Command and control

Enhancing Command and Control (C2) Systems in the Age of Cybertechnology

By /

Modern warfare demands cyber-resilient command and control (C2). Taha Amir argues that traditional systems struggle to defend against escalating cyber threats. He proposes fortifying C2 with advanced analytics, AI, and secure communication. The paper acknowledges potential technical, organizational, and ethical hurdles in accomplishing that and analyzes the US Cyber Command as a case study for future considerations.

Askari Bank Banner

Abstract

The research paper underlines the dire need to improve command and control (C2) of cyber-based technology. A detailed exploration indicates that the contemporary battlefield is more cyber-based. The main reason that would guarantee success or failure is the ability to address the surging rates of cyber threats and attacks in the military theatre. The lens of analysis pinpoints drawbacks in traditional C2 systems. They lack accurate machinery capable of identifying, addressing, and stopping such cyber-based attacks as those achieved through digital warfare.

The paper also explains the military organization’s instrumentality via cybertechnology. The tested instruments for C2-enhancing will revolve around improved analytical capabilities, capacity, artificial intelligence (AI), and secure communications. The projected technical, organizational, and ethical shortcomings are also addressed. Through the case of the United States Cyber Command, the paper anticipates lessons learned and how C2 will influence the military.

The time is now to adopt dependable and cyber-adaptable C2 systems to face ever-increasing cyber threats. A critique of the various C2 enhancing systems is also captured to help military decision-makers make practical choices in line with individual military strategies.

Keywords: Command and Control (C2), Cyber Technology, Cyber Warfare, Organizational Transformation

Introduction

Command and control (C2) are one of the most crucial components within the C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) components. They are pivotal facets of military missions because they provide powerful teamwork, transmission, and decision-making methods that are vital for the successful performance of armed forces, policies, and maneuvers. C2 systems also facilitate the essential infrastructure to gather, analyze, and spread information, enabling the military leader to make prudent decisions and guide the actions of their forces (Li, Wenqing Huai, & Wang, 2016).

In the contemporary era, cyber technology is continuously changing day after day. Because of this, the author opines that it is necessary to improve C2 capabilities to maintain a strategic advantage in advanced warfare. The soaring dependence on digital and network-centric systems and the developing danger of cyber attacks have demanded the cultivation of a more sturdy and flexible C2 skeleton that can tackle the incoming uncertainties presented by the persistent cyber landscape (Rizwan, 2022).

Background

There is no doubt that the development of warfare has been deeply molded by the swift progressions in cybertechnologies (Iqbal, 2024). This digital revolution in the 21st century has basically altered the way defense operations are intended, performed, and continued. Therefore, due to this revolution, cyber abilities have become vital facilitators, allowing for improved information gathering, transmission, and accuracy in aiming, among other tactical benefits (Amir Benbouza, 2011).

Moreover, as the cyber realm has turned progressively into military activities, defense organizations have encountered important problems in adjusting to this latest development. These dilemmas, including the intricacy of cyber systems, the persistent development of cyber menaces, and the desire to sustain an elevated degree of digital safety, have created major requirements for military funds and manpower (Wilson, 2019).

Additionally, in the context of cyber-enabled disputes, the importance of effective C2 cannot be overemphasized, This is because the capability to collect, approach, and distribute news in actual time, as well as to organize the deeds of scattered armed forces units, is critical for holding a strategic edge and reacting competently to cyber-based dangers. Thus, strong C2 frameworks are vital for guaranteeing the flexibility and versatility of armed forces in the face of quickly varying cyber-related problems.

Problem Statement

Problems arise everywhere with regard to enhancing C2 in the age of cybertechnology. There is no doubt that conventional C2 systems have been productive in tackling conventional military threats; however, they often strive to efficiently handle the extraordinary difficulties posed by cyber-based menaces. The greatly energetic and asymmetric character of cyber attacks, the capability of opponents to swiftly modify their tactics, and the possibility for comprehensive disturbance of crucial defense systems and infrastructure have stressed the limits of current C2 frameworks.

Moreover, the author of this composition believes that in order to competently pilot the cyber-enabled battlespace, there is an urgent need for a more broad and unified approach to C2. This could involve incorporating state-of-the-art cyber capabilities, real-time data analytics dashboards, and flexible decision-making processes into the heart of military C2 systems. It should be noted that such an approach would facilitate military leaders to promptly recognize, evaluate, and respond to cyber dangers while also aiding in the smooth amalgamation of cyber activities with conventional military affairs.

Additionally, if observed, the likely effect of unproductive C2 in the age of cybertechnology can be serious. It can possibly sabotage the triumph of military operations and impair strategic objectives. Consequently, cyber attacks directed at damaging or manipulating C2 systems could lead to the damage of vital intelligence, the deterioration of military abilities, and the incompetence to efficiently organize and carry out military deeds. Hence, leaders and policymakers should consider the development of more strong and flexible C2 frameworks.

