The concept of network swarms, particularly in the context of modern conflict and security, represents a fascinating and somewhat disorientating evolution in the dynamics of warfare and strategic operations.  The implications of swarm intelligence also extend beyond  these immediate scenarios in technology and defense. They challenge our traditional notions of intelligence, control, and organization, suggesting that in certain contexts, decentralized and distributed approaches can outperform centralized and hierarchical ones.  Find our analysis here.  

Network Swarms – aka “Drone Swarms” and Swarm Intelligence

At its core, Network Swarms (aka “Drone Swarms”) encapsulates the utilization of decentralized, autonomous systems—often in the form of drones or robotic entities—operating in a coordinated manner to achieve specific objectives. This approach leverages the principles of swarm intelligence, a phenomenon observed in nature, where simple agents following simple rules can generate complex behaviors and solve complex problems without the need for a centralized command structure.

The strategic implications of network swarms are profound and multifaceted:

1. They signify a shift towards more asymmetric warfare tactics, where the line between conventional and unconventional forces becomes increasingly blurred. The ability of network swarms to operate autonomously, adapting to dynamic environments and objectives, presents a challenge to traditional defense mechanisms that are often designed to counter more predictable, hierarchical threats.
2. The potential for network swarms to be employed in a variety of contexts—from surveillance and reconnaissance to direct combat operations—underscores the versatility and adaptability of this approach. The Hungarian COLLMOT Robotic Research Project’s experimentation with drones that self-organize to overcome obstacles is a testament to the technological advancements fueling the development of network swarms. Similarly, the U.S. Office of Naval Research’s experiments with autonomous and remote-controlled swarming robot boats illustrate the military’s interest in harnessing these capabilities for defensive and offensive purposes.

Swarm Intelligence

Swarm intelligence is a compelling and innovative concept that draws its inspiration from the natural world, particularly from the collective behavior of social insects like ants, bees, and termites. It encapsulates the idea that simple agents, following simple rules, can collectively produce complex and adaptive behaviors that far exceed the capabilities of any individual member of the swarm.

This principle is not confined to biological systems:  it extends into artificial systems, offering profound insights and applications in the realms of robotics, optimization, and artificial intelligence:

• Consider the example of ant colonies, where the absence of a central command does not hinder but rather enhances, their ability to find food, optimize paths, and adapt to environmental changes. Each ant follows simple rules based on local information and interactions, yet the colony as a whole exhibits highly efficient and adaptive problem-solving capabilities.  This phenomenon of emergence, where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, is a hallmark of swarm intelligence.
• In the context of technology and cybersecurity, the principles of swarm intelligence have inspired the development of algorithms and systems that mimic these natural processes to solve complex problems. For instance, swarm optimization algorithms have been applied to network security, enabling the dynamic and autonomous reconfiguration of networks into threats, much like a swarm of bees adjusting their behavior into an intruder.
• The concept of swarm intelligence holds significant potential for the future of warfare and defense strategies. The deployment of autonomous drone swarms, for example, could revolutionize military operations by providing scalable and adaptable force projection, reconnaissance, and threat neutralization capabilities. These swarms, guided by swarm intelligence principles, could autonomously navigate complex environments, make decentralized decisions, and execute coordinated actions without direct human intervention.

Biomimicry and Swarm Intelligence

Biomimicry, in the context of swarm intelligence, is a fascinating and innovative approach that seeks to emulate the strategies and mechanisms found in nature to solve complex human challenges, particularly in the fields of technology, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence.  This concept is predicated on the understanding that biological systems, through millions of years of evolution, have developed highly efficient methods to deal with problems related to survival, communication, and adaptation. By observing and understanding these natural processes, we can derive principles that can be applied to enhance the design and functionality of technological systems:

