Impacts of China's Army Commissariat System on Change

The Concept of the Army Commissar:

Every army has a different military tradition, rooted in the structure and history of its nation. Even if it is not used today, the concept of an imam officer is not foreign to us. We would say that he is a ranking religious officer attached to the army. But the concept of a religious officer in the army would be quite strange for countries that have no religion, or even for countries that have adopted religion as a hostile ideology. Like the armies of the Soviet era, the Chinese army or the North Korean army. I think that for many readers, the concept I am about to introduce will also be quite strange.

There is a type of officer that was left over from the Soviet Union system and then continued in the Russian army. Let's call it the Turkish Army Commissar (a person appointed by the Communist party and found ideologically reliable). You can also call it party officer, political officer, political commissar, political advisor. 

The Army Commissar is designed to stand right next to the unit or headquarters commander. He is responsible for ensuring that all orders given by the commander and all military activities carried out are in the interests of the communist party and in accordance with party ideology. In theory, as in all other armies, all military decisions are in the hands of the commander. In practice, however, the commander cannot make any decision or take any action that the Army Commissar does not consider appropriate according to party rules. The Army Commissar also has the dominant power in personnel administration. In the land armies, the Commissar was even authorized to execute anyone in the unit suspected of treason, including the unit commander.

Of course, this is also true for the Chinese army, which is rooted in Soviet doctrine. In China, the situation is even more exaggerated. 

History and geography are factors that shape peoples. When we look at the navies of the world today, the British, Japanese and American navies stand out with their advanced and modern structures. Their maritime culture has been shaped by the experiences of many generations and the wars they have fought, and has now turned into a genetic cultural heritage. Therefore, it should be assumed that an operation conducted by the British or Japanese navy would have a higher chance of success than others. When there is a maritime innovation, we assume that such countries will quickly and successfully adapt to the new situation.

But how can we judge the Chinese navy, which historically has never sailed beyond its shores? What expectations of success or failure can we have? This is a really important question. And it is a question that the Chinese are asking themselves.

Let's turn over a new leaf: Alpha Man

I'd like us to think of something together: Let his name be Alpha. An Alpha is someone who lives and moves with his troops, who can control them at the deepest personal level, but who has not the slightest emotional attachment to any of them. He has studied all the wars and operations in world naval history, analyzed them from the planning stages to the end. Let us assume that he is a complete expert in military techniques and tactics. He should be familiar with the military schools of the world and the characteristics of, for example, the naval nations. When in a command position, he must have the determination, ability and knowledge to carry out the task and responsibility assigned to him in an absolute manner. When necessary, he should be able to make the most ruthless and harsh decisions without blinking an eye. 

In the case of the Chinese army, let us assume that this corresponds to the concept of a new kind of Army Commissar. Instead of a human being, let's make this definition identical with "Artificial Intelligence". That is, our army commissar would be an Alpha Man equipped with artificial intelligence.

I believe that one of the main reasons behind China's work on artificial intelligence specialized in community control may be to implement such approaches. Because if you want to achieve victory with an army that has no tradition, you must first focus on two aspects: 

- The first is the concept of overwhelming numerical majority (quantum), which has not lost its importance throughout history. 

- The second is to trust that the trained soldier facing death will do his best to survive. This requires a strategy led by the Alpha Man to confront the soldier with death at the right time and place.

Let's imagine a warship. A boat full of trained sailors. There are specialized personnel in every field and they have unlimited authority. But they don't have a single thing. No one, not even the commander, can set the ship's course and speed. So the crew can only use their skills, initiative and creativity to fight and survive. If this kind of task force were being created by China, where would you look for the sign of it? Could it be that a force that surpasses the US Navy in terms of the number of platforms is still one-third in terms of firepower? Because the most logical move would be to increase the chances of success of this opportunity by ensuring your numerical majority.

In fact, although we have given examples from the naval forces, we can also extend the subject to the air, space and even land forces. It is also important to remember this. In a war that will be led and managed under the supervision of the Alpha Man Commissioners, the warriors or soldiers will be human beings. In the future, it is possible that such an army will be depopulated, that unmanned armies will be formed. At least we can already envision this happening. At least in the near term, it is also possible that such an army could be equipped/enriched with robotic war vehicles with artificial intelligence. This is where China's massive drone capabilities come to the fore, while remaining mysterious. Displaying concept studies such as an unmanned drone mothership at sea, this country seems determined to spread the issue to the surface and below the surface.

Different Cultural Responses

As a Turk, I do not want to accept under any circumstances and under any circumstances that a non-human intelligence should rule me, take me to war, and ask me to make sacrifices that may even cost me my life. I do not find it humane. No doubt this is true for many of us. This approach is actually part of the social culture in which we have all grown up together. Even if a government were to propose this, we would want to oppose it, we would not accept it. 

On the other hand, the Chinese are different from us Turks. Chinese social culture is shaped in such a way that it is the opposite of the course of action we would take. Confucianism, which has had the greatest influence on this culture, is also part of this culture. The closest example of this can be seen in North Korea.

Much of the public debate on the use of artificial intelligence in the military is centered on ethics. The possibility of a machine deciding the life and death of a human being is difficult for many religions and cultures to digest. When discussing these issues, what comes to mind is a robot with a gun firing at a human being, or a drone flying in the air firing missiles at a human being. In other words, our minds tend to drift towards individual death/killing. However, it is highly likely that we assume that the first human killing by AI will be mass, and that we will see the Chinese army as the first practitioner. 

This again reminds us of an argument we often see in open debates. You may be ethically opposed to the use of AI in the military. But you cannot prevent an enemy from using it one day. So, when your enemy uses AI and gains the upper hand over you, will you still be able to argue ethics? Or will you be forced to join the bandwagon and accept the ethical sacrifice?