Research Questions

This brief explanatory research aims to answer the following questions:

  1. What enables military organizations to use cyber technology to improve their C2?
  2. What are the predictable technological, organizational, and ethical challenges in cyber-enhanced C2?
  3. Are there any notable issues to keep in mind while implementing C2 for the military?
  4. What are the research lessons taken from C2 implementation studies identified as valuable?

Methodology

This research is of a qualitative nature. In this study, the author includes several sources, such as peer-reviewed journal articles, books, and expert debate, to acquire a deep insight into the subject and different opinions on how to better the C2 in the era of cyber technology. Moreover, this methodology implies that the research presented in this paper is all-inclusive, relying on a variety of sources and expert positions that provide a detailed understanding of the topic.

The Changing Landscape of Warfare

There is no question that the contemporary era has seen an evolution in the commonality and sophistication of cyber attacks. These include malware use but are not restricted to the invasion of networks, manipulation of data, and so forth. As a consequence, the author contends it is very pertinent to emphasize that cyber threats have the ability to obstruct vital military infrastructure, undermine delicate data, and militate against the efficiency of traditional military capability.

This eventually constitutes a serious impediment to the success of military operations. Secondly, because of the asymmetric nature of cyber warfare, in that even lesser foes are capable of causing significant harm, it has overburdened and persuaded military entities to rethink their procedures (Negrea Petru-Cristian, 2023).

Some notable examples of the influence of cyber menaces on conventional military operations include the NotPetya malware attack on Ukraine in 2017. This attack was allegedly carried out by Russia, aiming to disrupt critical information servers of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense.

Similarly, in 2020, some suspicious actors funded by state actors breached the networks of the US Department of Defense to gain access to sensitive data and to undermine military readiness. Additionally, most of the opponents use complex cyber attacks with the goal of interrupting GPS signals, deceiving missile guidance systems, and corrupting military logistics and communication networks (Mueller, Jensen, Valeriano, Maness, & Macias, 2023).

As of now, a lot of militaries around the world are still using the traditional C2 systems. These systems were mainly planned to address conventional military threats. However, with the increase in cyber perils, these systems often struggle to effectively detect, respond to, and mitigate cyber-based attacks. Other than this the speed and complexity of cyber threats can overcome conventional C2 structures. This ultimately leads to late decision-making and ineffective responses.

For instance, the 2020 SolarWinds breach emphasizes the limitations of conventional C2 systems to cyber-based attacks due to the inherently localized and rapidly developing nature of the threat. This aspect overwhelmed the US military’s conventional incident response protocols and delayed any efforts directed at mitigating its effectiveness. In a wargame scenario of 2018, the US military C2 system failed to detect and respond effectively to a mock cyber attack. This fake and simple action significantly disrupted the US military’s critical activities.

In addition, the examples above indicated that the 2020 SolarWinds breach could have allowed the actor to manipulate or corrupt the information streaming through C2 systems. Therefore, the ethical and reliable consideration of military decision-making has become an issue (Antigoni Kruti, Butt, & Rejwan Bin Sulaiman, 2023). Furthermore, within academia and the cyber realm, everyone has accepted the fact that the cyber domain has become more and more central to military operations. Because of this, there is an urgent need for C2 frameworks that are particularly planned to address the unique problems posed by cyber threats.

So, these new frameworks must include abilities capable of rapidly finding and responding to cyber-based attacks while also assisting the integration of cyber operations with traditional military activities. Similarly, many suggest that factors such as adaptability and resilience are crucial, as C2 systems must be able to evolve and adapt to the constantly changing cyber landscape. This will finally guarantee the continued strength of military forces in the face of emerging threats.

C2 Frameworks of Major Powers

Examples from the major world powers demonstrate the constant urge to generate resilient and flexible C2 structures to respond to cyberspace-related issues. The US Cyber Command has developed distinct C2 frameworks that blend traditional military operations and prioritize cyberspace. Essentially, it will eventually enable the creation of a more comprehensive and coherent strategy for cyber defense.

In the German Bundeswehr, regular Cyber and Information Domain Service personnel work closely with traditional military units. It will eventually enable the coordination of cyber defense activities across the armed services and real-time threat evaluation.

On the other hand, the Ministry of Defence of the United Kingdom has implemented a “hybrid” C2 model whereby cyber operations are integrated into the existing military C2 structure. Skilled cyber professionals are inserted into conventional units to enhance situational awareness and rapidly make decisions.