• Swarm intelligence, as previously discussed, is a prime example of biomimicry in action. It draws inspiration from the collective behavior of social insects, such as ants, bees, and termites, which demonstrate an incredible ability to organize, make decisions, and solve problems without central control or direct supervision. These organisms rely on simple rules and local interactions, which, when aggregated across the swarm, result in complex and adaptive behaviors.
• Also – as discussed above – in the realm of technology and cybersecurity, applying the principles of biomimicry and swarm intelligence can lead to the development of robust defense mechanisms against cyber threats:  The analogy of the Cambrian Explosion, as described by Gill Pratt, highlights the potential for rapid and transformative growth in robotic capabilities and artificial intelligence, driven by advancements in technologies like Cloud Robotics and Deep Learning.  This underscores the importance of biomimicry in fostering a virtuous cycle of innovation and growth in the technological domain.
• Biomimicry, as it relates to swarm intelligence, represents a paradigm shift in how we approach problem-solving and design in technology and cybersecurity:  By harnessing the wisdom of nature, we can develop systems that are not only more effective and resilient but also harmonious with the natural world. This approach challenges us to rethink our traditional notions of intelligence, control, and organization and opens up new avenues for innovation and discovery.

Future Scenarios:   Geopolitics, National Security, and Network Swarms

“As we look to the future, the role of network swarms in shaping the landscape of conflict and security is likely to grow, demanding a reevaluation of traditional paradigms of warfare and defense.”

Future scenarios that emerged from a discussion of network swarms and the future of global conflict and warfare are both intriguing and somewhat unsettling.  However, it’s not all doom and gloom: these challenges also present opportunities for innovation in defense, security, and governance. The development of countermeasures to network swarms, the strengthening of critical infrastructure, and the fostering of international cooperation to combat the threat of adversarial non-state actors by a nation-state are all avenues through which we can mitigate these risks.

The fact remains, however, that most pragmatic, stoic, clear-eye future scenarios suggest a world where the lines between warfare, security, and societal stability are increasingly blurred, driven by the rapid evolution of technology and the decentralization of power.  The scenarios:

Scenario #1: The proliferation of global guerrillas, leveraging network swarms to conduct asymmetric warfare on an unprecedented scale:  These non-state actors, empowered by the democratization of technology, could challenge state actors in ways previously unimaginable. The Hungarian COLLMOT Robotic Research Project’s drones that self-organize to overcome obstacles and the U.S. Office of Naval Research’s autonomous swarming robot boats 1 are harbingers of this future, where swarms of drones could be used for surveillance, disruption, or direct attack, complicating traditional defense mechanisms.

Scenario #2: The rise of a new form of netwar, where decentralized networks of global guerrillas engage in swarming attacks against critical infrastructure, exploiting the vulnerabilities of interconnected systems:  This form of warfare would not only target physical assets but also seek to undermine trust in institutions and destabilize societies through disinformation campaigns, leveraging the vast and exponentially growing amounts of information that can be shared globally.

Scenario #3: An increase in the privatization of violence and the emergence of many small, but interconnected conflicts that overwhelm the ability of governments and international institutions to manage.  Furthermore, the ongoing proliferation of commercial technologies and weapons, supported by states that seek to use such groups as proxies, could enhance the threats posed by these forces.

Scenario #4: The evolving landscape of global conflict suggests a future where the dichotomy between non-nation-state swarms and the traditional kinetic power of nation-states becomes increasingly pronounced and in direct, constant, regional and global conflict:  This divergence heralds a new era of warfare, characterized by asymmetry, unpredictability, and the blurring of lines between conventional and unconventional tactics.  This scenario would also include non-nation-state actors, leveraging network swarms, and engaging in highly disruptive, asymmetric warfare tactics that specifically exploit the vulnerabilities of traditional state militaries. These actors, unencumbered by the bureaucratic and hierarchical constraints that often slow down state responses, could deploy swarms of drones or cyber-attacks with speed and precision, targeting critical infrastructure, military assets, and even civilian populations to sow chaos and undermine state power.

What Next?

