text: Generating and Applying Combat Power
  and sensitivity to friendly casualties. Peer threats believe they have a comparative advantage because of their
  willingness to endure greater hardships, casualties, and negative public opinion. They also believe their
  ability to pursuelong-term goals is greater than that of the United States.
  Peer threats employ capabilities from and across multiple domains against Army forces, and they seek
  to exploit vulnerabilities in all strategic contexts. During conflict, peer threats seek to inflict significant
  damage across multiple domains in a short amount of time. They seek to delay friendly forces long enough
  to achieve their goals and end hostilities before friendly forces can decisively respond.
  THREAT METHODS
  Peer threats use various methods to render U.S. military power irrelevant whenever possible. Five
  broad peer threat methods, often used in combination during conventional or irregular conflicts, and below
  the threshold of conflict, include—
  (cid:122) Information warfare.
  (cid:122) Systems warfare.
  (cid:122) Preclusion.
  (cid:122) Isolation.
  (cid:122) Sanctuary.
  Information Warfare
  In the context of the threat, information warfare refers to a threat’s orchestrated use of information
  activities (such as cyberspace operations, electronic warfare, and psychological operations) to achieve
  objectives. Operating under a different set of ethics and lawsthan the United States, and under the cloak of
  anonymity, peer threats conduct information warfare aggressively and continuously to influence populations
  and decision makers. They can also use information warfare to create destructive effects during competition
  and crisis. During armed conflict, peer threats use information warfare in conjunction with other methods to
  achieve strategic and operational objectives.
  Note. Threat forces use the term electronic warfare, which differs from U.S. doctrine’s use of
  electromagnetic warfare. Electronic warfare consists of the measures threats conduct to control or
  deny friendly use of the electromagnetic spectrum, while ensuring its use by the threat. For U.S.
  forces, electromagnetic warfare is military action involving the use of electromagnetic and
  directed energy to control the electromagnetic spectrum or to attack the enemy (JP 3-85).
  Threats seek to employ information warfare to attack or disrupt in depth, including within the
  continental United States, viewing it as a low-cost and low-risk activity. A cyberspace attack may disrupt
  U.S. infrastructure that impedes deployment of forces, or a disinformation campaign can reduce morale and
  the will to fight. In some situations, threats use proxies for information warfare to achieve policy aims without
  having to incur the risks associated with employing military forces or official government entities.
  Peer threats typically have fewer policy and legal restrictions than U.S. forces on how they employ
  information warfare, giving them an initial advantage. They exploit the nature of open societies while
  restricting their population’s access to information. They often obscure their activities to prevent detection
  or attribution.
  Peer threats are free to sow disinformation among U.S. and allied populations while at the same time
  strictly limiting access to and manipulating the information their own populations receive. They employ all
  available means to influence a wide range of audiences, including both civilian and military and domestic
  and international, in support of their goals. Information warfare is a means to exploit shared cultural norms,
  historical grievances, and a self-serving interpretation of international law to limit U.S. military options and
  degrade U.S. political will. Peer threats use diverse means to conduct information warfare, and these means
  may include—
  (cid:122) Cyberspace operations.
  (cid:122) Perception management.