Responding to War and Warfare in the

Sixth Wave of Innovation (2020-2045)

By 2020 we would have entered the Sixth Wave of Innovation (6WoI). Some experts claim the
sixth wave has already started around 2015. As per Schumpeter’s Cycles/waves of innovation
that define the economic system of the world, currently we are running the 5 th wave of
innovation based on software, digital networks and new media (1990-2020)1. This wave is going
to give way to the sixth wave of innovation which will be based2 on (a) Things becoming Nano,
Networked, Autonomous and Hypersonic, through (2) Computational approaches based on
Algorithmic intelligence and Quantum Computing, and thereby providing (3) ability to
synthesize reality, biology and energy.

Creative Destruction

As pointed out by Schumpeter3 the new wave of technological innovation also brings along the
creative destruction. He writes, “Process of industrial mutation, incessantly revolutionizes the
economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new
one”.

The sixth wave of innovation, however, also is coupled this time with shaking up of the world
order. One can say, so were the previous waves – start of 5th wave (1990-2020) was also the
demise of Soviet Union and end of cold war albeit with a new war on Iraq – the 1991 Gulf War.
Similarly, the 4th wave of innovation (1950-1990) driven by petrochemicals, Electronics and
Aviation started after the colossal World War II.

Globalization and Anti-Globalization – What has changed in the 5th Wave of Innovation (1990-
2020)

Has the world changed more in last 30 years than it changed in previous 30 years? Is the new world after
the end of cold war changing much more rapidly compared to the world that was on tight leash by the
opposing superpowers? From 1989 to 2019 we definitely have come a long way ahead. One may argue
that will always be the case in any 30 years period. Would one say that from 1959 – 1989 world changed
much less than it changed from 1989-2019? Or is this question immaterial?

Definitely last thirty years has given us a tremendously fast-paced connected world, some may argue
connected dangerously and some may argue pacing dangerously – as some small event in one part may
have unprecedented effect on the whole world. The world built on information superstructure that has

1
https://www.economist.com/special-report/2014/08/11/catch-the-wave
2
http://www.crafitti.com/sixth-woi.html
3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism,_Socialism_and_Democracy
been in the making for many decades after Second World War, has definitely shaped the world that
impacts the whole world in unprecedented ways.

Amy Chuha in her book “World on Fire” 4describes "globalization has created a volatile concoction of
free markets and democracy that has incited economic devastation, ethnic hatred and genocidal
violence throughout the developing world." This is really the other side - the connected in the
globalizing world becomes haves and stronger haves, leaving the unconnected as have-nots. This is
potentially a dangerous disparity that can kill the very roots of globalization. Borders and cultures still
matter greatly. This is the identity that individuals and individual communities want to protect at huge
costs. There in lie the nemesis of standardization through technology enabled globalization. Hence a
backlash to globalization has started in this decade, surprisingly driven by nations who were
championing globalization in 1990s.

The first market crash after the word Globalization became a commodity was clear indication of how
complex the world that we have has become. Complicated new financial tools outpaced the
comprehension of regulators, bankers or customers. In fact, comprehension has gone for a toss –
although we are free but we are swamped with unprecedented choices – the explosion of choice is not
what human mind is able to absorb easily. This is the danger of complexity. When Globalization is the
focus - complexity increases without warning and it engulfs the world in dimensions not even
comprehensible. How to design globalization taking care of complexity is what Innovation should be
focusing on - therein is the play - the globalization, complexity and innovation as three-pronged world
dimensions need to be taken care of, simultaneously.

When western countries (read US) forced Indian and other Asian economies to open their markets in
late 1980s and early 1990s, west believed that they will get large markets for their products as well as
cheap labor to work for their leisure and pleasure. They forced economies to open through multiple
thrusts and forces that the so called poor protected economies had no means to push back. The poor
relented. In 1990s opening of Indian economy was criticized and generated a feeling of fear of new
products coming in India thus ending the so-called monopoly of existing players in protected economy.

Well, two decades later, the story has been turned on its head. It is the hunter who is feeling hunted
now. The Asian industries due to the strong innovation capability in a constrained environment that they
are used to, have created a much bigger impact due to spreading globalization - for the simple reason
that their people, are more used to ingenuity in adapting to change. And the change is what has
exploded due to globalization spread. In the Connected Age, the early adapters will thrive. The era of
lazy, leisure seeking, materialistic, automation dependent humans - in any society - either in US, Europe
or Asia is ending. We have entered the age of continuous creative work - that will lead to the future -
under constraints of living as per existing parameters of consuming natural resources. Some years back
an article in New Yorker noticed, “When we persuaded developing countries to open their doors to us,

4
https://www.amazon.com/World-Fire-Exporting-Democracy-Instability/dp/0385721862
we also opened our doors to them. Now they’re walking through5." Well, when doors are opened, traffic
is both ways.

