Papers, Articles and Comments

                                      Significance of Cognitive Warfare in the Current Security Environment

                                                                    S D Pradhan

Abstract

Cognitive warfare has emerged as a critical dimension of modern conflict, targeting human perception, decision-making, and behaviour rather than physical assets. Unlike traditional warfare, it seeks to weaponise public opinion and influence societal dynamics to achieve strategic objectives without confrontation. This paper examines the evolving nature of cognitive warfare, its instruments, and its implications for national security, with particular reference to India. It also analyses external threats posed by state and non-state actors and proposes a comprehensive framework for countering such operations through institutional, technological, legal, and societal measures. 

Introduction

 In the current security environment, cognitive warfare has assumed greater significance than ever before because it uses various channels to change targets' perceptions not only to distort their thinking but also to push them to act in a desired manner. While the use of psychological operations is not new, technological advancement and cyber connectivity have expanded the instruments in geometrical progression. These, coupled with hate campaigns during elections and interference by external forces for regime change, have considerably enhanced the possibilities of creating a situation in which national security gets weakened by weaponising public opinion.

Cognitive warfare is more than the sum of its various information warfare (IW) dimensions. It integrates all the elements available in the information, cyber and psychological domains. It takes them to a new level, not only by manipulating the target population's perception, but also by ensuring that the desired action from the targets is achieved. In simple terms, this is the weaponisation of public opinion for the initiator's advantage.  

The recent wars and regime change operations underscore the need for understanding the complex nature of cognitive warfare and taking steps to counter this growing challenge effectively by making citizens aware of this invisible but highly injurious menace. Gen Z-led movements in the Arab world (Arab Spring 2011-2012), Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Morocco and Madagascar reveal that a small population of about 3.5% can create enough economic and political disruption to force political change. This is based on research by Professor Erica Chenoweth of Harvard University. (The Harvard Professor Who Quantified Democracy | Harvard Magazine)  India is facing increasing threats from the brainwashed terrorists, who are products of this kind of warfare. The Delhi Red Fort car blast and the Phalgam attacks are recent examples. The Delhi Red Fort car blast reveals that professionals and highly educated persons can be influenced to undertake terrorist activity.   

Reports also suggest that inimical forces are spreading manipulated and doctored narratives to cause economic and political disruptions using multiple channels. In 2023, the US Department of Defense in its report entitled "Strategy for the Operations in the Information Environment, described the capabilities of different nations. (2023-DEPARTMENT-OF-DEFENSE-STRATEGY-FOR-OPERATIONS-IN-THE-INFORMATION-ENVIRONMENT.PDF)    

The increasing activities of our adversaries emphasise the need for taking urgent steps in this direction. A state or a non-state actor can launch this kind of war, or it could be a combined operation of the two. Three nations -the US, France and India- presented studies on the Chinese influence operations globally that suggest that they have acquired the dimensions of cognitive warfare. These findings are relevant for all our adversaries, who are using similar tactics.

 The US National Counterintelligence and Security Centre, in its July 2022 report, reveals extensive PRC activities to manipulate US state and local leaders to support policies favourable to the PRC and CCP, in accordance with the strategy of “using the local to surround the central”. It indicates that the CCP knows the U.S. state and local leaders enjoy a degree of independence from Washington and it tries to exploit this to turn them into “its proxies to advocate the policies that Beijing desires”. The PRC influence operations could be “deceptive and coercive” under the cover of benign business opportunities or people-to-people contacts. Financial incentives may be effective in engaging U.S. state and local leaders, given their focus on local economic issues. India is a democratic country and its system is also exploited. (https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/SafeguardingOurFuture/PRC_Subnational_Influence-06-July-2022.pdf)

In France, the Institute for Strategic Research of the French Ministry for the Armed Forces in October 2021 presented a study titled “The Chinese Influence Operations- A Machiavelli Moment” indicating that ‘the CCP’s influence operations have become considerably tougher in recent years and that is a “Machiavellian turn” since the Party-State now seems to believe that “it is much safer to be feared than to be loved,” in the words of Machiavelli in “The Prince”. This 654-page report is divided into four parts: covering the main concepts; the actors implementing these operations, including the Base 311 of the People’s Liberation Army and dedicated to the implementation of the ‘Three Warfares” strategy; the actions conducted by Beijing toward the diasporas, the media, diplomacy, economy, politics, education, think tanks; and the terms of information manipulations. Importantly, this report indicates that China aims to shape the international norms. ((PDF) Chinese Influence Operations. A Machiavellian Moment)  

