Doctrine

As the Artificial Intelligence Wave Sweeps the Military Domain, Does Strategic Wisdom Still Have a Role to Play?

当人工智能浪潮席卷军事领域，谋略智慧是否仍有用武之地?

PLA Daily (解放军报) 2 June 2026

Summary

Three PLA authors—Cheng Mingming, Ji Xiaoning, and Wang Lei—argue in a doctrinal essay that AI and intelligent systems cannot replace strategic judgment, and prescribe a framework they call 'governing technology through strategy (以谋驭技)' that embeds commanders' intent and ethical constraints into intelligent system design while using machine computation to support, not supplant, human decision-making. The essay documents an active institutional tension inside PLA professional military education between techno-optimist currents ('algorithm dominance,' 'victory through data') and a traditionalist counter-argument that strategic wisdom, moral legitimacy, and on-the-spot command judgment remain decisive—a tension the authors resolve by subordinating AI to human strategic authority rather than treating the two as competitors. The piece extends a visible pattern of PLA doctrinal writing that works to bound autonomous decision-making authority before it is operationally tested, raising the question of whether this framing is shaping actual system acquisition requirements or functioning primarily as ideological guardrail against perceived over-reliance on technology among junior officers.

Translation

The Constancy and Change of Military Strategy in the Intelligent Age

■ Cheng Mingming, Ji Xiaoning, Wang Lei

Introduction

At present, the wave of artificial intelligence is sweeping the military domain, driving systematic restructuring of battlefield perception, command links, and combat operations. Concepts such as "algorithm dominance" and "victory through data" have become focal points of discussion, and have also prompted questions about the value of traditional military strategy—when intelligent systems can precisely process massive amounts of data and simulate complex combat scenarios, does the strategic wisdom that has persisted for thousands of years still have a role to play? A deep analysis of the nature of war and the characteristics of intelligent technology yields a clear and unambiguous answer: the more intelligence develops, the more precious strategy becomes.

Intelligent technology can reshape combat patterns, but cannot change the nature of war; it can extend the boundaries of capability, but cannot replace human creative wisdom. In the face of the surging wave of intelligent technology development, we must adhere to the principle of "governing technology through strategy, and integrating strategy with technology (以谋驭技、谋技融合)"—enthusiastically embracing the transformation brought by intelligent technology while firmly grasping strategy as the decisive instrument of victory, continuously endowing it with new contemporary content, thereby truly seizing the initiative in future warfare and laying a solid foundation for winning battles.

What Does Not Change: The Essential Core of Strategy Remains Constant

War is not only a confrontation in the physical domain, but a complex contest across multiple dimensions including psychology, ethics, and moral justice. No matter how technology iterates, the essential core of strategy always retains its stability—this is something intelligent technology cannot reach.

The value orientation that strikes at the human heart does not change. The outcome of war depends not only on the balance of strength between opposing sides, but to a large extent on human will, the allegiance of the people, and the rise and fall of morale. Intelligent technology can precisely calculate troop strength, firepower, and the like, but cannot quantify the fighting spirit, cannot predict the public's moral acceptance of a war's justice, and cannot replace the strategic wisdom of "winning hearts and minds above all (攻心为上)." Napoleon once said that three-quarters of the outcome of war depends on morale. War practice demonstrates that the key to victory lies in whether one can profoundly grasp the direction of human sentiment. In the intelligent age, the art of strategy that strikes at the human heart has not only not become obsolete—its strategic value has become even more prominent.

The thinking logic of flexible adaptation does not change. "Military forces have no constant disposition; water has no constant form (兵无常势，水无常形)" reveals the essential nature of war as full of uncertainty and antagonism. The effectiveness of intelligent systems depends on a relatively stable data foundation and preset models, whereas battlefield adversaries possess subjective initiative—they can actively think and create "surprises." When an adversary adopts unconventional tactics that exceed preset models, the system's "adaptive" capability often struggles to keep pace with the rhythm of battlefield change. The reason Han Xin's "battle with one's back to the water (背水一战)" became a classic lies not only in its tactically innovative break from convention, but more in its precise grasp of the adversary's arrogant psychology and one's own soldiers' will to survive in a desperate situation. This kind of strategic wisdom that flexibly adapts to battlefield conditions is something fixed algorithmic programs cannot replicate.