Rise of China, Strategic Superpower Competition in Cyberspace and Digital Economy

The Global Order started changing at the end of 1980s and with the demise of Soviet Union and
an unprecedented display of modern military prowess through information technologies and
beaming of war operations in our drawing rooms in 1991 Gulf-war, a Uni-polar world was
announced. A decade later, 9/11 demonstrated that the type of technologies and integration
of various aspects of military mission that have been unleashed can be used by relatively small
and resource-crunched but intensely motivated or mind-washed have-nots of the world to
inflict damage through combination of networks, knowledge, motivation and cunning. US
continued to focus on Russia in 1990s and even early 2000s and was completely engaged with
the war on terror that it missed the rise of a new power – the people’s republic of China. In fact,
till last decade the Sino-US economies were considered too interlinked that there was some
thoughts of a joint Sino-US world economic order

However, this time the shakeup is happening in the forms that are not well-known (trade war
between not so sincere and genuine friends – US and China - since 19986 as stated by eminent
Chinese Scholar - Yan Xuetong. He further states and predicts that world is headed towards a
Bipolar Order that is different from cold war of the past in many aspects – especially as it is not
based on ideology but on technology and race for national power. However, the most
important aspect this “strategic competition” differs is in the form and shape it is taking in an
unchartered territory of cyberspace and digital economy. We are moving towards an uncertain,
unstable and chaotic state of the world affairs with everyone having mistrust of the
superpowers as well as the multilateral treaties and structures.

It’s time to Define - Cyberspace

What do we mean by Cyberspace? What about Cyber Warfare? Cyber Security? There doesn't
seem to be a definition that is agreed upon.

“Cyberspace” – Definitions Deluge – What it is? Pentagon – which can be credited with the
creation of ARPANET in 1970s – a precursor to perhaps one of the greatest disruptions of
humanity in the last century - the Internet – has provided at least 12 definitions of “Cyberspace”
over the years. The latest being the year 2008 definition, “The global domain within the
information environment consisting of the interdependent networks of information technology
infrastructures, including the Internet, telecom networks, computer systems, and embedded
processors and controllers”.

5
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/01/28/the-tata-invasion
6
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1157022.shtml#.XSN1quFpitU.linkedin
Singer and Friedman in their book, “Cybersecurity and Cyberwar – what everyone needs to
know”7, describe cyberspace as

“Cyberspace is the realm of computer networks (and the users behind them) in which
information is stored, shared, and communicated online”.

The book further list down the key feature of cyberspace as - an information environment
made up of digitized data that is created, stored, and most importantly shared. It is not the data
alone, but it includes the networks of computers, infrastructure, Internet, Intranets, and other
communication systems that allow information, organized as digital data, to flow. Since the
authors include people/users of the information structures as well, the definition includes
cognitive realm, besides the physical and digital spaces as well.

Cyberspace may be global but it has its divisions and notions of sovereignty, nationality and
property. Cyberspace is “living” – constantly changing, evolving. Unlike geography the
cyberspace geography is much more mutable. Evolving from an initial “expert” only place, it has
become the nervous system controlling the economy and has already become the dominant
platform for life in 21st Century. Internet is where we live – central platform for business,
culture and personal relationship. However, it is a place where everyone doesn’t play nice.
Increasingly it has become a place of risk and danger.

Cyberspace-X Given the above centrality of “cyberspace” in our life, we see the emergence of
multi-hued specific context “cyberspaces”. These “specific context cyberspaces” would prefer
to be disjoint – or “air-gapped” – from the global cyberspace – for different reasons (such as
privacy, security, niche nature of transactions and/or specific functionality, features or
fraternity), yet these will use and allow the core technologies for the digital data, infrastructure,
protocols, software, rules, computers and communication systems that are used to build “the
global cyberspace”. We call these special context Cyberspaces as Cyberspace-X.

The general-purpose Cyberspace-X may include but is not limited to - Strategic Cyber Space
(e.g., MNCs, Large enterprises, National Governments), Politico-military/Military Cyber Space,
Governance Cyber Space, Open market places/ e-Commerce/auction exchanges, Social
networks, Vehicular (say in a train or a ship), etc.

Definition of Cyberspace-X

The specific context cyber spaces (calling it Cyberspace-X) is information, communication,

computing and decision environment where digital data is created, stored, exchanged, flows,
and updated for assisting, enabling, and making various actors (automatons and humans) enact
their roles, perform their functions, and achieve their objectives, over the computer networks.