Keep in mind that the implications of swarm intelligence also extend beyond these immediate scenarios in technology and defense. They challenge our traditional notions of intelligence, control, and organization, suggesting that in certain contexts, decentralized and distributed approaches can outperform centralized and hierarchical ones. This insight has profound implications for how we design systems, manage organizations, and understand intelligence itself.  Given the transformative potential of swarm intelligence, it also prompts us to consider how these principles could be applied across various domains, from enhancing cybersecurity measures to innovating new business models and operational strategies.

Ethical and Legal Considerations – Including the Inevitable “Unintended Consequences”

The rise of network swarms raises ethical and legal questions, particularly regarding accountability and the potential for unintended consequences. The decentralized nature of these systems complicates efforts to attribute actions to specific actors, a challenge that is further exacerbated in the context of international law and norms governing conflict.  In the broader scheme, the concept of network swarms represents a paradigm shift in the way we conceive of and engage in conflict. It underscores the need for innovative strategies that can effectively counter these capabilities while also navigating the ethical, legal, and strategic complexities they introduce.

The Development of Countermeasures, the Strengthening of Critical Infrastructure, and the Fostering of International Cooperation

In response to adversarial network swarms, nation-states might escalate their investment in anti-swarm technologies, electronic warfare capabilities, and cyber defenses, aiming to neutralize the threat posed by non-nation-state swarms. This arms race could lead to the development of more autonomous, AI-driven defense systems capable of rapid, independent decision-making to counter swarm attacks.    However, the rapid pace of technological advancements and the increasing sophistication of non-nation-state actors’ tactics could outpace the ability of traditional militaries to adapt, creating a perpetual cycle of escalation. 

Alternatively, the future of combating adversarial network swarms demands a sophisticated, multi-pronged strategy consisting of the development of the abovementioned countermeasures, the strengthening of critical infrastructure, and the fostering of international cooperation:

The development of countermeasures against network swarms necessitates a leap in our current understanding and capabilities in cybersecurity:  Given the rapid rise of artificial intelligence and quantum computing, we are entering an era where the speed and complexity of attacks, including those from adversarial network swarms, will significantly increase.  To counter this, we must invest in AI-driven defense mechanisms that can not only detect but also predict and neutralize threats in real time. This involves leveraging machine learning to automate vulnerability discovery and the deployment of deception tactics such as honeypots to disrupt and mislead attackers.   The creation of autonomous systems capable of understanding adversarial behavior and dynamically generating countermeasures will be crucial. IBM’s prototype autonomous malware, DeepLocker, which uses a neural network to select its targets, offers a glimpse into the potential of such technologies.

Strengthening critical infrastructure is equally critical:  The U.S. military’s approach to building resilience across every link and node of its operations, from sensors to attack platforms and information networks, provides a blueprint for how critical infrastructure can be fortified.  This includes the adoption of large numbers of low-cost and attritable platforms to support intelligence collection, communication, logistics, and attack, especially during the initial stages of a cyber campaign. Moreover, strategic resilience will depend heavily on our ability to harden the nation’s critical infrastructure against cyber-attacks, a task that requires both technological innovation and regulatory frameworks to ensure compliance and accountability.

International cooperation is the third pillar of this strategy:  The complexity and global nature of cyber threats necessitate a collaborative approach to defense. Initiatives like NATO’s agreement to rely on sovereign cyber effects in to cyber-attacks illustrate the potential of international cooperation in imposing costs on attackers and deterring future attacks.  However, fostering such cooperation extends beyond formal alliances. It involves creating norms and frameworks for cyber conduct, sharing threat intelligence, and coordinating responses to cyber incidents.  The challenge here is not just technical but also diplomatic, requiring sustained efforts to build trust and consensus among nations with diverse interests and capabilities.  In envisioning the role of international cooperation in combating adversarial network swarms and strengthening critical infrastructure, it is imperative to consider how such collaboration can be structured to maximize effectiveness while respecting the sovereignty and security concerns of all participants. The path forward will likely involve a combination of bilateral agreements, multilateral forums, and informal networks, all aimed at fostering a unified threat that knows no borders.

