Cognitive Warfare and Questioning Efficacy of Tech Superiority in War
Issue 4, 24 October 2021
Cognitive Warfare (认知战)
An article in PLA Daily about 'cognitive warfare' (认知战) presents it as the new domain of battle along with the physical domain. The author argues that we have now entered the era of "Comprehensive Cognitive Warfare" ( 全域认知战 ). This includes comprehensive cognitive perception (全域认知感知), comprehensive cognitive fusion (全域认知融合), and comprehensive cognitive offense and defense (全域认知攻防), etc. The ammunition in such war is "information" (信息).
The confrontation in cognitive warfare includes not only physical domains such as land, sea, and air, but also covers information domains such as electronic warfare, the internet, and interfering in the cognitive space of citizens of hostile countries. The cognitive offense includes interfering, influencing, and controlling the feelings, perceptions, thinking, imagination, experience, beliefs, etc. of personnel of hostile countries. Cognitive defense includes protection against the same. Given the nature of activities involved in such warfare, it is unsurprising that the author argues that cognitive warfare does not distinguish between peacetime and wartime. The author further argues that only through cognitive fusion (认知融合) can a comprehensive, timely, and accurate judgment of the situation be formed, and then the perception advantage can be transformed into a decision-making advantage and an action advantage.
The aim of this concept is to change how people think and act. In its extreme forms, it can have destabilizing effects on the entire society. The use of social media and the penetration internet in almost every aspect of life has enabled such possibilities. Such campaigns can be short-term (a few months) or be long-term (panning decades). Hence, there is no clear distinction between 'peacetime' and 'wartime.'
Cognitive fusion (认知融合) is a process that involves attaching thoughts and feelings to an experience so that experiences dominate further behavior. In warfare, this process can be used to disturb the mental health of personnel and wage a psychological war against a hostile country.
This is not the first time such argument has been made. Cognitive warfare suits the traditional Chinese "defeating enemy without fighting" (不战而屈人之兵) strategic thinking. As per reports, PLA is actively pursuing research in development capabilities to enable cognitive warfare. Elsa Kania, Adjunct Senior Fellow with the Technology and National Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, has written that these methods could range anywhere from the "use of the drug Modafinil for performance enhancement, to leveraging insights from brain science and psychology to target and exploit inherent vulnerabilities in human cognition." (Kania, 2020).
The concept of cognitive warfare is also linked to the advances in brain science including attempts to “imitate the brain” (仿脑), leverage “brain control” (脑控), “enhance the brain” (超脑), or “control the brain” (“控脑”) (Kania, 2020). The Chinese researchers have advocated leveraging technology that interferes with and control people's consciousness and the researcher working on such projects have been part of an expert group of the Central Military Commission's (CMC) Science and Technology Commission (Kania, 2020).
This in turn is a part of larger human-machine interface projects underway in China under the umbrella of the military-civil fusion strategy.
(Link to Elsa Kania's full paper is in the Additional Reading section at the end of this newsletter.)
Tech Superiority != Victory in War
An article in PLA Daily argues that tech superiority does necessarily mean victory in war. Having a technologically advanced military does mean that only technology should be used and considered as the ultimate advantage. The following quote sums up the authors' argument,
"Merely possessing technological advantages is far from enough. We must focus our efforts on bringing technological advantages into full play and turning them into victory in war." (仅仅拥有技术优势是远远不够的，必须着力将技术优势发挥出来，使之转化为战争胜势。)
To win a war, the authors argue, the following conditions should be satisfied.
According to the authors, war should be just - one that represents the interests of the country and people. A just war should have support from home and abroad and such war should rely on the power and wisdom of people.
The technology will be effective in war only when used scientifically and justifiably. The warfare operation involving advanced technology should be designed scientifically.
Reliable technology suitable for battlefield environments and conditions can be helpful. In “informatized warfare”, this means using combat methods such as long-range precision guidance and unmanned combat technologies applicable in land, sea, air, and space. Authors caution that these new technical methods are highly information and network dependent. If the information is lost or the network is interrupted, the technological advantages will be lost.
Adapting strategies according to the battlefield environment and keeping the objective reality of war in mind is also important to win future wars.
Authors use American withdrawal from Afghanistan to make the case. They argue that the United States (US) Military is technologically superior to the adversary it was fighting. Still, the US had to withdraw.
"The Gulf War once shaped the myth of the invincibility of the U.S. military. However, in the new century, the U.S. military has won and lost the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Facts show that technological superiority is not omnipotent, and pure technologicalism is very harmful." (海湾战争一度塑造了美军不可战胜的神话，然而新世纪以来美军在阿富汗战争和伊拉克战争中赢了战斗、输了战争。)
With all the efforts of modernizing the military and using high-tech weapons to fill the gap between the US and China's military power, the author is trying to caution about the pitfalls that might lie ahead. Having advanced tools and weapons might give a false sense of superiority and ignore important concepts in warfare.
The 'just war' argument is also a jibe at Washington. Many articles in official Chinese state media have tried to portray the US as a war-loving state. This article also uses a similar line of argument. However, the tone of the article is that of caution - for China might face similar choices later, Beijing should take notes from the recent US experiences.
In Short
China Tested a New Hypersonic Missile
China reportedly tested a new hypersonic missile in August 2021. My colleague Suyash Desai has covered the topic in his newsletter. Read it here.
Law Against Telecom, Internet Fraud
China's legislature has proposed draft legislation to combat telecom and internet frauds. This is the first time China has introduced special legislation to combat telecom fraud.
International Research Center for Big Data for Sustainable Development
The inaugural meeting of the International Research Center for Big Data for Sustainable Development was held in Beijing. In September 2021, China officially established an International Research Center for Sustainable Development Big Data in Beijing. In September 2020, Xi Jinping had announced at the general debate of the 75th United Nations General Assembly that China will establish a research center to assist implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development using big data.
Additional Reading
Minds at War: China’s Pursuit of Military Advantage through Cognitive Science and Biotechnology, By Elsa B. Kania, PRISM
Cognitive Domain Operations - The PLA's New Holistic Concept for Influence Operations, by Nathan Beauchamp-Mustafaga, RAND Corporation.