7
https://www.amazon.com/Cybersecurity-Cyberwar-Everyone-Needs-
Know%C2%AE/dp/0199918112/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1465408825&sr=1-
1&keywords=cybersecurity+and+cyberwar+what+everyone+needs+to+know
The networks and cyberspace are potentially vulnerable to unauthorized actors who may have
opposing objectives to the actors belonging and authorized to the cyberspace. These objectives
may include disrupting, degrading, damaging, destroying, and even demolishing the
components, capabilities, and infrastructure of Cyberspace-X.

Cyberspace strategic competition is new form of warfare in the Multi-dimensional warfare

As I mentioned in my previous article8, we have identified 15 dimensions of warfare including

the Cyberspace and Economic Warfare. Further, we are witnessing a change in the character of
warfare in these dimensions along with strategic switching from one dimension to another as
an offset strategy. Cyberspace Strategic Competition in a digital economy that is transitioning to
the sixth wave of innovation through creative destruction of established economic systems is
sure shot recipe for increasing entropy of the repolarizing world.

Goals and Objectives of 15-D warfare in the Sixth wave of innovation

The truism captured in the dictum “war is politics by other means” need to be relooked in the “new”
warfare – with a caveat warfare indeed is either new or different from what we have seen or known
before. War has always been one of the means to achieve political goals. Nature of war as a violent
means to inflict damage or cost on the adversary for diplomatic, political, economic reasons or
ownership of resources has remained same. The question to be explored, analyzed and perhaps
understood through potentially a new framework of warfare how much and in what form the political
goals that have historically driven wars between nation states has changed, mutated or will evolve in the
new dimensions that have emerged or may emerge in future.

Indian defence capability for the wars in the Sixth wave of Innovation (2020-2045)

Creating the defence forces, their doctrine and their equipment for this sixth wave of
innovation are questions that we need to answer. These force structures, systems and
doctrines need to respond to threats that will also be evolving in the sixth wave of innovation.

Starting point of course is to clearly understand the Goals and Objectives of India in emerging
world. The emerging world is displaying upheavals or instability in the emerging strategic
landscape of potential bipolarity which will be stable, with technology driven creative-
destruction of the established world economic system where means of production and skills
needed to operate are substantially being transferred to non-human systems. Further, the
opaqueness of the substrate on which our human oriented conflict-dynamics played historically
has changed and is changing rapidly into interconnected and interdependent systems of
unprecedented complexity. We are truly perplexed to operate in this substrate of man-made
dimensions.

8
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/war-as-a-multi-dimensional-whole-a-framework-for-india-in-a-
repolarizing-world/
While we do need to change military structures, the political requirements for going to war
need to be seen - are these changing? Thus, what will be the political aim - defend the territory
or destroy the enemy? Is India going to fight an adversary who has military or will it be non-
state actors or surrogate organizations designed for hybrid or asymmetric wars with
asymmetric instruments of war9? Maneuver aims at the enemy's mind as against the physical
destruction of men and material in attrition war. In the 15-D warfare what will be maneuver –
will it be multi-dimensional pain-inflicting capability or will it be encirclement, dimension by
dimension? What will defeat the enemy? Physical casualties or total disruption of the systems
of administration and governance? What will be defeat or victory? Are we moving towards a
continuous orientation of resources and switching of conflicts in these dimensions? These
aspects will dictate the force structures and weapons systems required. The war ends when
one government accepts defeat/ceasefire. Are these changing? Perhaps we are moving to an
era where wars will co-exist with peace, only the eclectic mix will have characteristics that will
vary dimension to dimension? We are not going to kill each other in millions as we did in 20th
century wars, but will we not be continuously, comprehensively and certainly at the throats of
each other – an era of multi-level mis-trust between global and regional powers or at even
smaller nations levels?

These questions do not have straightforward answers.

We propose following three initiatives for Indian defence and security establishment to develop
and create for the Warfare and wars in the sixth wave of innovation

Develop a New Theory of War, Warfare and Combat for the Sixth Wave of Innovation (2020-
2045) – Systems Approach to discover, define, describe, develop, design and deploy and
operate the new forces and also how will India fight these wars and political reasons or goals
that will need us to go to war in a dimension against a particular adversary

Theory of war, warfare and combat, as defined in the previous centuries are based on
Clausewitz and two specific approaches to combat – attrition and maneuver in the general
sense. Combined with Boyd’s OODA loop and dismantlement of Clauswitzian center of gravity
of the opponent, the theory has remained deeply ingrained in the defence structuring and
development of the nations at large.

The first two decades of this century, however, have shown the inadequacy of the theory to
explain the type of wars and the changing character of war that has emerged. Nations and
powers are playing war in all 15 dimensions that we have identified. The Chinese Unrestricted
war proposed in 1999 and Russian Hybrid war since 2006 has also become multi-domain
war/operations including the so-called information domain.