The command quality of on-the-spot decision-making does not change. No matter how technology advances, the fog of war has never dissipated and friction always exists. Sudden failures at critical nodes, unexpected impacts of extreme weather, and instantaneous misjudgments in command links can all change the direction of a battle. Algorithms can assess known risks through probability evaluation, but for "black swan" events that exceed the scope of existing data, they may fall into a "decision blind spot." At such moments, a commander's on-the-spot decision-making—grounded in rich experience, keen intuition, and a strong sense of responsibility—becomes the key to resolving crises and reversing the situation. This "art of war" of maintaining clarity under pressure and seizing the critical point amid chaos is precisely the concentrated embodiment of the value of strategy.

The value judgment that places moral justice first does not change. "Having a just cause for sending out troops (师出有名)" concerns the legitimacy and justice of war, and is an important foundation for consolidating internal strength and winning international support. Intelligent weapons can strike targets with precision, but cannot autonomously answer the fundamental question of "why we fight"; algorithms can optimize combat effectiveness, but struggle to make value trade-offs between military necessity and humanitarian concern. These judgments involving values and ethics must be borne by responsible actors who hold a correct view of war. Against the backdrop of autonomous weapons provoking ethical controversy and cyberattacks blurring the boundaries of war, the application of strategy should place even greater emphasis on upholding the moral bottom line, ensuring that military operations always conform to the requirements of justice.

What Changes: The Practical Forms of Strategy Advance with the Times

The continuous development and application of intelligent technology has not weakened the status of strategy; on the contrary, it has expanded new space for strategy and injected new content into it. Comrade Mao Zedong emphasized in "Problems of Strategy in China's Revolutionary War" that all laws of war guidance develop in accordance with historical development and in accordance with the development of war. Facing future intelligentized warfare (智能化战争), the practical methods, pathways of effect, and points of emphasis in military strategy need to advance with the times and proactively upgrade.

The application of plans and stratagems expands from physical space to the full-domain battlefield. Traditional strategy was conducted primarily around physical spaces such as land, sea, and air, with emphasis on troop deployment, battlefield maneuver, and tactical coordination. In the intelligent age, intangible spaces such as the electromagnetic, cyber, data, and cognitive domains have become new arenas of contest. The application of strategy is no longer limited to the mobilization of forces on the tangible battlefield, but runs through all dimensions of the physical domain, information domain, and cognitive domain. Traditional "troop deployment and formation (排兵布阵)" has been upgraded to full-domain "interweaving of the real and the virtual (虚实交织)," and multi-domain, multi-dimensional linkage has become an important characteristic of strategy application in the intelligent age.

The path to victory shifts from platform attrition to system disruption. Traditional warfare victory relied more heavily on troop scale, firepower intensity, and platform performance, with strategy focused on annihilating the adversary's effective strength and destroying key combat platforms. Intelligentized warfare is a contest of system against system; combat effectiveness depends on system integration, link connectivity, and overall coordination, and victory or defeat is no longer determined by a single element. The focus of strategy application should shift toward identifying the critical nodes, weak links, and vulnerable connections in the adversary's combat system, achieving system incapacitation through precise disruption and structural paralysis; while simultaneously emphasizing the construction of a distributed, redundant, and rapidly reconfigurable resilient system to enhance one's own survivability and regenerative capacity, winning the initiative in confrontation through system superiority.

The operational tempo upgrades from reactive response to forward-positioned shaping of the situation (前置谋势). Traditional warfare had a relatively slow operational tempo; strategy application was largely reflected in "pre-war planning and post-war review," with longer decision cycles. In the intelligent age, the speed of information transmission, data processing, and action response has greatly increased, the operational tempo has significantly accelerated, and the "OODA" loop cycle has shortened. Strategy application shifts from "passive response" to "active design," using technological advantages to sense battlefield trends in advance, pre-position operational conditions, and shape a favorable situation, seizing the initiative in the contest before war breaks out. Strategy application places greater emphasis on foresight, pre-positioning, and timeliness—both deeply analyzing trends and laying out positions in advance before war, and rapidly perceiving changes and flexibly adjusting strategy during war; both constraining the adversary's operational tempo through active design, and seizing the time advantage through rapid response.

