Systemic Warfare in the Networked Age
Operational Systems, Information Competition, and Cumulative Pressure
- Wu, Shaoyuan
Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0660-8232
Description
This working paper introduces systemic warfare as a form of contemporary conflict in which actors impose cumulative pressure across interconnected operational systems and information domains rather than relying on decisive battlefield outcomes. It distinguishes Operational System Warfare as the material dimension of systemic conflict and information competition as the interpretive dimension, and develops the Operational Node Criticality Score (ONCS) and Systemic Pressure Index (SPI) as analytical constructs for modeling node-level importance and system-level stress.
Abstract
Contemporary warfare is undergoing a structural transformation driven by the growing centrality of interconnected operational systems and networked information environments. Existing frameworks, from industrial warfare to network-centric warfare, emphasize either territorial control or information superiority, but provide limited tools for explaining how cumulative disruption across infrastructures generates strategic effects. This article introduces systemic warfare as a form of conflict in which actors seek to impose cumulative pressure across interconnected operational systems and information domains, rather than achieve decisive battlefield outcomes. Within this framework, Operational System Warfare (OSW) constitutes the material dimension of conflict, while information competition shapes its political and interpretive dynamics. To formalize this framework, the article develops two analytical constructs: the Operational Node Criticality Score (ONCS), capturing the structural importance of infrastructure nodes, and the Systemic Pressure Index (SPI), representing the nonlinear accumulation of system-level stress across interdependent infrastructures. These constructs are intended as analytical tools for modeling interaction mechanisms rather than as directly observed empirical measures. Drawing on observations from the initial phase of the 2026 U.S.–Israel–Iran conflict, the analysis suggests that systemic pressure may accumulate nonlinearly as disruptions target increasingly critical nodes and propagate across interconnected systems. Sustained multi-domain actions can generate effects that appear to exceed the additive impact of individual strikes, reconfiguring the logic of warfare from discrete engagements toward system-level competition. The article contributes to the study of contemporary conflict in three ways: it reconceptualizes military effectiveness as system resilience under persistent disruption, introduces a formalized framework for analyzing cumulative pressure in networked conflict, and integrates operational and informational dynamics into a unified model of multi-domain warfare. More broadly, it argues that systemic warfare reflects a shift toward cumulative, system-level competition in which the interaction of material disruption and interpretive processes reshapes how strategic effects are generated.
Files
| Name | Type | |
|---|---|---|
| Systemic Warfare in the Networked Age.pdf Full-text PDF of the working paper | application/pdf | Download |
Keywords
- Systemic warfare
- Operational System Warfare
- OSW
- Operational Node Criticality Score
- ONCS
- Systemic Pressure Index
- SPI
- information competition
- network-centric warfare
- operational systems
- military infrastructure
- narrative competition
- multi-domain conflict
- strategic resilience
- cumulative pressure
- systemic pressure
- operational nodes
- interpretive amplification
- critical infrastructure interdependence
- U.S.–Israel–Iran conflict
- AI-mediated strategic risk
- EPINOVA Working Paper F-Series
Subjects
- Strategic Studies
- Military Operations
- Systemic Warfare
- Operational System Warfare
- Information Competition
- Network-Centric Warfare
- Multi-Domain Conflict
- Critical Infrastructure
- Narrative Competition
- System Resilience
- Operational Node Criticality
- Systemic Pressure Modeling
- International Security
- AI-Mediated Strategic Risk
Recommended citation
Wu, Shaoyuan. (2026). Systemic Warfare in the Networked Age: Operational Systems, Information Competition, and Cumulative Pressure (EPINOVA Working Paper No. EPINOVA–WP–F–2026–07). Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19078936. DOI: To be assigned after Crossref membership approval.
APA citation
Wu, S. (2026). Systemic warfare in the networked age: Operational systems, information competition, and cumulative pressure (EPINOVA Working Paper No. EPINOVA–WP–F–2026–07). Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19078936. DOI: To be assigned after Crossref membership approval.
