China Mil Watch Mandarin-source monitoring · Chinese military & security reporting
Independent monitor
Official PRC military media, read in the original
← Daily Brief
Modernization Doctrine

Viewing the Employment of Unmanned Combat Forces Rationally

理性看待无人作战力量运用
PLA Daily (解放军报) 4 August 2026
View original source ↗
An article in Chinese military media argues against what it frames as cognitive overreach on unmanned combat forces, contending that unmanned platforms function as a force 'multiplier' (倍增器) within a joint system-of-systems rather than as independent war-winners, and that the true cost of unmanned warfare lies in industrial and supply-chain depth rather than unit-platform price. The piece invokes 辩证思维 (dialectical thinking) and 体系思维 (system-of-systems thinking) as the corrective framework, explicitly pushing back against claims circulating in PLA discourse that unmanned combat is catalyzing a new military revolution. The framing points to an internal debate over how to integrate unmanned capabilities into force development priorities without displacing investment in conventional joint-force foundations—a tension the article documents but does not resolve.

In the most recent local conflicts, unmanned combat forces have emerged as a rising power and become deeply integrated into combat systems, with their practical application scenarios continuously expanding. Assertions such as "unmanned platforms winning independently," "unmanned combat rewriting the rules of the battlefield," and "unmanned combat forces catalyzing a new round of military revolution" have arisen one after another, treating unmanned combat forces as a disruptive factor reshaping the landscape of warfare. However, history has repeatedly proven that tactical success does not equal strategic advantage, and battlefield innovation does not equal victory in war. No single weapons system or innovation in operational methods can change the fundamental laws governing the conduct of war, still less directly determine the outcome of a war. Today, in dealing with unmanned combat forces, we must adhere to dialectical thinking (辩证思维), follow the fundamental laws of war, proceed from the overall perspective of system-of-systems construction, and scientifically grasp the functional positioning of unmanned combat forces—so as to avoid falling into the cognitive trap of excessive exaggeration and overgeneralization.

From the perspective of the laws governing the offense-defense contest, every iterative upgrade in operational methods is inevitably accompanied by the synchronous evolution of countermeasure systems. The rapid development of unmanned combat forces has compelled the accelerated iteration of counter-unmanned combat capabilities. At present, while countries around the world are developing and fielding intelligent unmanned equipment, they are simultaneously laying out countermeasure technologies and equipment such as electronic jamming, laser interception, low-altitude air defense, and decoy-and-capture, and are accelerating the construction of multi-layered, three-dimensional, hard-and-soft-integrated counter-unmanned combat systems. The detection accuracy, jamming effectiveness, interception efficiency, and large-scale application levels of various counter-unmanned means are improving in step with the intelligentization level, mobile penetration capability, and covert assault performance of unmanned combat forces, making it difficult for unmanned combat forces to establish a one-dimensional, absolute technological generation gap or combat advantage. The waxing and waning, dynamic balancing, and spiraling escalation between unmanned and counter-unmanned combat forces have already become the new normal of battlefield confrontation.

From the perspective of the logic of combat costs, low-cost unmanned equipment does not equal low-cost warfare; the systemic comprehensive cost of unmanned combat far exceeds surface-level perception. People tend to simplistically regard unmanned combat forces as "low-cost munitions," measuring combat costs solely by the price of a single platform, while ignoring the sustained consumption costs of the combat system upon which unmanned operations depend. On the future battlefield, unmanned combat forces will play an increasingly important role. However, relying purely on unmanned combat forces to accomplish all combat tasks is also unrealistic. The true cost of unmanned combat is decidedly not the procurement and maintenance expense of individual unmanned platforms, but rather the systemic comprehensive expenditure required to sustain large-scale, continuous operations across the entire war cycle. The deeper competition in unmanned combat is a contest of a nation's comprehensive strength in long-term industrial manufacturing and supply chain support. Therefore, although the unit-platform cost is relatively low, when viewed across the full cycle of large-scale employment and long-term war attrition, the comprehensive cost of war remains high—and for the vast majority of countries, it remains an unbearably heavy burden.

From the perspective of the positioning within system-of-systems operations, unmanned combat forces are an important extension of the joint operations system-of-systems, not a replacement for traditional combat forces, and cannot win independently without system-of-systems support. The primary cognitive distortion at present is the stripping of unmanned platforms from the complete system that supports their operational employment, and the one-sided amplification of the tactical value of unmanned equipment. In fact, every precise and efficient unmanned combat action is merely the terminal execution point of the entire operational chain, which encompasses front-end intelligence reconnaissance, target identification, communications relay, and precise control, as well as back-end equipment operation and maintenance, spare parts supply, and technical support—and requires integrated linkage, deep coordination, and coupled application with traditional combat forces on the ground, in the air, and elsewhere. Every link in the entire operational chain is interconnected and tightly coupled; a problem at any single link will directly degrade overall combat effectiveness. This demonstrates that unmanned combat forces cannot replace the joint operations system-of-systems of the various services and arms; they function more as a beneficial supplement and force "multiplier" (倍增器) for the overall combat system, capable of releasing combat power and multiplying effectiveness when supported by the system-of-systems.