The People’s Liberation Army of China also showcases the need for a scalable and flexible C2 framework. It has a centralized, hierarchical C2 for cyber operations, which allows for quick mobilization and command of cyber soldiers to respond to emerging threats.

Another example is the Israeli Defence Forces, which rely on a decentralized “swarming” strategy. It creates fast and agile small teams of cyber specialists poised to independently identify and neutralize threats. Thus, the reliance on the hierarchical pyramid is minimized. Contrarily, in the Russian military, the approach is to overwhelm an opponent using C2.

Conclusively, the knowledge of warfare transformation and cyber technology might enable military organisations across the globe to create comprehensive and integrated C2 frameworks capable of addressing emerging issues (Joseph & William, 2009).

Enhancing C2 through Cyber Technology

Cyber technology is capable of being used for the monitoring, forecasting, and control processes of C2 systems. Cyber-suspicious activities create an instant emergency. These threats are found and investigated by applying AI and ML algorithms that run several data sources all the time. A blend of extended analytic abilities and artificial intelligence amidst military authorities will allow them to identify the computers and networks as tools for cyberattacks and thwart the imminent threats by preventing the ensuing dangers.

The decision support systems based on AI can automate and optimize many of the routine and unimportant operations while at the same time guaranteeing that, in cases of a lack of time or resources, workers will be able to focus on more important issues. Modernized authentication protocols, duplicate protection, and robust encryption provide signs pointing to the origin of connected destructive channels that are born in cyberspace.

We can create extended systems and alternative communication channels, not to mention the plan B scenarios, to make sure that the C2 routines get operating even if there is a cyberattack or a system breakdown. The reliability of the system can be enhanced by the decentralized ways of sharing the C2 so that attackers can’t impact and bring down the network as a whole.

The existence of offensive cyber weapons to distort the data, denial of accessibility, or network penetrations can, consequently, lead to more failure by the adversary. The aim, therefore, is to make the military operations more successful. Operational systems (C2) should be adequately covered by robust cyber defense programs and procedures to safeguard them from cyberattacks and guarantee their continuous functioning.

Using the interoperability of cyber warfare capabilities and the conventional C2 process, a unified format that involves good coordination to incorporate cyber operations with conventional military operations can be established. All in all, the armed forces can strengthen their level or degree of physical fitness by improving their cyber policies using advanced science and technology.

Potential Challenges and Thoughts

Many technological, ethical, legal, and organizational challenges become relevant when cyber capabilities are integrated into C2 systems. The most acute problem is the compatibility of the older systems with the recent technologies. The infrastructure involved is likely to be inflexible to operate and be integrated with current systems properly, leading to issues of compatibility and plausible points of failure.

Besides, an insufficient level of standardization does not allow for a comprehensive understanding of the operational environment and an inclusive representation of different C2 systems’ information. The proper employment of cyber capabilities in military operations under international law and its treaty initiatives should be approached with careful thought so that observance of such fundamental principles as distinction, proportionality, integrity, and military necessity can be sustained (Grady, Rajtmajer, & Dennis, 2021).

It is also of vital importance to develop robust governance systems to ensure the responsible and liable use of cyber-augmented C2 capabilities, preventing abuse, misuse, and unintentional outcomes. To incorporate fully cyber capabilities into C2, one will have to construct bridges between the discipline of cyberspace and traditional military discourses.

It will be feasible through the establishment of multidisciplinary teams and the implementation of training programs and education to help the employees acquire the knowledge and competencies necessary to work in environments where C2 is supported by cyber capabilities. These and many other issues mentioned above should be properly addressed by military establishments to create robust and sustainable cyber-enabled C2 capabilities empowered to wage effective resistance to rapidly changing cyber threats.

Case Study of the US Cyber Command

The US Cyber Command, created in 2010, amalgamated all the military’s cyber operations under a unified chain of command. This decision combined the various cyber capabilities, each previously possessed separately by the different military branches, into one specialized organization charged with strengthening, unifying, and maximizing the power and potency of cyber forces. Over time, the responsibilities of this command have expanded.

The Department of Defense expanded its responsibilities over network security, in addition to offensive cyber operations and cyber support to the other combatant commands. This institutional progression mirrored that of cyberspace and the exponential increase in the importance of its functions in the military sphere. With the growth of cyber warfare, the military’s command and control structure added integrated cyber troops and capabilities.

The command and control structure expanded into three key leadership levels: strategic, operational, and tactical. From the strategic level, the Cyber Command provides the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the secretary of defense with the capacity and commitment necessary to conduct high-level strategic planning and decision-making, including military operations, tactics, and discernments about rules of aggression tactics. At the operational level, cyber forces are integrated into the geographic map and functional missions of regional and functional combatant commands. This jagged layer ensures cyber effects are synchronized with kinetically violent activities to support mission accomplishment (Cyber Command, 2020).