Alternate identifiers
| Scheme | Identifier | Description |
|---|---|---|
| EPINOVA Working Paper Number | EPINOVA–WP–F–2026–07 | Working paper number shown in the PDF |
| DOI | 10.5281/zenodo.19078936 | Zenodo/DataCite DOI shown in the PDF recommended citation |
| DOI | 10.5281/zenodo.19078935 | Earlier DOI value from ORCID-derived metadata; retained for reconciliation |
| ORCID put-code | 208799838 | ORCID Public API record identifier from early metadata |
| File name | Systemic Warfare in the Networked Age.pdf | Source PDF file name |
| Short citation | Wu (2026), Systemic Warfare in the Networked Age, EPINOVA Working Paper F–2026–07 | Short citation implied by the EPINOVA working paper format |
Related works
| Relation | Identifier | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preceding EPINOVA Working Paper F-Series work that compares industrial and network-oriented operational logics and provides a conceptual foundation for systemic warfare analysis | 10.5281/zenodo.18972327 | ||
| Related EPINOVA policy brief referenced in the PDF for platform-node and narrative competition analysis | 10.5281/zenodo.19027188 | ||
| Related EPINOVA analytical platform used as supporting source for conflict cost and systemic pressure context | https://epinova.org/articles/f/2026-middle-east-conflict-cost-monitor-mccm |
References
- AIPAMS Analytical Platform. (2026). 2026 U.S. & allies–Iran conflict cost monitor (MCCM): An event-driven, daily expenditure and loss scenarios assessment series. https://epinova.org/articles/f/2026-middle-east-conflict-cost-monitor-mccm
- Alberts, D. S., Garstka, J. J., & Stein, F. P. (2000). Network-centric warfare: Developing and leveraging information superiority. CCRP.
- Associated Press. (2026, March 11). U.S. medical equipment company Stryker says cyberattack disrupted its global networks. https://apnews.com/article/stryker-cyberattack-iran-medical-equipment-products-8dd418618a3bd4fa4c97caf7978c11ee
- Boyd, J. (1996). The essence of winning and losing. Unpublished briefing.
- Cebrowski, A. K., & Garstka, J. J. (1998). Network-centric warfare: Its origin and future. Proceedings, 124(1), 28–35.
- Clausewitz, C. von. (1976). On war (M. Howard & P. Paret, Eds. & Trans.). Princeton University Press.
- Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019). Weaponized interdependence: How global economic networks shape state coercion. International Security, 44(1), 42–79.
- Helbing, D. (2013). Globally networked risks and how to respond. Nature, 497(7447), 51–59.
- Hoskins, A., & O’Loughlin, B. (2015). Arrested war: The third phase of mediatization. Information, Communication & Society, 18(11), 1320–1338.
- Keegan, J. (1993). A history of warfare. Vintage.
- Mazarr, M. J. (2019). Understanding deterrence. RAND Corporation.
- Nye, J. S. (2010). The future of power. PublicAffairs.
- Rid, T. (2013). Cyber war will not take place. Oxford University Press.
- Rinaldi, S. M., Peerenboom, J. P., & Kelly, T. K. (2001). Identifying, understanding, and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 21(6), 11–25.
- The Wall Street Journal. (2026, March 16). Hack on U.S. medical company shows reach of Iran’s cyber capabilities. https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/hack-on-u-s-medical-company-shows-reach-of-irans-cyber-capabilities-85999878
- Valeriano, B., & Maness, R. C. (2015). Cyber war versus cyber realities. Oxford University Press.
- Warden, J. A. (1995). The air campaign: Planning for combat. National Defense University Press.
- Wu, S. (2026a). Industrial War and Network War: Operational Logics in the Russia–Ukraine War and the U.S.–Israel–Iran Conflict (v1.0). Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18972327
- Wu, S. (2026b). Terminal platform nodes and narrative competition in the U.S.–Israel–Iran conflict (Policy Brief No. EPINOVA–2026–PB–13). Global AI Governance and Policy Research Center, EPINOVA LLC. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19027188