The rules of the contest evolve from passive adaptation to active shaping. Traditional military strategy was largely conducted within the framework of existing international rules and conventions of war. The rapid development of intelligent technology has profoundly changed combat methods and the balance of forces, and has impacted the existing international security order and military rules system. Whoever can participate earlier in rules discussions and put forward reasonable positions will be better positioned to occupy the moral initiative and legal advantage. Strategy application should strengthen rules consciousness and forward-looking thinking, proactively seize the moral high ground and the right to define rules in relevant domains, and shape a favorable international security environment through stratagems and diplomacy (伐谋伐交); while simultaneously accelerating the improvement of one's own rules system, using the strategy of rules to constrain the adversary's technological abuse and expand one's own strategic space.

Integration: Governing Technology Through Strategy to Build a New Victory System

The key to winning intelligentized warfare lies in achieving deep integration and synergistic effectiveness between strategy and technology. Building a new decision-making system with humans as the dominant force and intelligence as the support has become an inevitable requirement for adapting to the evolution of warfare forms.

Adhere to governing technology through strategy, injecting a strategic soul into intelligent equipment. The military application of intelligent technology is essentially in service of strategic intent and strategic design, not a pile-up of technology divorced from value orientation. The leading position of strategy in the intelligentized combat system must be established, with strategic objectives, operational guidelines, and ethical boundaries embedded in advance throughout the entire process of intelligent system design and operation. Specifically: strengthen the guiding role of strategy over technology application, clarify the mission boundaries and usage red lines of intelligent equipment, and prevent algorithmic autonomous decision-making from deviating from the justice of war; promote the translation of strategic intent into algorithmic language, converting commanders' tactical concepts and psychological contest thinking into action instructions recognizable by intelligent systems, realizing "technology follows strategy, and equipment serves strategy (技随谋走、器为谋用)."

Adhere to using technology to assist strategy, expanding decision-making boundaries with data and algorithms. The core value of intelligent technology lies in solving the problems of information overload and situational ambiguity that traditional strategy faces, providing solid support for strategic innovation. We must fully leverage the advantages of data and algorithms, build an auxiliary decision-making chain, and expand the cognitive depth of strategy. In strategic planning, rely on data fusion technology to penetrate the fog of war and provide precise basis for decision-making; in plan selection, use simulation and deduction to infer the effects of different stratagems and assist commanders in selecting the optimal option; in risk prevention and control, use algorithms to capture battlefield anomalies in real time and provide reference for on-the-spot strategy adjustment, realizing "using calculation to assist strategy, and acting only after strategy is determined (以算辅谋、谋定后动)."

Adhere to human-machine collaboration, building a decision-making mechanism of complementary advantages. Combat decision-making in future intelligentized warfare is not a simple division of labor between humans and machines, but a collaborative symbiosis of deep integration and mutual empowerment. We must break from traditional models, emphasize giving full play to human creative thinking and judgment capability alongside the machine's computational speed and precise execution advantages, and establish a layered interactive human-machine collaboration mechanism. At the strategic level, commanders lead value judgment and strategic design, with machines handling data organization and support work; at the campaign and tactical level, form a closed-loop process of "machine rapid assessment—commander precise decision—machine efficient execution," achieving organic unity between the human art of command and the machine's technical effectiveness.

Strengthen personnel cultivation, forging a command force that is proficient in both strategy and technology. Comrade Mao Zedong pointed out in "On Protracted War": "Weapons are an important factor in war, but not the decisive factor; the decisive factor is people, not things." People are always the subject of strategic innovation and technology application. In the intelligent age, we must build a composite personnel cultivation system of "strategy + technology," promote deep integration of classical military theory with intelligent science and technology knowledge, both inheriting the command art of winning through strategy and being adept at using technological characteristics to innovate tactics. Use cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence and big data to strengthen combat-realistic training, rely on intelligent simulation battlefields to temper the ability to apply strategy in complex environments, and cultivate a cohort of new-type command personnel who understand both strategy and technology, providing solid support for the innovative development of military strategy in the intelligent age.