At the tactical level, cyber capabilities have been integrated at the unit level. The integration has further facilitated using cyber officers and tools to complement frontline troops. The tactical integration is vital for the quick spread of cyber impacts to enable support for land, naval, and air operations. Thus, the comprehensive C2 fusion’s principal aim is to distribute cyber operations to conventional military motives, enabling commanders to assimilate and operate integrated cyber operations.

However, operationalization has struggled to integrate cyber capabilities within the military command, fearing challenges. The specific areas that have significant challenges are technical integration, developmental integration, and integration of specialist personnel, given that these personnel are supposed to be knowledgeable and skilled in using extensive command and control machinery for the military’s daily functions.

Additionally, authorities, roles, and power-sharing mechanisms have been challenged because cyber operations are strategic and should abide by other military motives and rules of engagement where feasible. Thus, the military has adopted independent C2s and decision-making arenas for cyber capabilities. By doing so, it nourishes data control among the cyber units, intelligence services, and traditional military troops, and utilizes integrated views of operations in information sharing.

These efforts have eased the amalgamation of cyber capabilities into the broader military C2, fostering the development of cyber-enhanced operations. The lessons learned regarding the need to prioritize early cyber integration, develop a unified cyber-C2 mentality, and establish a fully operational cyber force have significantly contributed to enhancing cyber defense in the United States.

These lessons’ influence can be observed in the development of the US Cyber Command C2 structure and efforts, the evolution of educational priorities, and the growth of cyber within the armed forces. The incorporation of cyber capabilities into C2 in the US military continually results in learning and informed approaches. The intelligence acquired from this experience has directly and indirectly contributed significantly to the continued enhancement and advancement of US cyber capabilities (Temur Digmelashvili, 2023).

Critical Analysis

The C2 capabilities of military organizations can be enhanced with several benefits that stem from the techniques mentioned above, such as better decision-making, situation awareness, resilience, and the capability to respond to cyber threats. However, there are other challenges associated with these, such as technological compatibility, moral issues, and the need for organizational change. Comparing the value of various C2-enhancement approaches to those associated with cyberspace may provide valuable insights into the advantages, disadvantages, and utility in specific operations.

Through comparisons, military organizations may accurately decide on and prioritize a list of feasible C2-enhancement strategies for their operations. Several areas will need additional attention, even though cyber competencies have been effectively incorporated into C2 operations. This includes new communication architecture and data sharing paradigms for addressing interoperability being developed, an ethical and legal framework for responsible military employment, and workforce development and organizational transformation management strategies to guarantee effective C2 structures adoption.

Ongoing utilization of these techniques can confirm, through experimentation and research, that C2-improved structures are kept up-to-date with the continually altering circumstances in cyber conflict. To stay tactically significant in today’s conflict, military organizations may wisely invest in the most promising C2-improvement strategies by recognizing drawbacks, available upgrades, and development alternatives.

Conclusion

Since the threat today is relevant, cyber technology needs to be implemented in C2 systems of the armed forces. Without it, the forces of the twenty-first century are doomed to be ineffective, as the former director of the CIA, General David H. Petraeus, tells us. This century is about the rapid dissemination of information and non-stop digital connection.

As a result, battles have changed phenomenally. There is an enormous benefit to C2 systems when they use such advances to improve decision-making, build anti-cyber capabilities, and improve their resilience. However, to be successful, it must face issues relating to management, personnel, legality, ethics, and organization, including data compatibility (Blessing, 2020).

As the former NATO supreme allied commander, retired Admiral James G. Stavridis, noted today, this matter contains a doctrinal, organizational, and culture-centered challenge rather than just technological. Consequently, this solution can be beneficial for the US Cyber Command plan’s particular difficulty in contemplating additional forces.

It is imperative for military forces to not stop implementing cyber technologies to preserve their positional advantage in the loud battleground of the future. The same applies to the military, said Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Milley. Milley is convinced that to ensure an appropriate response rate, raising the military’s potential is vital (NATO, 2024).

In order to ensure the success of this integration, a significant amount of financing on R&D projects, technology introduction at the fastest possible time, and complex change management procedures are required. Importance can be found in the ability to change and penetrate invisible fields when deciding future battles. “The infantryman has had to learn to dig a trench, to charge a rifle, just to stay,” says tech entrepreneur Elon Musk. By using cyberspace, armed forces can enhance their C2 systems to face new cyber threats and the battles of modern warfare fully equipped.

References

If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please check the Submissions page.

The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.

 

About the Author(s)
Taha Amir
+ posts

Taha Amir is a graduate ofdefense and strategic studies from Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad. Currently, he is interning at The Consul Monthly Magazine.

Click to access the login or register cheese