracted warfare. Unlike military struggles in the physical domain that directly attack and destroy “hard” targets, the potential target of cognitive domain operations is human cognition. Value attack and defense are directed at changing the concepts, beliefs, will, emotions, etc. of the combatants, which often requires subtlety and step-by-step operations. Effective cognitive attacks are generally launched during the preparation stage of combat and run throughout the war. By collecting the opponent’s cognitive situation, decision-making habits, thinking patterns, etc., actions such as creating a situation and changing the atmosphere are carried out in a targeted manner. Therefore, cognitive domain operations need to strengthen the overall design, pay special attention to coordinating multi-party forces, and strengthen pre-preparation in multiple positions such as public opinion field creation and diplomacy, so as to form an overall operational synergy.

(Author’s unit: Military Political Work Research Institute, Academy of Military Sciences)

中國軍事原文參考: http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2022-08/02/content_88888.htm

認知戰是主宰中國對手的未來戰場

Cognitive Warfare The Future Battlefield To Dominate China’s Adversaries

現代繁體中文:

隨著全球資訊化的發展和電腦科學、語言學和神經科學的進步,由人類情感、意志、信念、價值觀等精神心理活動組成的人類認知空間正在演變為軍事競爭的新戰場。 以達到不戰而勝人的效果。 早在2001年7月,美國國防部向國會提交的「網路中心戰」論證報告就指出,除了陸、海、空、天、電力五維戰爭空間外,未來戰爭還將還有第六維度戰爭空間。 ——認知空間。

認知領域之爭愈演愈烈

自人類戰爭誕生以來,不戰而屈人之兵的策略就受到古今中外軍事家的推崇。 無論是“空城計”還是“四面楚歌”,都是中國歷史上認知域戰的經典例子。 孫子說:“不戰而屈敵者,是好人。” 美國內戰期間,北方軍隊被南方軍隊包圍。 關鍵時刻,北軍司令要求談判。 南軍司令沒有說話。 他剛帶領北軍司令來到自己的砲兵陣地,清點了大砲的數量。 當人數達150人時,北軍統帥投降。

隨著科學技術的進步和人類社會的發展,在資訊化和全球化的相互作用下,新興媒體、民族語言、文化產品等承載的各種資訊被用作滲透、影響、塑造敵意的武器。 認知領域的戰鬥,面向國家領導層、軍隊、精英、民眾的認知、情感、意識,最終達到控制一個國家的意識形態、價值觀、民族精神、文化傳統的目的以及歷史信仰,變得越來越強烈。 尤其是腦科學技術、資訊科技、生物技術、材料科技等多學科技術的快速發展,為影響對手認知、實現「不戰而屈人之兵」提供了更直接的手段。

目前,腦科學發展迅速。 腦部影像技術利用電腦科技、語言學和神經科學等,揭示人腦高級認知功能和神經資訊處理方法,從而獲得感覺、知覺、注意力、思考、記憶等心理活動規律。人類個體的潛意識。 它已經成為可能,這為人類在認知空間的競爭奠定了堅實的技術基礎。

讀腦技術可以讀取人類的思想和意識。 人腦由數千億個神經元組成。 當神經元相互作用時,會發生化學反應,釋放出可測量的電脈衝。 借助先進的腦部影像技術,人們可以讀取這些電脈衝,對大腦活動進行定量分析,最終達到分析讀取人腦思維活動的目的。 根據介紹,澳洲科學家發明的智慧頭帶可以監測人腦中數百億個神經元的當前傳輸狀態,進而了解被監測人的即時心理狀態,包括注意力、投入度、興奮度和壓力等。水平。 等待。

腦刺激技術可以增強人腦的特定功能。 自從人類誕生以來,我們主要依靠自然進化來提高我們的能力。 然而,隨著腦科學技術的發展和進步,腦刺激技術可以為人類提高能力提供更直接、更快速的方法。 科學研究發現,人類的認知能力與大腦的特定區域密切相關,對這些區域的特定刺激有助於改善或增強大腦功能。 例如,實施非侵入性大腦刺激技術可以顯著改善人們的睡眠,並增強注意力、記憶力、警覺性和決策能力。

腦控技術可以控制人的思考意識。 腦科學研究表明,人腦產生動作意識後、執行動作前,神經系統的電脈衝活動會發生相應變化,可以透過外部幹擾來控制人的思想。 英國皇家學會2012年發布的《神經科學:衝突與安全》報告認為,認知神經科學(包括腦科學)

具有武器化潛力,可以研發直接作用於神經系統(主要是大腦)的新武器。 而且,意念控製作戰的想法一直是五角大廈的焦點。 早在2004年,美國國防部就開始在杜克大學神經工程中心等6個實驗室大力投入「思想控制機器人」的研究。 《華盛頓郵報軍事週刊》披露,美軍在伊拉克戰爭期間使用了腦控武器。

