The idea underlying the postulate "to Reveal opportunities for deterrence, but to hide the possibility to gain an advantage in the conduct of hostilities," was a key aspect of the Second counterweight of the United States. For example, in the United States revealed their intentions and demonstrated a pre-selected features in order to convince the Soviet Union that have the technological resources to deploy tactical military networks with guided weapons from long range. They hid the development of stealth aircraft - the basis of the conduct of American forces in military action for the destruction of the system under a veil of secrecy. In fact, while the press regularly there were assumptions about the development of stealth aircraft, the United States has not officially recognized their existence until 1989, seven years after the demonstration project "Chopper attack" (see the American strategy of the counterweight with Chinese characteristics).
The Chinese, apparently, follow the same pattern. As President XI Jinping: "Advanced technologies are the powerful weapons of a modern state... it is Not necessary to show the most powerful weapon of the state". Chinese experts sometimes call it potentially provides for the victory of secret weapon "with a Rod killer" or Project 995. This project was launched in may 1999, shortly after the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Serbia. "Black" opportunities in China, largely obtained thanks to the industrial-technical espionage and the active support of the government may include such things as directed energy weapons, advanced space weapons, electromagnetic rail guns, high powered microwave weapon, or even more exotic weapons. As one Chinese military analyst, army of the country goes the way of "leapfrogging" to achieve a decisive superiority in the "strategic and advanced technologies" that Americans are not yet aware of.
Planning the structure of the US army should realize that the developers of the Chinese weapons tend to these opportunities as aggressively as their American partners. "The rod of the killer" and the 995 Project have been ongoing for almost two decades; and, apparently, there is some success. As a result, despite the fact that some classified opportunities are "dark horses", the us military must be prepared for some unpleasant technological surprises in the case of entry into an armed conflict with China. Indeed, due to the fact that the U.S. armed forces were drawn into an implacable military-technological confrontation, their preparation for combat encounters with the unexpected use of technological solutions may be as important as the development of the new "black" features.
The development of artificial intelligence to achieve military superiority
The formation of each of the four above-mentioned directions of activity began in the late 90-ies. However, recently, the Chinese added a fifth direction, designed to accelerate the achievement of their ultimate goal - obtaining the dominant technological superiority to the us military. The impetus for this was given by Chinese President XI that started a global restructuring of the Chinese army and called for the acceleration of innovative processes in the sphere of arms. As noted, XI Jinping, "Brewing new technological and industrial revolution, the global revolution in the military sphere is accelerated, and the model of international military competition is undergoing historic changes". He and the Chinese army is determined, at least to keep up. In this regard, the Chinese believe that artificial intelligence, big data, hybrid human-machine intelligence, swarm intelligence and automated decision-making along with Autonomous unmanned systems with integrated artificial intelligence and intelligent robots will become a Central component of the nascent economic and military-technical revolutions. Victory in the spring of 2016 AlphaGo program from Google DeepMind over Whether Sodala, which at the time was considered the greatest player in the game of go, was the "moment of truth" for the Beijing leadership and forced the Chinese to significantly accelerate in order to gain superiority in the field of artificial intelligence.
This is especially true for the planners of the PLA, which intend to implement artificial intelligence (AI) in each component of its combat systems at all levels in order to use this "strategic advanced technology and to a sharp increase in military capabilities". For example, the object of scrutiny of the PLA began a program called "Deep Green" started Running DARPA in the mid-2000s, the purpose of which was to ensure commanders prognostic capabilities based on AI. China is studying AI not just as a tool to increase combat capabilities when making command decisions, but as an integrated element of weapons systems. As noted by one analyst, China has significantly increased its spending on research in the field of development of systems of a hypersonic missile based on neural networks. Indeed, Chinese military theorists believe that the AI is likely to be the key to superiority over the us military as the world's most powerful armed forces, and it will happen much faster than initially estimated in the late 90s.
In support of these plans in July 2017, China's state Council published the "plan for the development of artificial intelligence the next generation", clearly outlining ambitious algorithm, outputting, by 2030, China is a world leader in AI. This plan is the embodiment of civil-military merger, as it seeks to ensure that benefits AI in commercial sector can be readily used for the purposes of national defence at the expense of the process, which China calls "the abrupt development of" critical technologies. The Chinese government has invested billions of dollars in related technologies in the company (local and foreign) and human capital in order to implement these ambitious plans. And if data is the fuel for AI, then China can gain a structural advantage over the rest of the world in the race for AI. As you can see by the response to the transmission of the "Facebook" of personal data to third parties, the Western democracies wary look at governments and companies that collect personal data. Such doubts among Chinese consumers doesn't exist, and especially the Chinese government, which is AI as a tool to maintain order and control of the population. For example, in November 2017, the Chinese Tech startup Yitu involved in face recognition, took first place in the competition, Facial Recognition Prize Challenge, conducted by the advanced intellectual projects.
