🎧 Related Podcast Episode

Executive Summary

Cognitive Warfare has emerged as a critical challenge in the modern security environment, defined as the deliberate effort to “exploit facets of cognition to disrupt, undermine, influence, or modify human decision-making.” This form of conflict targets the human mind as its primary battlespace, leveraging advanced technologies to manipulate behavior and gain strategic advantage. Adversaries exploit the openness of democratic societies, using propaganda, disinformation, and hybrid tactics to target both military personnel and civilian populations, often operating below the threshold of armed conflict.

In response, NATO has designated Cognitive Warfare as a strategic research challenge, with the overarching goal of achieving “Cognitive Superiority,” a key Warfare Development Imperative outlined in its 2021 Warfighting Capstone Concept. The Alliance’s Science & Technology Organization (STO) is at the forefront of this effort, having established a comprehensive research program to understand and counter these threats. Since 2019, the STO has initiated 20 distinct research activities, engaging over 200 experts from 26 Allied and Partner nations.

Download: cognitivewarfare cognitivewarfare.pdf1 MB.a{fill:none;stroke:currentColor;stroke-linecap:round;stroke-linejoin:round;stroke-width:1.5px;}download-circle This extensive research has identified three primary strategic functions for countering Cognitive Warfare: degrading adversaries’ influence capabilities, improving the cognitive performance of friendly forces and systems, and building societal and military resilience to withstand and recover from cognitive attacks. The findings underscore the necessity of a whole-of-government and -society approach, integrating science and technology with policy and strategy to defend against this pervasive and evolving threat.

1. The Strategic Context of Cognitive Warfare

The Evolving Threat Landscape

NATO and its Allies operate within an increasingly unpredictable strategic environment where competitors and adversaries leverage the interconnectedness of open societies as a vulnerability. This has led to the re-emergence of Cognitive Warfare, a modernized form of influence operations amplified by digital technology.

  • Hybrid Tactics: Threat actors employ a range of tactics including propaganda, deception, and malicious disinformation campaigns (e.g., deepfakes) to fragment public trust in institutions, science, and governments.- Targeting Democracy: These campaigns can lead to significant societal challenges, including social instability and election interference, by exploiting the freedoms and protections inherent in democratic systems.- The Cognitive Dimension of Modern Conflict: The full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia demonstrated that modern warfare is fought not only through attrition but also in the human mind. Russia utilized conflicting narratives and false flags to destabilize and influence decision-making, highlighting the importance of the “cognitive dimension” in conflict.

The Role of Technology as a Force Multiplier

While the principles of Cognitive Warfare are not new, citing strategists like Sun Tzu, modern technology has fundamentally altered its scale, speed, and reach.

  • Emerging Disruptive Technologies (EDTs): Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI), biotechnology, neurobiology, and big data have dramatically increased the potential for cognitive attacks.- The Digital Information Environment: Social media and other digital platforms form the primary battlespace for Cognitive Warfare, enabling adversaries to target vast segments of the population with weaponized information. The COVID-19 pandemic served as a case study, showing how disinformation on social media can threaten critical decision-making processes.- Targeting Decision-Making Frameworks: Adversaries exploit vulnerabilities within military decision-making frameworks, such as the Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act (OODA) loop, to create confusion and disrupt command and control.

2. Defining and Delineating Cognitive Warfare

Core Concepts and Definitions

The STO research provides several layered definitions that collectively frame the concept of Cognitive Warfare:

  • Manipulation: It is described as the “manipulation of the enemy’s cognition” with the aim to weaken, influence, or destroy the enemy. (Du Cluzel)- Behavioral Impact: It is the use of all available knowledge and tools to impact human behavior through cognition, with the ultimate goal of altering decision-making.- NATO’s Official Definition: The Alliance defines Cognitive Warfare as “the fight for Cognitive Superiority,” which involves deliberate military and non-military activities designed to gain, protect, and maintain a cognitive advantage.- Overarching Goal: The fundamental objective is “to exploit facets of cognition to disrupt, undermine, influence, or modify human decision-making by altering human behaviour and cognition through any means and technological advances.”

The White House Influencer Pipeline: How the Biden Administration Revolutionized Government Communications Through Social Media

Distinctions from Traditional Information Operations

Cognitive Warfare represents a convergence of disciplines like Psychological Operations (PsyOps), Information Operations (InfoOps), and cyber operations, but it is also broader and distinct in several key aspects.

Aspect

Traditional Operations (InfoOps, PsyOps)

Cognitive Warfare

Scope

Typically mission-oriented with specific, approved audiences and objectives.

Not solely a military challenge; targets military and civilians across the spectrum of peace, crisis, and conflict.

Objective

Create desired effects on the will, understanding, and capability of adversaries.

Aim to alter human behavior, often by creating chaos and complexity, without necessarily knowing the specific outcome.

Domain

Conducted within the Information Environment.

Creates a “cognitive battlespace” using multiple, synchronized interferences; considered a cross-cutting effect dimension.

Threshold

Often part of declared military operations.

Frequently designed to operate below the threshold of armed conflict.

The cognitive dimension is not recognized as a separate operational domain like land, sea, air, space, and cyber. Instead, it is a cross-cutting effect dimension that is integral to NATO’s Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) concept.

3. NATO’s Strategic Response and Research Framework

Policy Integration and High-Level Recognition

NATO’s senior leadership has formally recognized the importance of the cognitive dimension in modern warfare through key strategic documents.