Original Chinese

智能时代军事谋略的变与不变 ■程明明纪小柠王蕾引言当前，人工智能浪潮席卷军事领域，推动战场感知、指挥链路、作战行动等发生系统性重构，“算法主导”“数据制胜”等成为热议焦点，也引发了关于传统军事谋略价值的疑问——当智能系统可以精准处理海量数据、模拟复杂作战场景时，延续数千年的谋略智慧是否仍有用武之地？深入剖析战争本质与智能技术特性，答案清晰而明确：智能越是发展，谋略越显珍贵。智能技术可以重塑作战样式，却无法改变战争本质；可以延伸能力边界，却无法替代人的创造性智慧。面对智能技术蓬勃发展的浪潮，应当坚持“以谋驭技、谋技融合”，既热情拥抱智能技术变革，又牢牢掌握谋略这一制胜法宝，不断赋予其新的时代内涵，从而真正掌握未来战争主动权，为胜战打赢奠定坚实基础。不变：谋略的本质内核始终如一战争不仅是物理域的对抗，更是心理、伦理、道义等多重维度的复杂博弈。无论技术如何迭代，谋略的本质内核始终具有稳定性，这是智能技术所难以触及的。直击人心的价值取向不变。战争胜负不仅取决于对抗双方的实力对比，很大程度上还取决于人的意志、民心归属和士气盛衰。智能技术可以精确计算兵力、火力等，却无法量化战斗精神，无法预判民众对战争道义的认同，也无法替代“攻心为上”的谋略智慧。拿破仑曾说，战争的胜负，四分之三取决于精神因素。战争实践表明，战争胜利的关键在于能否深刻把握人心向背。智能时代，直击人心的谋略艺术不仅没有过时，其战略价值反而更加凸显。灵活应变的思维逻辑不变。“兵无常势，水无常形”，揭示出战争充满不确定性和对抗性的本质。智能系统效能的发挥，离不开相对稳定的数据基础与预设模型，而战场对手具有主观能动性，能够主动思考、制造“意外”。当对手采取超出预设模型的非常规战法时，系统的“自适应”能力往往难以跟上战场变化节奏。韩信“背水一战”之所以成为经典，不仅在于其突破常规的战术创新，更在于其精准把握对手骄纵心理、己方士兵绝境求生的意志，这种针对战场情况灵活应变的谋略智慧是既定算法程序难以复制的。临机决断的指挥特质不变。无论技术如何进步，战争的迷雾从未消散，阻力始终存在。关键节点的突发故障、极端天气的意外影响、指挥环节的瞬时误判，都可能改变战局走向。算法可以通过概率评估已知风险，但对于超出现有数据范畴的“黑天鹅”事件，则可能陷入“决策盲区”。此时，指挥员基于丰富经验、敏锐直觉和强烈担当的临机决断，就成为化解危机、扭转态势的关键。这种在压力下保持清醒、在混乱中抓住关键的“战争艺术”，正是谋略价值的集中体现。道义为先的价值判断不变。“师出有名”关乎战争合法性与正义性，是凝聚内部力量、争取国际支持的重要基础。智能武器可以精确打击目标，却无法自主回答“为何而战”的根本问题；算法可以优化作战效能，却难以在军事必要与人道关怀之间作出价值权衡。这些涉及价值与道德的判断，必须由秉持正确战争观的责任主体来承担。在自主武器引发伦理争议、网络攻击模糊战争边界的背景下，谋略运用更应注重坚守道义底线，确保军事行动始终符合正义要求。应变：谋略的实践形态与时俱进智能技术的不断发展与运用，不仅没有削弱谋略的地位，反而为其拓展了新空间、注入了新内涵。毛泽东同志在《中国革命战争的战略问题》中强调，一切战争指导规律，依照历史的发展而发展，依照战争的发展而发展。面向未来智能化战争，军事谋略的实践方式、作用路径与运用重点，需要与时俱进、主动升级。施计用谋从物理空间向全域战场拓展。传统谋略主要围绕陆、海、空等物理空间展开，侧重兵力部署、战场机动与战术配合。智能时代，电磁、网络、数据、认知等无形空间成为新的博弈场域，谋略运用不再局限于有形战场的力量调动，而是贯穿物理域、信息域、认知域全维度。传统“排兵布阵”升级为全域“虚实交织”，多域多维联动成为智能时代谋略运用的重要特征。制胜路径从毁伤平台向体系破击转变。