Cognitive Warfare: what is our actual knowledge and how to build state resilience?

• Authors: Robert Reczkowski , Andrzej Lis

Abstracts

EN

Contemporary national security systems face many challenges related to the changes taking place in the security and operating environments. Cognitive warfare, listed as one of such challenges, is often described as “the struggle for hearts and minds” because in cognitive warfare it is the human mind that becomes the battlefield. The aim of the paper is to identify and explore the key assumptions of cognitive warfare. The research process is focused on the following study questions: (1) What are the characteristics of cognitive warfare? (2) How can cognitive operations build an advantage over a competitor? (3) How to build resilience to cognitive operations? The analysis is based on the data collected with the use of the method of narrative literature review. Moreover, the authors’ participatory observations and lessons from national and international military research projects contributed to understanding and discussing the gist of cognitive warfare.

Keywords

EN

cognitive warfare; cognitive domain; security environment; awareness; resilience

• Publisher: Krakowska Akademia im. Andrzeja Frycza Modrzewskiego
• Journal: Bezpieczeństwo. Teoria i Praktyka
• Year: 2022
• Volume: XLVIII
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 51-61

Dates

published

2022

Contributors

author

Robert Reczkowski

• Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
• Doctrine and Training Centre of the Polish Armed Forces

author

Andrzej Lis

• Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
• Doctrine and Training Centre of the Polish Armed Forces

References

• Backes O., Swab A., Cognitive Warfare. The Russian Threat to Election Integrity in the Baltic States,Cambridge: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 2019.
• Bjørgul L.K., “Cognitive Warfare and the Use of Force”, Stratagem, 3 November 2021, https://www.stratagem.no/cognitive-warfare-and-the-use-of-force [accessed: 15 December 2021].
• Booth A., Papaioannou D., Sutton A., Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2012.
• Cao K., Glaister S., Pena A., Rhee D., Rong W., Rovalino A., Bishop S., Khanna R., Saini J.S., “Countering Cognitive Warfare: Awareness and Resilience”, NATO Review, 20 May 2021,
• https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2021/05/20/countering-cognitive-warfareawareness-and-resilience/index.html [accessed: 16 December 2021].
• Cook D.J., Mulrow C.D., Haynes R.B., “Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Clinical Decisions”, Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 126, issue 5, 1997, pp. 376–380, https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00006.
• Czakon W., “Metodyka systematycznego przeglądu literatury”, Przegląd Organizacji, no. 3, 2011,pp. 57–61, https://doi.org/10.33141/po.2011.03.13.
• “For the Greater Good: Reflections on Legacy with Vincent Stewart”, DIA Public Affairs, 24 February 2022, https://www.dia.mil/News-Features/Articles/Article-View/Article/2945317/for-the-greater-good-reflections-on-legacy-with-vincent-stewart/ [accessed: 27 February2022].
• Government of Canada “Defending Canada Against Cognitive Warfare”, 22 November 2021, https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/maple-leaf/defence/2021/11/defending-canada-cognitive-warfare.html [accessed: 11 January 2022].
• Kahneman D., Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, [cop. 2011].
• Landes R.A., Orientalism as Caliphator Cognitive Warfare: Consequences of Edward Saïd’s Defense of the Orient, [in:] Handbook of Research on Contemporary Approaches to Orientalism in
• Media and Beyond, vol. 1, eds. I. Tombul, G. Sari, Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2021, pp. 33–52, https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-7180-4ch003.
• Mazur Z., Orłowska A., “Jak zaplanować i przeprowadzić systematyczny przegląd literatury”, Polskie Forum Psychologiczne, vol. 23, no. 2, 2018, pp. 235–251, https://doi.org/10.14656/PFP20180202.
• Mokrzycki J., Reczkowski R., Cieśla S., Foreward, [in:] Security Environment Out To 2035 – NUP
• 2X35: The Polish Perspective, eds. J. Mokrzycki, R. Reczkowski, S. Cieśla, Bydgoszcz: Doctrine and Training Centre of the Polish Armed Forces, 2020, pp. 5–6.
• Myers S.L., Perlez J., “U.S. Diplomats Evacuated in China as Medical Mystery Grows”, New York Times, 6 June 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/06/world/asia/china-guangzhouconsulate-sonic-attack.html [accessed: 12 February 2022].
• Ottewell P., “Defining the Cognitive Domain”, Over the Horizon, 7 December 2020, https:// othjournal.com/2020/12/07/defining-the-cognitive-domain [accessed: 11 January 2022].
• Rogers Z., “In the Cognitive War – The Weapon is You!”, The Mad Scientist Laboratory blog, 1 July 2019, https://madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil/158-in-the-cognitive-war-the-weapon-is-you [accessed: 27 December 2021].
• Schmidt T., “The Missing Domain of War: Achieving Cognitive Overmatch on Tomorrow’s Battlefield”, Modern War Institute, 4 July 2020, https://mwi.usma.edu/missing-domain-warachieving-cognitive-overmatch-tomorrows-battlefield [accessed: 13 January 2022].
• Sun Tzu, The Art of War, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 12 November 2018.
• Tranfield D., Denyer D., Smart P., “Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review”, British Journal of Management, vol. 14, issue 3, 2003, pp. 207–222, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375.
• Underwood K., “Cognitive Warfare Will Be Deciding Factor in Battle”, SIGNAL, 15 August 2017, https://www.afcea.org/content/cognitive-warfare-will-be-deciding-factor-battle [accessed: 19 December 2021].

Identifiers

DOI

10.48269/2451-0718-btip-2022-3-003

Biblioteka Nauki

2176769