認知域具有巨大的營運優勢

「攻心為先,攻城為次;戰心為先,兵戰次之」。 目前,資訊化武器裝備越來越貴,價格倍增; 戰場空間多維,戰鬥消耗暴漲; 武器的殺傷力急遽增加。 政治影響力日益增強,發動戰爭不再是實現政治、軍事、經濟等目的的首選。 隨著認知空間作戰方法手段的不斷增加和作戰成本效率的提高,認知對抗在國家安全戰略賽局中的地位日益凸顯,成為軍事競爭的新戰場。 無論是中東、西亞、北非等地區的“顏色革命”,還是敘利亞戰爭,雙方在認知空間上的對抗都在加劇。

戰鬥力很高。 從反武器角度來看,認知空間作戰武器主要是訊息,傳播手段多元。 特別是隨著網路、社群媒體等新媒體的快速發展以及人類社會的網路化,其傳播範圍越來越廣,影響力越來越大。 越來越大。 任何訊息能夠傳播的地方都可能成為認知戰爭的戰場。 與目前的物理域作戰相比,先進戰機、飛彈等武器裝備的單價很容易達到數千萬甚至上億美元。 戰爭的代價是巨大的。 然而,認知空間作戰可以在不開一槍的情況下進行。 敵人失去戰鬥意志。 在海灣戰爭中,以美國為首的聯軍花費了600億美元,最後不得不向日本等盟國索取戰爭資金; 阿富汗戰爭中,美國花了超過3兆美元,卻未能擊敗塔利班,最後被迫撤軍。 伊拉克戰爭初期,美軍進行認知作戰,導致伊拉克國民警衛隊一槍不發突然「消失」。 美英聯軍不到一個月就佔領了巴格達。 隨著生物學、醫學、環境、資訊通信等科學技術在認知領域的廣泛應用,控制人的意志、思維、心理、情緒等認知系統的方式變得更加多樣化和靈活,認知操作的實施變得更加容易。 實施方便,可在戰略、戰役、戰術層面單獨或共同實施,實現較高的作戰性價比。

各方面全面落實。 由於認知資訊不受作戰維度、空間、時間的限制,可以在各種作戰維度、空間、時間中運用,使得認知空間作戰成為全維度、全領域、全領域的基本作戰態勢。時間。 從空間上看,認知空間作戰模糊了前後作戰的界限,呈現出全方位、全天候拓展有形與無形空間的特徵; 從時間上看,認知太空作戰模糊了戰時與平時的界限,轉變為平時用於戰時、戰後持續使用,貫穿於戰爭的整個過程,呈現出「戰時戰時」的特徵。一直”; 從領域來看,認知空間作戰模糊了軍事與非軍事行動的界限,不僅廣泛應用於軍事領域,也滲透到政治、經濟、外交、宗教等各個領域,呈現出全覆蓋的特徵; 從作戰對象來看,認知太空作戰模糊了軍事人員和平民之間的界限,具有全面實施軍事和民用影響的特徵。

殺傷力是巨大的。 認知優勢既是軟實力,也是硬實力。 這是軟實力和硬實力最好結合的智慧實力。 認知優勢通常包括知覺優勢

現代英語:

With the development of global informatization and the advancement of computer science, linguistics and neuroscience, the human cognitive space composed of spiritual and psychological activities such as human emotions, will, beliefs and values ​​is evolving into a new battlefield for military competition. In order to achieve the effect of defeating others without fighting. As early as July 2001, the “Network Centric Warfare” demonstration report submitted to Congress by the U.S. Department of Defense pointed out that in addition to the five-dimensional war space of land, sea, air, space, and electricity, future wars will also have a sixth-dimensional war space. ——Cognitive space.

Cognitive domain battles intensify

Since the birth of human warfare, the strategy of subduing the enemy without fighting has been highly praised by military strategists at home and abroad in ancient and modern times. Whether it is the “empty city strategy” or “embarrassment on all sides”, they are classic examples of cognitive domain warfare in Chinese history. Sun Tzu said: “He who subdues the enemy’s army without fighting is a good man.” During the American Civil War, a northern army was surrounded by a southern army. At the critical moment, the northern army commander asked for negotiations. The southern army commander said nothing. He just led the northern army commander to his artillery position and counted the number of cannons. When the number reached 150, the northern army commander Surrender.

With the advancement of science and technology and the development of human society, under the interaction of informatization and globalization, various information carried by emerging media, national languages, cultural products, etc. are used as weapons to penetrate, influence and shape hostility. The battle in the cognitive domain, which is oriented toward the cognition, emotion, and consciousness of the national leadership, military, elites, and the general public, and ultimately achieves the purpose of controlling a country’s ideology, values, national spirit, cultural traditions, and historical beliefs, is becoming more and more intense. In particular, the rapid development of multidisciplinary technologies such as brain science and technology, information technology, biotechnology, and materials technology has provided more direct means to influence the opponent’s cognition and achieve “conquering the enemy without fighting.”