In India, the Law and Society Alliance brought out in Sept 2021 how the Chinese influence operations are manipulating the perceptions of targets in different sectors. It concluded that “China’s subtle attempts to infiltrate the Indian society through the use of several alternative means such as financial investments, fellowships, travel courtesies and coercion can be extremely damaging in the long run.”  In the education sector, it is being manipulated through universities, think tanks and also the Confucius Centres and China Study Centres. Besides students, a sharper focus is made on journalists and scholars in think tanks, who are the opinion-shapers of society. Selected persons are sent to China for ‘re-education’ and serve later as ‘the useful idiots of the CCP’. China deploys CCP-appointed intellectuals and academicians for brainwashing. With their help, journals and magazines are produced to project the Chinese viewpoints and contributors are paid handsomely. (Law and Society Alliance study report exposes Communist China’s overt, covert influence operations in India – Law and Society Alliance)  

The nature of Cognitive Warfare                                                                             

In essence, cognitive war, which is a new frontier of warfare, is a process to weaponise public opinion of targets and drive them to take actions that the initiator desires. Cognitive war aims at affecting the process of understanding of targets, comprising all aspects of intellectual functions that form the basis of human decisions. The objective of cognitive war is to shatter the adversary’s decision-making capacity and influence the decisions and behaviour of individuals, groups, and entire populations to the advantage of the initiator of the cognitive operations without firing even a bullet. The focus is on the adversary’s society to make it work in the initiator’s interests. Once the adversary’s society is fragmented, national security is weakened.  It weakens the foundation of total war, i.e. the society, which mobilises all resources to fight the war and gives priority to the needs of armed forces over non-combatant requirements. Besides, the targets begin to work in the initiator's interests. Though this constitutes the sixth domain of warfare, it has significantly changed the nature of warfare. This goes beyond information warfare: it pushes targets to act in the interest of the initiator of the cognitive war. Through cognitive operations, the target’s mind is controlled.  

In terms of its effectiveness, cognitive warfare can be highly damaging: it can cause much more damage than physical devastation during conventional wars. It is aimed at turning the population against its own country. The divisions engineered in society can be difficult to deal with. In essence, it can destroy the will of the nation to oppose its adversary.        

Cognitive warfare comprises three broad elements: psychological operations, neuroscience operations (neuro-strike operations) and social engineering. The psychological operations involve the deployment of all communication channels to bombard targets with a narrative that serves the purpose of the initiators. The main objective is to make the target country’s population accept its narrative, i.e. opposing it (the initiator narrative) is either not possible or not justified, or would have a huge cost. Cognitive warfare includes deterring, convincing, and influencing targets to accept its narrative and work as its proxies in the target country. It is achieved by confusing the population, policymakers and armed forces of the adversary, pushing them to take a decision that favours it through influence operations. The neuro-strike operations impair the ability of targets to think rationally. Social engineering in cybersecurity is the psychological manipulation of people into performing actions or divulging confidential information, such as passwords or financial data. Instead of exploiting technical software flaws, these attacks exploit human vulnerabilities like trust, fear, or curiosity. Common methods include phishing, pretexting, and baiting to steal credentials or gain unauthorised network access. The controlled brains work as weapons for the initiator of cognitive war. Targets are individuals on important positions in civil (including political leaders) and military fields or influential persons (opinion shapers) and the entire population in the target country. This is in line with Sun Tzu’s dictum: “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” 

Targets are pushed to go against the ruling government or their nation. Local interests can be woven in such a way that they project a view favourable to the adversary. For example, minorities can be projected as second-class citizens who are denied normal rights, pushing them to oppose the ruling government. This can cause disenchantment with the current dispensation among them, and the government’s attention and resources can be diverted. In democratic countries, cognitive operations can easily be pushed among the people as they enjoy greater freedom in expressing their views. In an authoritarian system, the IoT can be controlled, protecting the population from adverse operations. In the latter case, information is controlled by the ruling dispensation; hence, it can deal better with the neuro-cognitive conflicts.