How seriously the Chinese are engaged in the issues of AI in the military sphere, the recent decision to postpone the doctrinal and analytical emphasis from confrontation systems in the "competition of algorithms" and their belief that "the achievement of excellence in algorithms will allow you to gain the upper hand in the fighting". It can also serve as a signal that the Chinese are now confident that they have reached technological parity with the us military and are ready to move on to the third phase of its activities - to achieving absolute technological superiority over the armed forces of the United States.
What this activity will lead in ten or twenty years is difficult to predict. The US does not shy away from this competition and thanks to their efforts can easily come out on top. Under any circumstances, however, it is clear that AI and Autonomous operation the level which they can afford will have a huge influence on existing arrays - multi-sensory, operational management, communication and collection of information (C3I), an array of support and recovery - and could pave the way for military-technical revolution. It is clear that the Chinese are set to play the role of an aggressive first-mover in this new mode of confrontation, and I hope in this role to exceed the us military - today the most powerful military force in the world.
To violate a Chinese counterbalance
In November 2014, after 13 years of continuous combat and counter-terrorism operations in the middle East, the U.S. defense Department announced a new "Defense innovation initiative". The basis for this new initiative was a call to follow the Third strategy is a counterweight to stop the degradation of the American traditional system of containment of a resurgent Russia and a rising China.
In retrospect, we can rightly say that the call is coming from these two powerful Nations, especially China, were simply undervalued. The announcement following the third post-war strategies of the counterweight was made clear that the United States has a technological advantage and initiative in the development of the new strategy of the counterweight according to your own schedule. However, after analyzing what the Chinese military made up from a technological point of view a little more than two decades, and what they plan to do in the next decade, any objective assessment should at least take into account the fact that the PLA can seize an initiative and to control its timing and that US forces may be close to becoming the victim of a deliberate, energetic and superbly resourced strategy of military-technical counterweight. And those who denies it, not soberly assess the situation, just have to look at the results of large-scale war games that the Ministry of defence has been in recent years, simulating military action between the US and China. The outcome of these war games shows that in the absence of fundamental changes in the planned capacity building and current concepts of hostilities the armed forces of the United States can lose from the Chinese military in the most likely scenarios.
The Chinese leadership announced its plans for the full modernization of the PLA by 2035, and the conquest of leadership in military terms to the 100th anniversary of the people's Republic of China in 2049, as well as creating the conditions for victory in the information wars. Personal attention of Mr. XI to implement these plans together with the structure of spending for defense indicates that China likely intends to realize its ambitions in the field of modernization of the armed forces at some time between 2020 and 2049 years. "Plan for the development of artificial intelligence the next generation" provides that China will become the world leader in AI and related technologies by 2030 - an important step on the way to achieving "smart military force." The desire of the Chinese to develop a military structure that is optimized to fight and win what they call "intellectual military actions," explains the aforementioned doctrinal shift from confrontation to a competition of algorithms that the tip of the PLA sees as a way of achieving absolute technological superiority.
If defense Secretary Hagel in November 2014 said that the main purpose of "Defense innovation initiative" is "to undermine China's strategy of opposition", then his statement would be more effective. This wording would better convey the idea that the American military-technical leadership of significantly weakened; the Chinese, not the Americans, apparently, seized the technological initiative; and if the United States want to regain a technological advantage, it is necessary to take quick and decisive action.
In addition, the Pentagon also could be a warning to this formulation that the United States can no longer afford deterrence through the traditional method of hard economic and military superiority. What would have been the reaction of the United States, they must take into account the steadily growing economic power of China and the speed of technological transformations in the country. As mentioned in the first article in this series, according to the International monetary Fund, in case of preservation of rates of economic growth, the Chinese economy will overtake us economy by 2030 in nominal gross domestic product. In addition, China's spending on technology is growing at the same impressive pace as the Chinese economy. R & d expenditure in China has increased "from 1991 to 2015, nearly 30 times - from $13 billion to $376 billion - more than R & d expenditures of Japan, Germany and South Korea combined".
As noted previously, this strategic situation is very different from what it was throughout the Cold war, when the United States competed with the economically not very healthy Soviet Union. In addition, the United States during the Cold war had another advantage lies in the fact that could start the military-technical competition in those technological areas where the Soviet Union was much weaker than, for example, in microelectronics. This advantage is hardly present in the competition with China. Given the policy of integration of military and civilian resources, the country is no longer a simple thief-copier technology. China is now becoming a leader in emerging technologies, including quantum computing, robotics, genetic engineering and a number of areas. As a result, there are serious doubts that the US will be able to easily beat the Chinese in the technological race. On the contrary, they will have to exert enormous efforts to preserve at least a semblance of parity.