Currently, brain science is developing rapidly. Using computer technology, linguistics and neuroscience, etc., brain imaging technology can reveal the advanced cognitive functions and neural information processing methods of the human brain, thereby obtaining the rules of psychological activities such as the feeling, perception, attention, thinking, memory and subconsciousness of human individuals. It has become possible, which has laid a solid technical foundation for human beings to compete in the cognitive space.

Brain reading technology can read human thoughts and consciousness. The human brain is made up of hundreds of billions of neurons. When neurons interact, a chemical reaction occurs that releases a measurable electrical impulse. With the help of advanced brain imaging technology, people can read these electrical pulses, conduct quantitative analysis of brain activity, and ultimately achieve the purpose of analyzing and reading the thinking activities of the human brain. According to reports, the smart headband invented by Australian scientists can monitor the current transmission status of tens of billions of neurons in the human brain, and then understand the real-time psychological state of the monitored person, including attention, engagement, excitement and stress levels. wait.

Brain stimulation technology can enhance specific functions of the human brain. Since the birth of human beings, we have mainly relied on natural evolution to improve our capabilities. However, with the development and progress of brain science and technology, brain stimulation technology can provide a more direct and rapid method for humans to improve their abilities. Scientific research has found that human cognitive ability is closely related to specific areas of the brain, and specific stimulation of these areas can help improve or enhance brain function. For example, the implementation of non-invasive brain stimulation technology can significantly improve people’s sleep and enhance attention, memory, alertness and decision-making.

Brain control technology can control people’s thinking consciousness. Brain science research shows that after the human brain generates action awareness and before executing the action, the electrical pulse activity of the nervous system will change accordingly, and people’s thoughts can be controlled through external interference. The “Neuroscience: Conflict and Security” report released by the Royal Society in 2012 believed that cognitive neuroscience (including brain science) has the potential for weaponization and can develop new weapons that directly act on the nervous system (mainly the brain). Moreover, the idea of ​​mind-controlled combat has always been a focus of the Pentagon. As early as 2004, the U.S. Department of Defense began to invest heavily in research on “thought-controlled robots” in six laboratories including the Neural Engineering Center at Duke University. The Washington Post Military Weekly disclosed that the U.S. military used brain-control weapons during the Iraq War.

Cognitive domain has huge operational advantages

“Attack on the heart is first, siege the city second; war on the heart is first, followed by military warfare.” At present, information-based weapons and equipment are becoming more and more expensive, and the price has doubled; the battlefield space is multi-dimensional, and combat consumption has skyrocketed; the lethality of weapons has increased dramatically. The political influence is increasing day by day, and waging war is no longer the first choice to achieve political, military, economic and other purposes. With the increasing number of methods and means of cognitive space operations and the high cost-efficiency ratio of operations, cognitive confrontation has become increasingly prominent in the national security strategic game and has become a new battlefield for military competition. Whether it is the “color revolutions” in the Middle East, West Asia, North Africa and other regions, or the war in Syria, the confrontation between the two sides in the cognitive space is intensifying.

The combat effectiveness is high. From the perspective of counter-weapons, cognitive space combat weapons are mainly information, with various means of dissemination. Especially with the rapid development of new media such as the Internet and social media, as well as the networking of human society, its dissemination scope is getting wider and wider, and its influence is increasing. getting bigger. Anywhere information can spread can become a battlefield in cognitive wars. Compared with the current physical domain operations, the unit price of advanced fighters, missiles and other weapons and equipment can easily reach tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars. The cost of war is huge. However, cognitive space operations can be used without firing a single shot. The enemy loses his will to fight. In the Gulf War, the U.S.-led coalition spent 60 billion U.S. dollars, and finally had to ask Japan and other allies to finance the war; in the Afghanistan War, the U.S. spent more than 3 trillion U.S. dollars but failed to defeat the Taliban, and was eventually forced to withdraw. In the early days of the Iraq War, the U.S. military carried out cognitive operations, causing the Iraqi National Guard to suddenly “disappear” without firing a single shot. The U.S.-British coalition captured Baghdad in less than a month. With the extensive application of science and technology such as biology, medicine, environment, and information communication in the cognitive field, the ways to control cognitive systems such as people’s will, thinking, psychology, and emotions have become more diverse and flexible, and the implementation of cognitive operations has become easier. It is easy to implement and can be implemented individually or jointly at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels to achieve a high operational cost-effectiveness ratio.

Fully implemented in all dimensions. Since cognitive information is not limited by operational dimensions, space, and time, it can be used in various operational dimensions, spaces, and times, making cognitive space operations a basic combat situation that is all-dimensional, all-domain, and all-time. From a spatial point of view, cognitive space operations blur the boundaries between front and rear operations, showing the characteristics of all-round and all-weather expansion of tangible and invisible spaces; from a time point of view, cognitive space operations blur the boundaries between wartime and peacetime, transforming In peacetime, it is used in wartime, and it continues after the war, throughout the entire process of the war, showing the characteristics of “war at all times”; from a field perspective, cognitive space operations blur the boundaries between military and non-military operations, and are not only widespread It is used in the military field, and penetrates into various fields such as politics, economy, diplomacy, religion, etc., showing the characteristics of full coverage; from the perspective of combat objects, cognitive space operations blur the boundaries between military personnel and civilians, and have the ability to comprehensively implement military and civilian Characteristics of impact.