This is a highly cost-effective option. A well-organised cognitive attack is not even a fraction of the expenditure of a conventional war, though at times it may take a lot of time to achieve the objective of changing the perception of the influential groups. The use of social media demands experts to carefully design operations based on the group or individual’s likes and dislikes as well as their bent of mind. Of course, high-quality researchers are required to develop an entirely new kind of combat to target and control the human mind, the human body’s intelligence and the decision-making hub that controls all senses, body movements, and behaviour. This warfare relies on a deep understanding of human psychology and behaviour to influence, disrupt, and degrade the enemy’s ability to make decisions while protecting friendly/its forces. As compared to conventional wars, it saves not only the expenses involved in the use of expensive weapons but also the expenditure in the mobilisation of forces.

The planned narrative is so heavily bombarded that it becomes difficult for targets to remain uninfluenced by them and they begin to act as planned by the initiator of cognitive war. It builds heavy pressure on the adversary by making the offensive always active, anywhere, everywhere, and anytime. These operations are carried out by myriad actors - from governments, politicians, non-State actors, special interest groups, foreign intelligence agencies and agents, etc. – promoting a range of political causes and disruptive agendas.  The war becomes much wider to cover all in society and operations are launched seamlessly with no beginning, end, or ceasefire -24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 12 months a year. In addition, there is no collateral damage and friendly casualties.  

Threats from across the border

This threat is very much present in our environment. In fact, we are facing problems arising from cognitive operations launched by our adversaries. Our adversaries are using covert influence operations to obtain their objectives. While Pakistan may not have developed the sophistication and expertise of China, it can easily target minorities to create the impression that they are being ignored. In this field, Pakistan has developed expertise and is using different fundamentalist groups to create communal violence and tension. It is sponsoring religion-based terrorism. Pakistani psychological operations are aimed at exploiting the fears and apprehensions of minorities. They are also using various international forums to project that minorities are denied political rights.

China is targeting a much larger population. China has a higher degree of expertise in neuro-strike operations and is developing advanced weapons and programmes for targets in India as also for other adversaries. China’s entities are collecting data on individuals and social groups to design specialised operations to achieve their objectives. They have the intent to create more problems by exploiting the fault lines to build anti-India sentiments. It is not uncommon to see individuals on social media platforms, placing arguments that favour China. Some of them are projecting that China has a formidable force and India cannot match them.

In China, the Strategic Support Force (SSF) has been disbanded and three new entities have been created- the Information Support Force, the Aerospace Force, and the Cyber Force. This change signifies a change in the Chinese strategy to focus more on information warfare. This is strategic response to their perception of evolving security challenges and technological advancement. Significantly, the Electronic and Electromagnetic Systems Department, which formerly oversaw C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), are integrated into the Information Support Force (ISF). The fourth arm remains the Joint Logistic Support Force to oversee logistical operations. These changes aim at enhancing capabilities in critical domains such as space, cyber, and information warfare.

The Information Support Force would deal with electronic warfare for weapons based on microwave attacks. Besides, the PLA has created several groups to use social media to launch attacks and control the minds of targets, which will work under the ISF. Its RedFoxtrot group was noted for targeting multiple networks of India’s defence, telecommunications, mining, and research organisations, including several aerospace and defence contractors. However, there are other entities also dealing with cognitive warfare. The CCP’s United Front Work Department (UFWD) also plays an important role in directing and coordinating influence operations globally through its various front organisations. Other PRC government agencies involved in foreign influence operations are China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of State Security, and Ministry of Education. Among the important entities used for foreign influence operations, is the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (CPAFFC), which describes itself as a “national people’s organization engaged in people-to-people diplomacy of the People’s Republic of China.”      

Instruments of cognitive warfare   

Cognitive warfare depends on two types of weapons. First, there are microwave or energy-based weapons known as neuro-cognitive disruptors. They are elusive and have stealth qualities, making it difficult to know at the time of the attack. These are reported to be very effective if used within 3,000 meters. And if attacked repeatedly, they can permanently impair the cognitive capabilities of targets. This method can be used during military operations and important diplomatic meetings to confuse targets and destroy their capability to make correct decisions. These weapons were used against the US diplomats in Havana and China used them against protestors in Hong Kong in 2019. Reports in the media also suggest that these were used by the Chinese police stations abroad to target those opposing the Chinese viewpoints.

Second, the use of IoT to change the perceptions of the population, decision-makers, or military commanders. Data (personally identifiable information) is meticulously collected for the targets and specially designed operations are launched to obtain the desired result. They are not merely to deny information or confuse the targets, but to obtain the desired action from the targets. These operations create ‘inside of the action’ in the target’s brain (final thought after considering various available options), which results in the desired action from the target. These weapons are extensively used by China against the US, the UK, India, and the countries opposing its claims in the South China Sea. Influence Operations pertain not so much to the realm of information warfare or psychological warfare, but cognitive warfare, as they use dubious means to influence public opinion to act in a desired way.   

