THE WAR WITHIN

In contemporary Western societies, the traditional line dividing “internal” and “external” spheres in warfare is rapidly dissolving—a transformation brought by cognitive warfare. Once, nations rallied the population as a monolithic bloc behind their political system and collectively braced against clear “external” adversaries. Today, digital-era information operations have made this notion obsolete. Cognitive warfare now exploits internal dissent and micro-identities, turning the population into both subject and agent of conflict: the battleground has shifted inward.

The central mechanism of cognitive warfare is the manipulation of perception and information, not simply through old-school propaganda but via modern social media, artificial intelligence, and microtargeted disinformation, reshaping public attitudes from within rather than through external messaging. For instance, as explored in “Cognitive Warfare: Key Aspects”, current adversarial strategies combine psyops, information warfare, and continuous “hearts and minds” campaigns, using neuroscience, psychology, and emerging technologies like brain-computer interfaces and AI to penetrate the target’s perception and behavior, advancing battles into “the realm of the human mind.”

Minorities, Dissenters and Micro-groups – the Chinese and Russian battlefields

China’s operational doctrine, as outlined in the referenced brief, includes “Cognitive Domain Operations,” with a focus on deception, psychological shaping, and ‘war of attacking the heart.’ In recent years, this has involved integrated cyber and disinformation campaigns, such as those observed during the former US Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, where China merged cyber-attacks with narrative control to shape global interpretation of the event.

Similarly, Russia’s doctrine on cognitive warfare rests on exploiting historical memories and perception manipulation—as seen during the conflicts in Georgia, Crimea, and Ukraine—serving as a template for others. Russian strategy is characterized by long-term efforts to manipulate belief systems, achieve ‘informational deterrence,’ and erode public confidence in Western values and institutions, often through targeted social media outreach and reflexive control operations.

This blurring of boundaries is no technicality. Instead of bolstering a unified national identity, cognitive warfare exposes minorities, dissenters, and micro-groups—ranging from conspiracy networks to digital tribes on platforms like Reddit, Telegram, and Discord—as highly vulnerable actors. Each can be targeted, isolated, and used to undermine broader societal consensus. Social justice movements, revivalist and populist parties, and identity-based micro-communities all claim to represent “true” national values, but are also susceptible to infiltration and exploitation by adversarial actors.

A vivid illustration comes from the COVID-19 pandemic, where coordinated campaigns by Russian and Chinese state actors seeded chaos and doubt—spreading anti-vaccine disinformation, amplifying skepticism towards health authorities, and encouraging distrust of government mandates. Such efforts went beyond influencing public debate—they had direct consequences for public health and the stability of national institutions. This is detailed in articles like “Cognitive warfare: Why wars without bombs or bullets are a threat”. AI-fueled bots and fake experts filled social media with contradictory claims, eroding collective trust and prompting real-world harm.

The concept of the “external enemy” is thus fundamentally altered. Adversaries sow division through tailored narratives about local politics, amplify fringe voices, and exploit social and cultural tensions. In the Ukraine conflict, Russian operatives have distorted perceptions of current events through ongoing campaigns, manipulating opinion inside and outside the region and fueling uncertainty about the legitimacy of Western support for Ukraine. These efforts demonstrate how the population itself is now the primary battleground, with adversaries making full use of technological advances in microtargeting to target individuals and demographics based on digital footprint and psychological mapping. See for more details, “Seizing the Edge in Cognitive Warfare”.

Western traditions of individualism and expressive freedom, long seen as democratic strengths, provide fertile ground for fragmentation in today’s cognitive conflict. Micro-identities and dissenting groups—once celebrated as signs of a healthy pluralism—are often leveraged to break down both social cohesion and collective sensemaking. As described by Mick Ryan in “The West’s Intellectual Deficit in Modern War”, adversaries exploit the narrative of Western decline, messaging that Western values no longer matter or aren’t worth defending, and fuel the breakdown of community ties.

Fight beyond traditional defense strategies

Cognitive warfare’s consequences extend into the legal and ethical gray zone. Traditional interpretations of war focus on physical violence, leaving cognitive attacks largely unregulated—yet the effects may be equally severe, inciting civil unrest, violence, and harmful behaviors. It is a domain where conflict is “fought” not with bullets or bombs, but through the deliberate shaping of collective consciousness and judgment. This strategic reorientation demands new resilience in democratic societies—defending social trust, civic virtue, and solidarity—since the most consequential battles now take place within society and minds, not across borders.

If Western democracies are to respond effectively to this new landscape, they must move beyond traditional defense strategies, recognize the “war within,” and develop cohesive capabilities in the cognitive domain. The challenge is not just technological or procedural, but concerns the very meaning of democracy and societal solidarity in an era when enemies, and indeed the battle itself, emerge from within.

Further Reading:

• Cognitive Warfare: Key Aspects
  https://www.idsa.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Issue-Brief-Gp-Capt-Sukhbir-Kaur-Minhas-18-August-2025.pdf
• Seizing the Edge in Cognitive Warfare
  https://csd.eu/blog/blogpost/2025/07/03/seizing-the-edge-in-cognitive-warfare/
• Cognitive warfare: Why wars without bombs or bullets are a threat
  https://phys.org/news/2025-07-cognitive-warfare-wars-bullets-legal.html
• The West’s Intellectual Deficit in Modern War
  https://mickryan.substack.com/p/the-wests-intellectual-deficit-in

About The Author

Thomas Franke

Thomas Franke has been working for more than 30 years in the field of security and defense. One of the main focuses of his recent activities is the “Forum Vernetzte Sicherheit gGmbH,” which he founded. This is a news portal and network dedicated to promoting interdisciplinary exchange on all essential aspects of security.

During his work as an advisor in the German Bundestag, Franke became familiar with the concept of synergistic security. It’s NATO affiliation is the “comprehensive approach”. He adopted this approach and consistently emphasized security aspects during his numerous roles as soldier, researcher, press officer and publisher. Through this, Franke gained expertise not only in the military domain but also in financial security, corporate risk management, political and societal risks.

Among other initiatives, Franke advocates for research projects that enable a new security architecture through collaboration between civilian, governmental, and scientific actors (Public-Private Partnerships/PPPs). Until March 2021, he led a bilateral research project on security in pharmaceutical logistics, funded by Germany’s Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and Austria’s Ministry for Innovation and Technology (BMVIT).

Most recently, Franke is mainly focused on cognitive warfare, Enterprise Architecture Management and human performance modification for the Federal Armed Forces of Germany.

See author's posts