The lethality is huge. Cognitive advantage is both soft power and hard power. It is the smart power that best combines soft and hard power. Cognitive advantages usually include perceptual advantages, knowledge advantages, psychological advantages and decision-making advantages. Perceptual advantages can help the military improve the lethality of weapon platforms. U.S. Air Force combat tests show that after a combat aircraft gains a perception advantage, its lethality can be increased by 2.5 times. However, if the aircraft is at a disadvantage in perception, it will be in a state of information confusion to a large extent, and will not only become “blind” or “deaf”, They may also become “idiots” who act blindly and “idiots” who are deceived by the enemy’s false information. In the future, intelligent warfare will, to some extent, be a contest of knowledge. Knowledge has become an important military element. Only by forming a knowledge advantage can we fully utilize the performance of high-tech weapons and equipment and achieve the best combination of people and weapons. Decision-making advantage is the core of cognitive space advantage and the key to winning future wars. Establishing and protecting one’s own decision-making advantages, and attacking and weakening the enemy’s decision-making advantages will be the focus of future war confrontations. Only by gaining a decision-making advantage can we form a full-spectrum advantage and ultimately win the war.

Give full play to the advantages of non-military power. Future wars are hybrid wars, involving not only the military field, but also many non-military fields. Due to restrictions such as the laws of war, military power cannot be used in non-military fields, but cognitive space operations can exert its unique advantages to achieve war goals. For example, during the Second Lebanon War, the Lebanese military made full use of the power of the media to publicize a large number of civilian casualties to win the support of international public opinion; internally, it used pictures of destroyed Israeli military equipment to publicize the results of the war, which not only forced the Israeli military to compress as much as possible The duration of the operation resulted in its inability to achieve its operational objectives, and it also received support from Arab countries, thus gaining strategic initiative. As cognitive space becomes a new battlefield space, non-military forces are likely to become the main force in cognitive space operations, and combat operations will become more and more frequent. According to statistics, in recent local wars, the ratio of non-military forces to military combat forces has reached 4:1, with non-military forces engaged in cognitive operations accounting for the vast majority.

Cognitive domain combat methods are diverse

In essence, cognitive domain operations start from the spiritual level of war, taking people’s will, beliefs, thinking, psychology, etc. as the objects of combat, triggering cognitive imbalances by attacking the opponent’s perceptual system, and attacking their value system to promote combat. The target is emotionally disturbed and attacks its belief system, causing the target’s will to collapse, thereby achieving the combat goal. According to the cognitive space combat mechanism, its combat methods mainly include the following.

Destroy the will to fight. To dismantle the will to war is to declare to hostile countries the determination to fight and the will to use force by displaying powerful new weapons and equipment, new combat forces, mobilizing and deploying troops, and large-scale military exercises, so as to intimidate and deter the enemy’s military and civilians. The opponent retreats or surrenders, abandoning war operations. As for the timing of use, it is mainly used before war, aiming to defeat the enemy without fighting, and can also be used during combat. At the operational level, operations to disrupt the will to fight are mainly used at the strategic and operational levels, reflecting the will and determination of a country or group to safeguard interests. In peacetime, it usually manifests itself in the form of revelations in the cognitive field, exercises in the military field, blockades in the diplomatic field, sanctions in the economic field, etc.; in times of war, it usually manifests itself in the use of battlefield information advantages to show the enemy the results of the battle and directly express the will to fight. and determination to achieve cognitive enhancement of combat effectiveness. For example, pictures of the precise destruction of important targets in war are transmitted to enemy soldiers and civilians in the form of images or videos, which enhances the memory of the combat effects in the enemy’s cognitive field, creates a psychological shadow on the enemy, and makes them lose their will to fight.

Attack the idea of ​​faith. Attacking beliefs and concepts refers to using various means to guide enemy soldiers and civilians to abandon or form certain beliefs and concepts, so as to disintegrate the spiritual pillars of enemy soldiers and civilians, change their attitude towards war, and then force the enemy to give up resistance. The main means of attacking beliefs and concepts include: vilifying the enemy’s political or spiritual leaders, destroying the values ​​​​of the enemy’s military and civilians, and inducing young people to change their “three views.” For example, in the Iraq war and the Libyan war, the US military vilified Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi were typical examples. Another example is to use the Internet, social media and other channels to attack the beliefs of the enemy’s military and civilians, induce cognitive confusion among the enemy’s military and civilians, change their concepts, and thereby destroy the enemy’s public opinion foundation for war.