Its three special characteristics need to be kept in view. First, it is not visible and its impact is felt later; second, attribution poses a serious problem; and third, targets remain convinced of the arguments planted by the initiators of cognitive warfare and act as their agents. Attribution remains an issue and this gives an advantage to cognitive attackers to maintain deniability. It is also not possible to observe the clandestine operations. Its impact becomes visible after some time. The response to cognitive warfare has more problems than attribution. So far, there are no effective defensive measures against such attacks. And in liberal democracies, where freedom is enjoyed, it is easy to exploit the population to launch effective operations.

The state and non-state actors, especially those supported by adversary’s intelligence agencies, have sufficient resources. Some states are working to use AI to analyse data and design operations. States like the US, UK, Russia, and China have developed systems to procure data (which includes stealing) and use them for operations. Snowden’s revelations point out that mobile phones could be used to collect data without the owner knowing about it. China employs several groups to collect data and launch operations to achieve the desired actions from targets. The IoT- based operations are on the increase by our adversaries and it is on this dimension; India needs to focus.     

The military and civilian environments are different. In the armed forces, the hierarchal system makes it easy to control their personnel from using social media platforms, though some do use such platforms and are often trapped in providing information about their units. This can be extremely harmful. In civil societies, the freedom enjoyed by the population is exploited for influence operations. China is known to be creating “useful idiots” in foreign countries who work as their proxies in the target countries. While in terms of immediate harm, attacks on armed forces personnel can be more damaging than attacks on civilians.

As observed in several cases, intelligence operatives also use social media platforms and can fall into traps or could be influenced by adversaries’ operations. There may be many who remain undetected. Overall, while the hostile influence operations using IoT can be controlled, armed forces personnel remain the prime targets of the microwave arrays aimed at destroying their cognitive capabilities. If at a critical juncture, the commanders’ cognitive abilities are harmed, then the most appropriate action cannot be taken and there would be a distinct possibility of his taking an action that would be in the interests of the attackers. The adversaries’ objective remains this. Such attacks can have serious consequences. These can upset all prior plans of combat. There is an urgent need to assess the net strategic value of such weapons in the future grey zone, counterinsurgency, regime stabilisation, regional armed conflict, and all-out war situations. These attacks can destroy the entire command and control system. Such attacks have the potential to destroy the entire organisation. While at an individual level, such attacks can permanently damage an individual’s cognitive capabilities, at the operational level, they can result in no action when that is needed or push the hostile armed forces to make wrong moves.  

Six steps for countering cognitive warfare

In view of the foregoing, we need to be prepared for covert, subtle, and undetected neuro-cognitive conflict. As mentioned above, we are living under such conditions. To protect the population and armed forces from the adverse impact of cognitive warfare, the following six steps are required.

The first is to conduct an in-depth study of the potential impact of using both directed energy weapons (neurocognitive disruptors) and IoT-based weapons. It must be appreciated that the objective is to control the minds of personnel, diplomats, policymakers, and citizens, manipulating them in ways favourable to the initiators of cognitive war. A strategic assessment to understand emerging technologies and threats is essential for preparedness. It is also important to assess how prepared India is for the neuro-cognitive conflict to develop better defensive, deterrent and quick systems and devices that can alert the targets in real-time and launch a suitable riposte.     

Second, the population, including personnel of armed forces, must be made aware of the consequences as well as the kinds of attacks that can be launched by adversaries. They need to be psychologically prepared to counter such attacks. In other words, a resilience-building strategy should be put in place. Keeping in view the special requirements of the armed forces, a separate tri-service organisation is needed, particularly to deal with the neuro-strike operations and to conduct both defensive and offensive operations. 

Third, for overall coordination of all stakeholders, including the private sector and the general population, there is a need for an empowered organisation to collect intelligence on cognitive warfare operations, formulate a strategy for the entire nation, assign responsibilities to different agencies and private sectors, and supervise the execution of the planned countermeasures in a coordinated manner. This organisation should also be able to get information from our intelligence agencies, including financial intelligence agencies and the Ministry of External Affairs, on a real-time basis. It should list out preventive and reactive measures. A coordinated national framework is central to counter influence operations. Building societal resilience is a critical defensive measure. The strategy to deal with this issue should be based on mixed elements, including coercion, persuasion and deterrent punitive measures. In short, the initiators of cognitive warfare should be treated as enemies responsible for waging a war against the nation.  