传统战争制胜，较多依赖兵力规模、火力强度与平台性能，谋略运用侧重歼灭对手有生力量、摧毁关键作战平台。智能化战争是体系与体系的对抗，作战效能取决于系统集成、链路畅通与整体协同，胜负不再由单一要素决定。谋略运用的着力点，应转向识别对手作战体系的关键节点、薄弱环节与脆弱链路，通过精准破击、瘫痪结构实现体系失能；同时注重构建分布式、冗余化、可快速重构的弹性体系，提升自身抗毁能力与再生能力，以体系优势赢得对抗主动。作战节奏从滞后应对向前置谋势升级。传统战争作战节奏相对缓慢，谋略运用多体现为“战前筹划、战后复盘”，决策周期较长。智能时代，信息传输、数据处理与行动响应速度大幅提升，作战节奏显著加快，“OODA”循环周期缩短。谋略运用从“被动应对”转向“主动设计”，利用技术优势提前感知战场趋势、预置作战条件、塑造有利态势，在战争爆发前即掌握博弈主动权。谋略运用更加注重前瞻性、预置性与时效性，既要在战前深入研判趋势、超前布局谋势，也要在战中快速感知变化、灵活调整策略；既要通过主动设计牵制对手行动节奏，也要通过快速响应抢占时间优势。博弈规则从被动适应向主动塑造演进。传统军事谋略多在既有国际规则、战争惯例框架内运筹。智能技术快速发展，深刻改变作战方式与力量对比，对现有国际安全秩序、军事规则体系形成冲击。谁能更早参与规则讨论、提出合理主张，谁就能更好占据道义主动与法理优势。谋略运用应强化规则意识与前瞻思维，主动抢占相关领域的道义制高点与规则定义权，通过伐谋伐交塑造良好国际安全环境；同时加快完善己方规则体系，以规则之谋约束对手技术滥用，拓展自身战略空间。融合：以谋驭技构建新型制胜体系打赢智能化战争，关键在于实现谋略与技术深度融合、协同增效。构建以人为主导、智能为支撑的新型决策体系，成为顺应战争形态演变的必然要求。坚持以谋驭技，为智能装备注入战略灵魂。智能技术的军事应用，本质是服务于战略意图与谋略设计，而非脱离价值导向的技术堆砌。必须确立谋略在智能化作战体系中的统领地位，将战略目标、作战方针、伦理边界提前嵌入智能系统设计与运行全过程。具体而言，强化谋略对技术运用的引领作用，明确智能装备的任务边界与使用红线，避免算法自主决策偏离战争正义；推动谋略意图向算法语言转化，将指挥员的战术构想、心理博弈思路，转化为智能系统可识别的行动指令，实现“技随谋走、器为谋用”。坚持以技辅谋，用数据算法拓展决策边界。智能技术的核心价值，在于破解传统谋略面临的信息过载、态势模糊等难题，为谋略创新提供坚实支撑。要充分发挥数据、算法优势，构建辅助决策链条，拓展谋略的认知深度。在谋略筹划上，依托数据融合技术穿透战争迷雾，为决策提供精准依据；在方案优选上，利用模拟仿真推演不同计谋效果，辅助指挥员择优选取；在风险防控上，通过算法实时捕捉战场异动，为临机调整谋略提供参考，实现“以算辅谋、谋定后动”。坚持人机协同，构建优势互补的决策机制。未来智能化战争的作战决策，不是人与机器的简单分工，而是深度融合、双向赋能的协同共生。要打破传统模式，注重发挥人的创造性思维和判断能力、机器的计算速度和精准执行优势，建立分层交互的人机协同机制。在战略层面，由指挥员主导价值判断与谋略设计，机器承担数据整理辅助工作；在战役战术层面，形成“机器快速研判—指挥员精准定策—机器高效执行”的闭环流程，实现人的指挥艺术与机器的技术效能有机统一。强化人才培养，锻造谋技兼备的指挥队伍。毛泽东同志在《论持久战》中指出：“武器是战争的重要的因素，但不是决定的因素，决定的因素是人不是物。”人始终是谋略创新与技术运用的主体。智能时代要构建“谋略+技术”的复合型人才培养体系，推动军事经典理论与智能科技知识深度融合，既传承谋略制胜的指挥艺术，又善于利用技术特性创新战法。运用人工智能、大数据等前沿科技强化实战化训练，依托智能仿真战场锤炼复杂环境下的谋略运用能力，培育一批懂谋略、懂技术的新型指挥人才，为智能时代军事谋略创新发展提供坚实支撑。