Public opinion attacks psychology. The psychology of public opinion attack refers to the use of various cognitive operations, such as creating a combat situation and atmosphere, to strongly stimulate the normal psychological state of enemy soldiers and civilians, thereby affecting combat judgment, decision-making, and actions. Public opinion attack psychological operations are not about eliminating the impact, but about controlling and minimizing the impact on one’s own military and civilians, and maximizing the impact on the enemy’s military and civilians. The U.S. military predicts through analysis of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that the proportion of attrition due to psychological problems will reach 10% to 25% in future operations. In recent local wars, the US military has always used psychological warfare as a “multiplier” of combat effectiveness and a “reducer” of combat costs. It must be used in every battle and every battle. Israel’s “Debka Files” website disclosed that in order to isolate Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the US military called senior Syrian military officials and said bluntly: “General, we have used the global positioning system to determine your position, and then sent snipers Hand. What do you want to do now? If I were you, I would definitely think twice about who I should be loyal to.”

The battlefield conceals truth and reveals lies. Concealing truth and showing falsehood refers to concealing the true battlefield situation and combat intentions through various actions, creating and displaying illusions, inducing the enemy to make wrong decisions, and achieving the purpose of controlling the war situation. For example, in ancient times, “hanging sheep beats drums”, “thatched boats borrow arrows”, and “empty city strategy” all infiltrated the idea of ​​concealing the truth and revealing the false. In future wars, both combatants will usually use false information in the information acquisition process to induce confusion in the enemy’s situation; use saturated information blocking in the information processing process to induce the enemy to make inaccurate analysis and judgment; use viruses in the information feedback process , Trojan horse attack means to make the enemy’s command decision-making errors.

中國人民解放軍將重點關注認知領域作戰

China’s People’s Libration Army To Focus on Cognitive Domain Operations

原始國語:

刘曙光

2022年10月05日08:XX | 来源:解放军报

要點提示

●認知域作戰著重全維度攻擊,既包括「平時」的認知滲透,也包括「戰時」的認知迫誘。

●戰時認知域作戰圍繞著軍事目的的達成而展開,與軍事行動配合實施、相互支持。

●在認知域作戰中,隨著槍砲聲的消散,新一輪認知域作戰的號角可能再次吹響,不能有絲毫懈怠。

認知域作戰是在意識思維層面進行的對抗,透過選擇性加工和傳遞訊息,影響判斷、改變觀念、爭奪人心,進而引導現實態勢向有利於己的方向發展。 從認知塑造來看,認知域作戰著重全維度攻擊,既包括「平時」的認知滲透,也包括「戰時」的認知迫誘。 因而,認知域作戰沒有明晰的平、戰界線;同時,根據政治或軍事目的需要,其作用對象可以是個人、組織甚至國家。 因此,認知域作戰應該樹立平戰一體、軍地一體、跨域融合、連動制勝的觀念,並依此整理基本任務。

聚焦意識形態的佈局任務

意識形態是「系統性地、自覺地反映社會經濟形態和政治制度的思想體系」。 意識形態決定了認知的理性根基,具有鮮明的陣營特徵。 儘管意識形態涵蓋社會生活的各個層面,但在國家或政治團體之間的對抗中,圍繞著信念引導、態度爭取、觀念同化等方面的鬥爭尤為激烈,成為認知域作戰重點關注的任務。

塑造引導政治認知,奪取信念破立主控權。 國家或政治集團之間的對抗不僅是舉國之力的對抗,也是舉國之志的對抗,政治信念的對抗首當其衝。 塑造引導政治認知旨在凝聚或破壞政治共識、堅定或動搖政治信念、拓展或瓦解政治陣營。 認知域作戰中,透過對執政黨的合法性、政治理念和製度的合理性、政治生態的健康性等各方面的認知引導,培植對政治立場、信念、實踐等的認同或否定、擁護 或憎恨等感情,舖設有利於己、不利於敵的政治認知佈局。 政治認知關係到國家或組織的生存根基,是認知域作戰的首要關注目標。

塑造引導戰爭認知,奪取戰爭態度領導權。 國可無戰事但不能無戰識。 戰爭認知是個人、組織、國家在戰爭週期中意志、觀念、心理、思考形成和發展的基礎。 透過對戰爭的本質、性質、法理觀念等的認知引導,建構戰爭認知思維體系,引導戰爭合理性、正義性、合法性的評價走向,推動對可能發生戰爭支持或反對態度的形成,調控 承擔戰爭義務意願的漲落,是戰爭認知引導的關鍵問題。 戰爭認知影響戰爭態度,對其主控權的爭奪是認知域作戰必須重視的任務。

塑造引導價值認知,奪取情感意志控領權。 價值觀影響人的美醜是非評判和社會行為取向,在認定事物、判定是非方面,人的情感總是傾向於支持價值觀相近的主張。 價值認知滲透於生活的各個角落,透過倫理道德觀念、美醜善惡標準、文學藝術觀點等的傳播,圍繞價值觀念導引權、生活模式導向權、傳統傳承評判權等的爭奪頻繁且激烈 。 現實生活中,不同的價值觀念往往會互相滲透糾纏。 塑造引導價值認知的實質是爭取社會情感的認同,是認知領域作戰的經常性任務。

