On 23 January, Independent Journalism Centre’s portal Mediacritica featured an article about  cognitive warfare – a modern form of confrontation in which the target is not territory, infrastructure, or armed forces – but the human mind. More specifically, it seeks to influence how people think, interpret reality, make decisions, and respond emotionally to information.

According to NATO’s Annual Report on Cognitive Warfare, published at the end of last year, cognitive warfare is defined as:

“The deliberate exploitation of human cognitive processes in order to disrupt, undermine, influence, or modify decision-making by altering human behaviour and cognition, using any available means, including advanced technologies.”

In simple terms, cognitive warfare does not attempt to take away our freedom by force – it aims to make us give it up ourselves, through confusion and distrust.

Beyond propaganda and disinformation

The report makes clear that cognitive warfare goes beyond traditional propaganda or disinformation. If propaganda seeks to persuade, cognitive warfare seeks to influence how we think, not merely what we think.

The objective is not necessarily to convince the public of a specific falsehood, but to weaken people’s ability to judge clearly. The target is not a single opinion, but the very capacity for rational decision-making.

In this context, information becomes a tool used to generate confusion, doubt, fear, or polarisation. When trust in institutions, media, or reliable sources erodes, societies become more vulnerable.

Unlike conventional conflicts, cognitive warfare is continuous and pervasive, especially in online environments such as social media platforms, video channels, comment sections, influencer content, and emotionally charged posts that may appear trivial but carry psychological impact.

Information Warfare vs. Cognitive Warfare

While information warfare focuses on messages – what is said, distorted, or concealed – cognitive warfare focuses on effects:
How do people feel?
How do they react?
What decisions do they make – or avoid making?

NATO experts underline that emotions are as significant as facts in this type of confrontation. Fear, anger, perceived injustice, and distrust can all be deliberately exploited to weaken social cohesion and democratic resilience.

In cognitive warfare, there are no purely military targets. Ordinary citizens, journalists, opinion leaders, public institutions, and democratic processes – including elections – may all become targets. Democratic societies are considered particularly vulnerable precisely because they are open, pluralistic, and built on freedom of expression. These values can be exploited to amplify division and mistrust.

The role of technology

Technology plays a central role in cognitive warfare. Artificial intelligence, recommendation algorithms, and access to personal data enable highly targeted messaging tailored to individual psychological profiles.

Deepfakes, manipulated content, and information taken out of context can make reality itself appear uncertain. As the NATO report warns, when people can no longer distinguish between what is real and what is false, their ability to make informed decisions is significantly impaired.

Why awareness matters

Cognitive warfare unfolds daily in the information space we inhabit. Every share, every emotional reaction, and every unverified source can become part of a broader influence mechanism.

The core message of the NATO report is clear: awareness is the first line of defence. Critical thinking, verifying sources, and understanding how influence operates are essential tools for strengthening democratic resilience. In an age where the battlefield increasingly lies within perception and cognition, informed citizens are society’s most effective protection.

 Source: MediaCritica – #PEÎNȚELES. Ce reprezintă războiul cognitiv?
https://mediacritica.md/peinteles-ce-reprezinta-razboiul-cognitiv/