Fourth, our legal system needs to be tightened. The Government of India needs to introduce legislative reforms for prosecuting foreign perpetrators as well as their Indian aides and associates involved in influence operational activities.  All advanced countries have covered this aspect under their cybersecurity doctrines. As cognitive warfare depends on cyberspace for operations, they have formulated cyber strategies to deter opponents. The concept of hybrid warfare brought cyberwarfare into prominence. Hybrid Warfare is a theory of military strategy, first proposed by Frank Hoffman, which employs political warfare and blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare, and cyberwarfare with other influencing methods, such as fake news, diplomacy, lawfare and foreign electoral intervention. Cognitive warfare has gone a step further- it is aimed at the manipulation of the adversary’s key officials, politicians, and the entire population to ensure the desired action by them. This kind of warfare can take place along with conventional wars or without them. There is a close relationship between strategic deterrence and cognitive warfare. Strategic deterrence can have a well-defined role in cognitive operations in the future, and cognitive warfare can play a pivotal role in strategic deterrence. Besides, economic development also demands a safe cyber environment. Hence, a robust strategy is needed to deal with all the possible dimensions of this warfare. Deterrence should be strengthened through the threat of imposition of high costs or the raising of existing penalties or costs due to bad behaviour.

Our national security strategy should look into the main elements of other nations’ strategies to formulate its response. The common aspects in the US, UK, Australia, Russia, France, Spain, Japan, and China are as follows-

I.      They relate their cyber strategies to national security strategies. They see the threat from other nations. The threat is seen in a wider context. They consider threats to national defence, economy, and public confidence.

II.     The use of cyber capabilities to deter adversaries. Cyber operations are not merely seen as supplementing military operations but are also used as a deterrent. 

III.    There is a greater thrust on developing domestic capabilities to produce necessary IT products. They are doing away with their reliance on foreign equipment and systems.                         

Hence, our national cybersecurity should focus on the dimensions of cognitive warfare. The strategy must be related to national security dimensions. The serious threats are originating from key adversaries, who could use non-state actors. Though attribution remains a problem, a declaratory strategy with an emphasis on deterrence can dissuade the key adversaries and groups supported by them from launching attacks to some extent. The National Cyber Security Strategy should indicate in clear terms that any breach of India’s cyberspace by foreign actors would be treated at par with violations of our sovereign territory, airspace, or territorial waters. We could indicate that our cyber strategy would be based on “Forward Active Defence” i.e. could take steps to neutralise the source and could use any means at our disposal to inflict unacceptable damage on the attacker. We can maintain ambiguity on the actual triggers and such decisions can be taken later when a serious attack takes place.  The strategy would be effective if India developed capabilities to find the source of the attack without losing time. As a matter of precaution, the armed forces and our IT ecosystem should depend on indigenous equipment and systems. The imported weapons and equipment must be subjected to rigorous testing before use, if necessary. It is common to implant backdoors in imported equipment by exporters and their intelligence agencies to obtain information needed for neuro-cognitive attacks.      

Fifth, advanced research should be encouraged to develop weapons to counter energy-based weapons.  AI should be used to alert the population, diplomats, and armed forces about the attacks, when they take place, and automatically provide cover to contain the attack on the system. This may take some time, but a beginning should be made right now. Defensive capabilities against energy-based weapons (neurocognitive disruptors) should be built as soon as possible. Continuous research is required as the attackers are coming up with new means to attack every day.

Sixth, personnel using computers should be kept under strict watch. If a victim of a neuro-cognitive disruptor uses a computer, he can cause massive damage to the entire system by implanting a malware. It may be pointed out that human interface with computers is essential to be watched. In Iran, a human planted Stuxnet malware that caused severe harm to the Iranian nuclear programme. In view of this, humans in critical infrastructure need special surveillance.

Coclusion   

In essence, cognitive warfare represents a paradigm shift in modern conflict, targeting the cognitive domain as the central battlefield. Its ability to influence perceptions, shape behaviour, and undermine societal cohesion makes it a formidable threat to national security.

For India, addressing this challenge requires a holistic and integrated strategy encompassing technological, institutional, legal, and societal dimensions. As cognitive warfare evolves, adaptive and proactive responses will be essential to safeguard national sovereignty.