緊盯社會心理的造勢任務

社會心理為認知提供了感性和經驗基礎,它在日常生活、社會活動、實踐感悟等經驗基礎上形成。 社會心理引導常會推動現實情勢產生難測變化,是雙方對抗特別是非軍事衝突期的慣用模式之一,也是認知域作戰必須重視的任務。

導引民族心理,調控民族情緒。 民族心理是最容易引發衝突對抗的社會心理之一。 打擊民族自尊心可滋長民族自卑心理而易分裂澇散,提升民族自尊心可增強民族凝聚力,但民族自尊心的膨脹又易引發極端種族主義、民族沙文主義等的產生;國家內部不同民族間地位、利益、文化 、風俗、生活等的差異性,為別有用心之人挑動民族對立情緒提供了可乘之機,而相同的生存空間、合作歷程等又奠定了民族間消除偏見甚至凝聚包容的基礎,結果取決於認 知導引。 民族心理導引敏感且容易失控,對社會穩定有直接影響,是認知域作戰需要重點關注的任務。

導引群類心理,漲消對立意識。 群類泛指同類的人,如民族、地理、階級、職業團體甚至民間團體、非政府組織等等。 如果說群類是以「趨同」為標準而主觀劃定的,那麼群類之間的「差異」就是客觀存在的。 這種差異性可能是政治、經濟地位,也可能是文化思想、地域觀念抑或其他。 導引差異認知推動黨派對立、地區對立、職業對立、貧富對立等不同群體對立心理,不但會對國家內部團結造成破壞,也會累積增加社會各界對政權當局的不滿情緒,為策動社會 動盪分裂留下伏筆。 認知域作戰中,需要對此類社會心理予以關注。

導引個體心理,影響社會情緒。 認知域作戰中,個體心理導引區分為兩種情境。 一種是重要人物心理導引,如敏感工作者、社會公知、學術菁英、商業成功人士等,對其政治立場、情感態度等的爭取,是對抗雙方需要重點關注的議題。 一種是對易引發個體心理共鳴現象的利用。 如公共危機、重大事故、自然災害甚至生活中的一些犯罪事件、突發情況等,有意導引某種情緒則可能因個體的從眾效應而產生群體極化現象,從而引發民意變化甚至社會動盪。 這兩個面向都是認知域作戰需重視的內容。

瞄準戰時認知的關鍵性任務

認知域作戰先於軍事行動開展而後於軍事行動結束。 戰時認知域作戰圍繞著軍事目的的達成而展開,與軍事行動配合實施、相互支撐,具有暴力脅迫特徵。 此階段的認知域作戰,「攻」「防」行動同步開展,武器影響、宣傳影響綜合致效,「誘」「打」「騙」「控」等手段層出不窮,是認知域作戰的 關鍵階段。

攻心奪志,迫誘認知。 戰時認知攻擊主要圍繞在削弱敵抵抗意志、誘導敵錯誤決策。 針對敵方決策層、一線指戰員等,透過靶向攻擊動搖抵抗意志,透過資訊欺騙幹擾誘導決策;針對以軍隊為主的武裝力量,以武力打擊震懾主導,綜合運用輿論戰等樣式行動以及新興技術 手段,動搖其參戰信念、引發其恐慌情緒、瓦解其軍心士氣、支配其行動模式;針對社會面支撐力量,透過大型軍事演習、裝備試驗、宣傳武器殺傷效能等傳遞強硬訊息打擊信心,透過選擇性 目標打擊、戰況傳播等誘發恐慌情緒,透過宣傳己方戰爭中的人道行為和國際相關評論爭取理解等。

築牢防線,凝心控局。 戰時認知防守的重點是築牢「心」「志」「智」防線,防止在局勢或環境劇烈變化的刺激下喪失鬥志。 教育和宣傳是戰時認知防禦的基本途徑。 針對參戰力量,透過動員激勵激發參戰熱情,透過批駁謠言澄清事實真相,透過宣傳戰果確立必勝信念,透過樹立典型調動士氣等等;針對支撐力量,透過戰爭的正義性、合理性、合法性教育 宣傳,建立全民使命感、責任感、義務感,透過揭露敵方的殘暴行為激發同仇敵愾心理,透過宣傳地方參戰支前事蹟激發支援作戰熱情等等。

拓展陣營,消除隱憂。 營造有利的認知氛圍,為己方陣營拓展提供支撐,是戰時認知領域作戰必須有所作為的重要面向。 特別是國際支持力量的爭取,雖然在途徑上主要以政治、外交等活動為主,但己方立場、理念、態度等的廣泛擴散,常會帶動國際民間態度的轉變,進而影響到政治層面的決策, 為己方拓展陣營提供支撐。 此外,戰時認知域作戰還有一項貫穿戰爭始終的重要任務,即消除戰爭中各種意外帶來的不利隱患。 特別是戰爭後期,隨著戰爭破壞效應的顯現擴散,人的認知體係必將受到不同資訊的反覆衝擊。 這段時期,需要意識形態引領、社會心理塑造、個體心理疏導等配合致效,方能確保戰果的鞏固。 在認知域作戰中,隨著槍砲聲的消散,新一輪認知域作戰的號角可能再次吹響,不能有絲毫懈怠。

現代英語:


●Cognitive domain operations focus on full-dimensional attacks, including both “peacetime” cognitive penetration and “wartime” cognitive coercion.