  • 2021 NATO Warfighting Capstone Concept (NWCC): Identified five long-term Warfare Development Imperatives (WDIs), two of which—Cognitive Superiority and Influence & Power Projection—are built directly on the principles of Cognitive Warfare.- 2022 NATO Strategic Concept: Emphasizes the critical need for national and collective resilience to safeguard societies and fulfill the Alliance’s core tasks, highlighting the importance of collaboration between military and civilian stakeholders.

The Science & Technology Organization (STO) Initiative

The STO is the Alliance’s principal body for cooperative defense S&T and plays a pivotal role in developing capabilities to counter Cognitive Warfare.

  • CPoW Challenge: In 2022, the NATO Science & Technology Board (STB) designated Cognitive Warfare as a strategic research challenge for its Collaborative Program of Work (CPoW).- Extensive Research Network: This initiative has spurred significant collaboration. As of April 2025, 20 STO activities related to Cognitive Warfare have been established, involving:Over 200 experts.- 26 NATO Allied and Partner nations.- Five associated NATO organizations, including Allied Command Transformation (ACT) and the Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence (STRATCOM CoE). Community of Interest: The STO has also established a broad Community of Interest that meets frequently to identify and discuss research needs, strengthening the Alliance’s knowledge base. The Silent War: Psychological Operations from the KGB to TikTok

The “House Model” S&T Framework

Developed by the STO Specialist Team HFM-ST-356, the “House Model” provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the science and technology knowledge areas essential for mitigating and responding to Cognitive Warfare.

The model is built upon a foundation of NATO’s legal and ethical frameworks and identifies seven interdependent S&T fields:

Category

S&T Knowledge Areas

Description

Knowledge Pillars

1. Cognitive Neuroscience

Understanding the physiological and neurological mechanisms of reasoning and decision-making.

2. Cognitive & Behavioural Science

Applying psychological knowledge on sense-making, social interaction, emotion, and trust.

3. Social & Cultural Science

Understanding structural and institutional factors that shape collective behavior.

Cross-Cutting Areas (Force Multipliers)

4. Situational Awareness / Sense-making

Understanding factors that enable or block the ability to make sense of ambiguous events.

5. Cognitive Effects

Understanding how an actor can affect a target to achieve a desired goal (e.g., distort, degrade).

6. Modus Operandi

Examining adversary methods and stratagems to identify opportunities for intervention.

7. Technology Enablers

Understanding advances in EDTs (AI, big data, biotech) that enable cognitive attacks.

This model is operationally relevant as it links directly to the military’s OODA decision-making loop, which is a primary target of Cognitive Warfare.

4. Key Research Findings and Strategic Functions

Summary of STO Research Activities

The 20 STO activities initiated since 2019 cover a wide range of topics critical to understanding and countering Cognitive Warfare. As of April 20, 2025, the status of these activities is:

  • Completed: 11- Active: 5- Planned: 3- Submitted for Approval: 2

These activities address subjects such as Social Media Exploitation, Ethical and Legal Challenges of Cognitive Warfare, Technology Enablers and Force Multipliers, and Building Resistance to Offensive Cognitive Strategies.

Three Overarching Strategic Functions

The collective body of STO research has highlighted three primary functions for developing capabilities to defend against Cognitive Warfare:

  1. Degrade Capabilities of Adversaries: To reduce their ability to influence and change behavior, thereby ensuring Allied decision-making ability and maintaining Cognitive Superiority.2. Improve Human and Technological Cognition: To enhance friendly cognitive capabilities above the current baseline, making personnel and systems more effective.3. Withstand and Recover Performance (Resilience): To retain and quickly recover operational performance in the face of cognitive threats, strengthening both military and societal resilience.

Collaboration and Impact Across the Alliance

The STO’s research has had a direct impact on NATO’s operational and strategic development.

  • NATO ACT Cognitive Warfare Concept: Findings from HFM-ST-356 provided valuable input into the development of this concept.- NATO Industrial Advisory Group (NIAG): The research supported a NIAG study on “Cognitive Augmentation for Military Applications,” assessing the modernization of human-technology integration.- NATO HQ Disinformation Workshop: In April 2023, the STO and the Office of Strategic Communications co-hosted a workshop to build a common understanding of disinformation and hostile information activities.

Psychological Warfare Across U.S. Military Branches: Shaping Perceptions on Multiple Fronts

5. Conclusion and Forward Outlook

Cognitive Warfare represents a persistent and significant challenge to the security of NATO Allies. It is a form of continuous competition that targets the core of democratic societies—the trust and decision-making of their citizens and leaders. As emerging technologies continue to evolve, the means to affect human cognition will only become more sophisticated, requiring the Alliance to remain vigilant in monitoring these developments.

Countering this threat demands a unified, whole-of-government approach that bridges military and civilian domains. S&T is foundational to this effort, providing the necessary tools to detect, analyze, and mitigate cognitive attacks while developing strategies to enhance resilience.

The work of the NATO STO has established a robust, interdisciplinary foundation for improving the Alliance’s understanding of and response to Cognitive Warfare. The establishment of 20 research activities and a dedicated Community of Interest demonstrates a clear commitment to this challenge. As warfare increasingly moves toward a Multi-Domain Operations construct, Cognitive Warfare will undoubtedly remain a key research theme, essential for supporting NATO’s core mission and securing Cognitive Superiority over any potential adversary.

U.S. Army Psychological Warfare (PSYWAR): Shaping Perceptions in the Cyber War Landscape