It is clearly articulated message of the National defense strategy 2018 (National Defense Strategy - the NDS). The strategy concluded that the United States is beginning to emerge from a period of strategic atrophy. This partly means that the dominant superiority of the U.S. military after the Cold war on regional powers suppressed any sensible idea about how this superiority can be eroded by the steadily growing possibilities of reviving and expanding the muscles of the great powers. Therefore, the NDS stated that the Ministry of defense should "make choices and to prioritize in order to prevent degradation of potential deterrent to American long-term strategic competition with China and Russia, which are the main priorities for the Ministry of defence".
The competition with the intentions of the two major powers in the alignment of military-technical playing field with the United States will mean that US armed forces will be thrown so serious a challenge, what was not (if ever was) since the end of the Cold war. In a poorly veiled reference to Russia and China this strategy States: "Some opponents and opponents striving to optimize their assessment of our military networks and operational concepts, while the security environment affects the rapid development of technology and the changing nature of military operations. In these circumstances, we must anticipate how our competitors and opponents will use the new operational concepts and technologies to try to beat us, and at the same time to develop operational concepts for strengthening our competitive advantages and improve our mortality".
Clearly, this requires some action and a good diagnosis of the challenges currently facing the U.S. armed forces. The Ministry of defence has long had a balanced cleverly and subtly respond. It should develop operational concepts, systems and platforms to the armed forces of the country could overcome a concerted attempt to China for scrapping and destruction of us military networks. It should develop operational concepts, systems and platforms to the armed forces of the country could apply an effective pre-emptive strikes and withstand massive launches of Chinese missiles. It should respond to the Chinese challenge in the field of AI and to provide leadership in this critical technology race.
If we consider the situation more broadly, China apparently does not intend to concede in the military-technical race in such critical areas as, for example, quantum computers, biotechnology, and the hypersonic ballistic and cruise missiles. The armed forces of the United States must compete more aggressively and, even more boldly, to create new competitive technologies. The unpleasant reality is that the United States has created many new competitive advantages, since in the 80-ies and 90-ies have used technological advances to create operational military networks and conducting precision strikes at long range. The armed forces of the United States must re-create the technological "miracle" which so well has baffled their opponents from the Soviet Union during the Cold war.
To this end, the Pentagon needs to generate much more intellectual energy to identify weaknesses in the Chinese Strategy of the counterweight, which could be used for competitive advantage. He also needs to develop a strategy for conducting demonstrations of new features or concepts of engagement, aimed at weakening China's confidence in its ability to achieve military effect. Such military demonstrations should be based on our understanding of the principles of decision-making of the Chinese leadership, define our own desired end States, as well as extended exercises with imaginary enemy to assess Chinese theory of victory and determine how to respond. The most important for such activities is a clear understanding of how China sees its own strength and weakness. He remembers that throughout the Cold war with the Soviet Union, the Pentagon and the U.S. armed forces consistently followed a policy of weakening the opponent. They just need to start practicing and to restore their strategic muscles.
And as soon as they restore their strategic muscles, the armed forces, the United States should recognize the main lesson learned from the First and Second strategies for balance in a fierce long-term military-technical competition of having the best technology is not enough. Studying military innovation before and during the Second world war, historians Williamson Murray and Alan Millett concluded: "the most Important task is achieving a better than anticipated contenders "match" between military equipment and weapons, concepts, doctrine and organizations." This important point is picked up in the National defense strategy 2018, which says: "Modernization is not determined only by the equipment and weapons: it requires changes in ways of organizing and engaging the troops. We need to evaluate the possible effects of new technologies on the battlefield, carefully identify the military problem, projected in a future conflict, and to foster a culture of experimentation and taking calculated risks".
US armed forces must be taken very seriously to this work. The people's liberation army of China has closely followed the U.S. military for two decades. She studied preferred the Americans the ways of warfare of the war and developed a strategy to use its weaknesses and strengths, especially its military-technical power. Apparently, it is getting closer to achieving technological parity with the us combat systems and has plans to achieve technological superiority. In this new security paradigm, when China and the United States are in search of a dominant military-technical advantage, the side that can find the best "match" between the technology and operational concepts, and probably will win this contest.
History has shown that the armed forces of the United States has a remarkable commitment to finding the most competitive "match". They are characterized by their ability to question the status quo, to take risks, experiment and adapt new technologically advanced operational concepts that confuse their opponents. If they want to violate the Chinese opposed, then they need more time to demonstrate their qualities.
- 13-06-2019Bruce Schneier about the digital threats of the future
- 16-01-2019The biggest danger 2019 — this is war
- 01-01-2019Subcommissie race
- 05-11-2018A Navy without ships. The Russian Navy is on the verge of collapse
- 07-04-2018Diversionary war against Russia
- 29-05-2012Drugs in the service of the Third Reich
- 12-09-2010Many experts believe the best tank Merkava main battle tank in the world
- 12-09-2010The Minister of defence of Germany introduced draft large-scale reform of the armed forces
- 21-04-2001To the question about the war of the fourth sphere