●Wartime cognitive domain operations revolve around the achievement of military objectives, and are implemented in conjunction with military operations to support each other.

●In cognitive domain operations, as the sound of gunfire dissipates, the horn of a new round of cognitive domain operations may sound again, and there must be no slacking off.

Cognitive domain warfare is a confrontation at the level of conscious thinking. Through selective processing and transmission of information, it affects judgment, changes concepts, and competes for people’s hearts, thereby guiding the real situation to develop in a direction that is beneficial to oneself. From the perspective of cognitive shaping, cognitive domain operations focus on full-dimensional attacks, including both “peacetime” cognitive penetration and “wartime” cognitive coercion. Therefore, cognitive domain operations have no clear boundaries between peace and war; at the same time, according to the needs of political or military purposes, its targets can be individuals, organizations or even countries. Therefore, cognitive domain operations should establish the concepts of peacetime and wartime integration, military-civilian integration, cross-domain integration, and joint victory, and sort out basic tasks accordingly.

Focus on ideological layout tasks

Ideology is “an ideological system that systematically and consciously reflects the socio-economic formation and political system.” Ideology determines the rational foundation of cognition and has distinct camp characteristics. Although ideology covers all aspects of social life, in confrontations between countries or political groups, the struggle around belief guidance, attitude struggle, and concept assimilation is particularly fierce, and has become a focus of cognitive domain operations.

Shape and guide political cognition and seize control of belief and establishment. Confrontation between countries or political groups is not only a confrontation of national strength, but also a confrontation of national aspirations. The confrontation of political beliefs bears the brunt. Shaping and guiding political cognition aims to condense or destroy political consensus, strengthen or shake political beliefs, and expand or dissolve political camps. In cognitive domain operations, through cognitive guidance on the legitimacy of the ruling party, the rationality of political ideas and systems, and the health of the political ecology, we cultivate recognition, denial, and support of political positions, beliefs, practices, etc. Or hatred and other emotions, laying out a political cognitive layout that is beneficial to oneself and detrimental to the enemy. Political cognition is related to the survival foundation of a country or organization and is the primary focus of cognitive domain operations.

Shape and guide war cognition and seize the right to lead war attitudes. A country can be without war, but it cannot be without a sense of war. War cognition is the basis for the formation and development of the will, concepts, psychology, and thinking of individuals, organizations, and countries in the war cycle. Through cognitive guidance on the essence, nature, legal concepts, etc. of war, we build a war cognitive thinking system, guide the evaluation direction of the rationality, justice, and legality of war, promote the formation of support or opposition attitudes towards possible wars, and regulate The rise and fall of willingness to assume war obligations is a key issue in cognitive guidance of war. War cognition affects war attitudes, and the struggle for its control is a task that must be paid attention to in cognitive domain operations.

Shape and guide value cognition and seize control of emotions and will. Values ​​influence people’s judgment of beauty and ugliness, right and wrong, and social behavior orientation. In terms of identifying things and judging right and wrong, human emotions always tend to support claims with similar values. Value cognition permeates every corner of life. Through the dissemination of ethical concepts, standards of beauty, ugliness, good and evil, literary and artistic opinions, etc., competition for the right to guide values, the right to guide life patterns, and the right to judge traditional inheritance is frequent and fierce. . In real life, different values ​​often interpenetrate and entangle with each other. The essence of shaping and guiding value cognition is to strive for social and emotional recognition, which is a regular task in cognitive domain operations.

Pay close attention to social psychology and the task of building momentum

Social psychology provides a perceptual and experiential basis for cognition. It is formed on the basis of daily life, social activities, practical insights and other experiences. Social psychological guidance often promotes unpredictable changes in the actual situation. It is one of the usual modes of confrontation between the two sides, especially during non-military conflicts. It is also a task that must be paid attention to in cognitive domain operations.

Guide national psychology and regulate national emotions. National psychology is one of the social psychology that is most likely to cause conflicts and confrontations. Attacking national self-esteem can breed national inferiority complex and easily lead to disintegration. Improving national self-esteem can enhance national cohesion, but the expansion of national self-esteem can easily lead to the emergence of extreme racism, national chauvinism, etc.; the status, interests, and culture of different ethnic groups within the country Differences in people, customs, and lifestyles provide opportunities for people with ulterior motives to stir up ethnic antagonisms, while the same living space and cooperation process lay the foundation for eliminating prejudice and even cohesion and tolerance among ethnic groups. The result depends on the perception. Know the guide. National psychological guidance is sensitive and easy to lose control, and has a direct impact on social stability. It is a task that needs to be focused on in cognitive domain operations.