In summary, the iterative upgrading of unmanned combat forces has enriched and expanded operational methods and paths to victory, but has not changed the fundamental laws and underlying logic of winning wars. Unmanned intelligent technology can propel a leap in combat capabilities and achieve breakthroughs and innovations at the tactical level, but cannot independently dominate the strategic whole or determine the outcome of war—the outcome of war ultimately depends on the contest of comprehensive national power. Therefore, in dealing with unmanned combat forces, we must avoid one-sided and superficial cognitive distortions, establish system-of-systems thinking (体系思维), and adhere to coordinated construction. While tackling key technologies in unmanned combat and cultivating new-type combat forces, we must persist in consolidating the industrial foundation, improving the all-domain support system, and honing the hard skills of joint operations, so as to drive the deep integration of unmanned combat forces with traditional combat systems.

Original Chinese
最新局部冲突中,无人作战力量异军突起、深度融入作战体系,其实战应用场景得到不断拓展,“无人平台独立制胜”“无人作战改写战场法则”“无人作战力量催生新一轮军事革命”等论断此起彼伏,将无人作战力量视为重塑战争格局的颠覆性因素。然而,历史一再证明,战术成功不等于战略优势,战场创新不等于战争胜利。任何单一武器装备和作战样式创新,并不能改变战争运行的基本规律,更不能直接决定战争胜负。今天,对待无人作战力量,应当坚持辩证思维,遵循战争基本规律、立足体系建设全局,科学把握无人作战力量的功能定位,从而避免陷入过度夸大、以偏概全的认知误区。 从攻防博弈规律看,作战样式每一次迭代升级,必然伴随反制体系同步演进。无人作战力量快速发展,倒逼反无人作战能力加速迭代。当前,世界各国在研发列装智能无人装备的同时,也在同步布局电子干扰、激光拦截、低空防空、诱骗捕获等反制技术装备,加快构建多层立体、软硬一体的反无人作战体系。各类反无人手段的探测精度、干扰效能、拦截效率与规模化应用水平,与无人作战力量智能化水平、机动突防能力、隐蔽突击性能等同步提升,导致无人作战力量难以形成单向度、绝对化的技术代差与作战优势。无人与反无人作战力量此消彼长、动态制衡、螺旋上升,已经成为战场对抗新常态。 从作战成本逻辑看,低成本无人装备并不等于低成本战争,无人作战的体系化综合成本远高于表层认知。人们往往简单将无人作战力量视为“低成本弹药”,仅以单平台价格衡量作战成本,却忽视了无人作战所依托的作战体系的持续性消耗成本。未来战场,无人作战力量将扮演越来越重要的角色。但是,单纯地依赖无人作战力量完成所有作战任务,也是不现实的。无人作战的真正成本,绝非单个无人平台的采购维护费用,而是整个战争周期内维持规模化持续作战的体系化综合开销。无人作战的深层比拼,是国家长期工业制造与供应链保障的综合实力。因此,单平台造价虽相对低廉,但从规模化运用及长期战争消耗的全周期来看,综合战争成本依旧居高不下,对绝大多数国家而言,仍是难以承受的沉重负担。 从体系作战定位看,无人作战力量是联合作战体系的重要延伸,而非传统作战力量的替代者,不能脱离体系支撑独立制胜。当前人们认知的主要偏差,是将无人平台从支撑其作战运用的完整体系中剥离出来,片面放大无人装备战术价值。事实上,每一次精准高效的无人作战行动,只是整个作战链条的终端落地,其涵盖前端情报侦察、目标甄别、通信中继、精准操控,以及后端装备运维、备件补给、技术保障等环节,并且需要与地面、空中等传统作战力量一体联动、深度协同、耦合发力。整个作战链路环环相扣、紧密衔接,任一环节出现问题,都会直接削弱整体作战效能。这表明,无人作战力量不能取代诸军兵种联合作战体系,其更多作为整个作战体系的有益补充和力量“倍增器”,能够在体系支撑下实现战力释放、效能倍增。 综上,无人作战力量迭代升级,丰富拓展了作战样式与制胜路径,但并未改变战争制胜的基本规律与底层逻辑。无人智能技术能够助推作战能力跃升、实现战术层面突破创新,但无法单独主导战略全局、决定战争胜负,战争胜负归根结底取决于综合国力的博弈。因此,对待无人作战力量,应避免片面化、表象化认知偏差,树立体系思维、坚持统筹建设,在攻关无人作战关键技术、培育新型作战力量的同时,坚持夯实工业基础、完善全域保障体系、锤炼联合作战硬功,推动无人作战力量与传统作战体系深度融合。