9
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/winning-the-asymmetric-wars-matrix-of-instruments-of-war/
The 7th Revolution in Military Affairs10 – called the Autonomous/Robotic war will become more
and more pronounced as we move to the third decade of 21 st century. India should develop the
new theory of political goals, objectives and drivers and war, warfare and combat as the
Clausewitz “nature” of war that has remained invariant is already undergoing a change.

New methods for Defence and security Systems in Sixth Wave of Innovation

The Globalizing innovation Complexity of the 21st century has given us and is demanding
systems that are ultra-large-scale systems11. Further complexity of such system of systems at
internet scale has started demanding mechanisms that are becoming harder to surface for the
users to comprehend – for example, what is cyberspace really. This dumbing down of human
operators and users in the explosion of technological complexity requires us to find new
approaches to understand, operate and build such systems. Further, the chances of such
systems failing humanity and national infrastructures that are being built on them are
increasing in an opaque manner. We need new approaches for such systems – what methods
we use to design a building cannot be used to design a city. Scale requires new approaches for
defending and securing such systems in an increasing complexity of the globalizing world.

Scale, Computation, Algorithmic and Network (SCAN) Thinking for Warfare in the Sixth Wave
of Innovation

We have been using analytical and logical thinking for solving problems and developed
comprehensive toolsets, procedures and methodologies for applying such thinking to fulfil our
needs, capture opportunities and solve problems. We also have experienced with value
thinking, inventive thinking and systems thinking – although not to the extent of analysis and
logic. The new wave, however, is demanding us to develop and apply new forms of thinking in 4
new dimensions – Scale thinking12, Computational thinking13, Algorithmic thinking (Pentagon
already has an algorithmic warfare cell14) and Network thinking15 (The SCAN thinking
dimensions). It is essential that we develop our solutions, systems, force structures, doctrines
and combat capabilities for the 15-dimensional warfare in the sixth wave of innovation using
SCAN thinking besides utilizing the analytical, logical, value, inventive and systems thinking that
has helped us to respond in the previous waves.

Key Message – Creating an Indian capability for wars and warfare for sixth wave of
innovation

10
https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/parameters/issues/Winter_2017-18/5_Hoffman.pdf
11
https://resources.sei.cmu.edu/library/asset-view.cfm?assetid=30519
12
https://www.santafe.edu/news-center/news/geoffrey-wests-long-anticipated-book-scale-emerges
13
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_thinking
14
https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2017/05/pentagons-new-algorithmic-warfare-cell-gets-its-first-
mission-hunt-isis/137833/
15
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-77028-2_3
We are in a repolarizing world reflected in strategic superpower competition between US and
China in an unfathomable cyberspace and digital-economy territory that will give rise to new
type of bipolar world. Further, world economy is going through a new creative destruction
driven by things becoming nano, hypersonic, networked and autonomous. These are being
developed using new forms of algorithmic intelligence and quantum computing. An
unprecedented ability is coming to man with these technologies to synthesize biology, energy
and reality. This will give rise to a new wave of innovation which we call the sixth wave of
innovation (2020-2045). Since the wars in the sixth wave will be 15-dimensional, national
interests, our geo-political, geo-economic and strategic objectives need to be clearly
articulated. However, the clarity on the linkages between political objectives in the new world
and means to achieve them through war are becoming nebulous. The uncertainty and lack of
clarity on national objectives in the 15-dimension warfare exacerbated by the increasing
entropy of the world order, technology driven creative destruction of economic system and
increasing mutations of warfare requires a comprehensive rethink on how to defend and secure
the nation. Our forces and our defence capabilities need to be developed using the tools,
concepts and thinking for the sixth wave of innovation. We propose that a new theory of
political objectives and comprehensive detailing of national interests should be developed
along with new theory, new methods and new thinking be to create defence capabilities for
wars and warfare in the upcoming sixth wave of innovation. A tall order indeed, alas, it is
necessary now!

Acknowledgements

Author is deeply indebted to the editorial comments from the Indian Defence Review (IDR)
chief editor and also guidelines for increasing the scope of the article.

NavneetBhushan (Navneet) is a founder director of CRAFITTI CONSULTING

(www.crafitti.com) – an Strategy, Technology, Innovation and Intellectual Property
Consulting firm focused on co-crafting solutions for global problems. He is the winner of
Indira India Innovation award for Entrepreneurship and Innovation Leadership for 2012. He
is the principal author of Strategic Decision Making- Applying the Analytic Hierarchy
Process published by Springer-Verlag, UK, as part of the Decision Engineering Series. Navneet Blogs at
http://innovationcrafting.blogspot.com.He can be contacted at navneet(dot)bhushan(at) crafitti(dot)com