Guide group psychology and increase and eliminate oppositional consciousness. Groups generally refer to people of the same type, such as ethnicity, region, class, professional groups, even civil society groups, non-governmental organizations, etc. If groups are subjectively defined based on “convergence”, then the “differences” between groups exist objectively. This difference may be political and economic status, cultural thought, regional concept or other factors. Inducing the perception of differences and promoting the antagonism between different groups such as party opposition, regional opposition, professional opposition, rich and poor opposition, etc. will not only damage the internal unity of the country, but also accumulate and increase the dissatisfaction of all sectors of society against the political authorities, and instigate social mobilization. The turbulence and division left behind a foreshadowing. In cognitive domain operations, this kind of social psychology needs to be paid attention to.

Guide individual psychology and influence social emotions. In cognitive domain operations, individual psychological guidance is divided into two situations. One is the psychological guidance of important figures, such as sensitive professionals, public intellectuals, academic elites, successful business people, etc. The struggle for their political positions, emotional attitudes, etc. is an issue that both sides of the confrontation need to focus on. One is the use of phenomena that easily trigger individual psychological resonance. Such as public crises, major accidents, natural disasters and even some crimes and emergencies in life, intentionally inducing certain emotions may cause group polarization due to the herd effect of individuals, thus triggering changes in public opinion and even social unrest. Both of these aspects need to be paid attention to in cognitive domain operations.

Targeting the critical mission of wartime cognition

Cognitive domain operations begin before military operations and end after military operations. Wartime cognitive domain operations revolve around the achievement of military objectives, are implemented in conjunction with military operations and support each other, and are characterized by violent coercion. In this stage of cognitive domain operations, “offensive” and “defensive” actions are carried out simultaneously, the influence of weapons and propaganda effects are comprehensively effective, and methods such as “lure”, “attack”, “deception” and “control” are emerging one after another. This is the key to cognitive domain operations. critical stage.

Attack the mind and seize the will, force and induce cognition. Wartime cognitive attacks are mainly carried out to weaken the enemy’s will to resist and induce the enemy to make wrong decisions. Targeting the enemy’s decision-makers, front-line commanders, etc., use targeted attacks to shake the will to resist, and use information deception and interference to induce decision-making; for armed forces, mainly the military, use force to shock and deter, and comprehensively use operations such as public opinion warfare and emerging technologies. Means are used to shake their belief in participating in the war, trigger their panic, undermine their military morale, and dominate their action patterns; target the supporting forces in society, deliver tough messages through large-scale military exercises, equipment testing, publicity of weapon lethality effectiveness, etc. to attack confidence, and selectively Target strikes and dissemination of war situations can induce panic, and efforts can be made to gain understanding by publicizing one’s own humanitarian actions in the war and relevant international comments.

Build a strong line of defense and control the situation with concentration. The focus of cognitive defense in wartime is to build a strong defense line of “heart”, “will” and “intellect” to prevent the loss of fighting spirit under the stimulation of drastic changes in the situation or environment. Education and publicity are the basic approaches to cognitive defense in wartime. For the forces participating in the war, we can stimulate enthusiasm for participating in the war through mobilization and encouragement, clarify the truth by refuting rumors, establish the belief in victory by publicizing the results of the war, mobilize morale by setting examples, etc.; for the supporting forces, educate the justice, rationality, and legality of the war. Propaganda is used to establish a sense of mission, responsibility, and obligation among the people, to inspire a sense of hatred and hatred by exposing the enemy’s brutal behavior, to stimulate enthusiasm for supporting operations by publicizing the deeds of local governments participating in the war and supporting frontline operations, and so on.

Expand your camp and eliminate hidden dangers. Creating a favorable cognitive atmosphere and providing support for the expansion of one’s own camp is an important aspect that must be achieved in wartime cognitive domain operations. In particular, although the fight for international support is mainly through political, diplomatic and other activities, the widespread diffusion of one’s own positions, ideas, attitudes, etc. often leads to changes in international civil attitudes, which in turn affects decision-making at the political level. Provide support for your own camp expansion. In addition, wartime cognitive domain operations also have an important task throughout the war, which is to eliminate the adverse hidden dangers caused by various accidents in the war. Especially in the later stages of the war, as the destructive effects of war appear and spread, people’s cognitive system will be repeatedly impacted by different information. During this period, ideological guidance, social psychological shaping, and individual psychological counseling are required to work together to ensure the consolidation of the results. In cognitive domain operations, as the sound of guns dissipates, the horn of a new round of cognitive domain operations may sound again, and there must be no slacking off.

解放日報原文網址: http://military.people.com.cn/n1/2022/1005