NOTE:  This OODA Loop Original Analysis was partially generated with the cognitive augmentation of and in collaboration with ALTzero Project – MattGPT.

Additional OODA Loop Resources

For previous OODA Loop News Briefs and Original Analysis on this topic, see OODA Loop|Drones  OODA Loop | Swarm

The Defense Intelligence Agency on the Iranian-backed Drone Power of Russia and the Houthis:  Two recently declassified Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) reports extensively detail the Iranian-backed drone capabilities fueling the reconfiguration of global warfare into a drone swarm architecture – fueling what John Robb has framed as the future: asymmetric, non-nation-state kinetic capabilities organized into drone swarms enhancing the ability for warfighting capabilities “networked tribes” and “global guerrillas” usurping that of traditional military doctrine and the monopoly on the threat of violent conflict traditionally held exclusively by nation-states.

Drones and Port Security:  OODA Network Members John P. Sullivan and George W. Davis, along with co-author Tom Adams, have penned a report based on a geospatial security assessment for the Port of Brownsville, Texas (which “holds the distinction of being the sole deep-water port situated directly on the US-Mexico border”). Details of the report here.

The Network Swarm Attack on Israel and the Escalating Global Networked War:  Intelligence Failure? Black Swan? Gray Rhino? Systemic Failure? An entropic, sclerotic Israeli political system? The geopolitical and regional power context for the recent surprise, large scale and violent Hamas attack of Israel may prove to be “all of the above”. What is clear is the attack was designed as a large scale, kinetic and digital “network swarm” – which now opens up a new, “formal” kinetic front in the ongoing, global networked war in the Middle East. Swarm dynamics are a crucial mental model – which we apply here to the Hamas network swarm attack of Israel.

Russian Invasion of Ukraine: Russia’s aggression against Ukraine prompts global repercussions on supply chains and cybersecurity. This act highlights potential threats from nations like China and could shift defense postures, especially in countries like Japan. See: Russia Threat Brief

Israel and Gaza: The horrors of war in the region are also giving rise to uncertainty in markets, but for now it seems the war will not spread throughout the Middle East. There were many initiatives between Israel and Arab/Persian nations that have been stalled due to the war.

Economic Weakness in China: China’s economy faces dim prospects exacerbated by disasters, COVID-19, and geopolitical tensions. Amid limited financial transparency, some indicators suggest China’s economic growth is severely stunted, impacting global economic stability. See: China Threat Brief

Networked Extremism: The digital era enables extremists worldwide to collaborate, share strategies, and self-radicalize. Meanwhile, advanced technologies empower criminals, making corruption and crime interwoven challenges for global societies. See: Converging Insurgency, Crime and Corruption

Food Security and Inflation: Food security is emerging as a major geopolitical concern, with droughts and geopolitical tensions exacerbating the issue. Inflation, directly linked to food security, is spurring political unrest in several countries. See: Food Security

Demographic Time Bomb: Industrialized nations face demographic challenges, with a growing elderly population outnumbering the working-age demographic. Countries like Japan and China are at the forefront, feeling the economic and social ramifications of an aging society. See: Global Risks and Geopolitical Sensemaking

Geopolitical-Cyber Risk Nexus: The interconnectivity brought by the Internet has made regional issues affect global cyberspace. Now, every significant event has cyber implications, making it imperative for leaders to recognize and act upon the symbiosis between geopolitical and cyber risks. See The Cyber Threat

Embracing Corporate Intelligence and Scenario Planning in an Uncertain Age: Apart from traditional competitive challenges, businesses also confront external threats, many of which are unpredictable. This environment amplifies the significance of Scenario Planning. It enables leaders to envision varied futures, thereby identifying potential risks and opportunities. All organizations, regardless of their size, should allocate time to refine their understanding of the current risk landscape and adapt their strategies. See: Scenario Planning