这份情报报告今年春天在与伊朗交战期间于美军内部传阅,立即拉响了警报:一艘在中东的中国船只正在运输核武器项目的部件。
据四位了解此事的人士称,美军随即行动起来,计划拦截该船只。其中两位消息人士称,美军武装人员正准备登船。其中一位消息人士和另一位了解此事的消息人士表示,军用飞机已经升空。
直到计划行动开始前,官员们才深入核查了这份由一名特种作战司令部分析师撰写的报告,发现它是在人工智能(AI)的帮助下生成的——而且该分析师使用的一个聊天机器人错误地识别了船上所载的物资。CNN 无法得知被误判的货物究竟是什么。
据其中一位消息人士称,这份报告“完全是假的”。但该消息人士说,它也“差点引发了一场战争”。美国对中国船只采取的任何行动,都可能升级为两国之间的武装冲突。
在美军和情报界,官员们正推动将 AI 融入其工作的几乎每一个环节,从分析美国收集的海量原始情报、为打击挑选目标,到预算管理、后勤和供应链等更为日常的应用。
但这一事件凸显出,在战争期间使用这种强大、新颖且相对而言仍未被充分理解的技术进行目标定位,存在极大的风险。分析人士长期以来一直担心,如果民族国家依赖糟糕或被污染的数据,AI 可能导致灾难性的误判——这种误判可能致使美国基于不准确的信息向一艘中国船只开火。
在这一具体案例中,该分析师就一份有关该船货物舱单的情报报告向一个聊天机器人进行了查询,该报告来源于驻夏威夷的美国太平洋特种作战司令部。目前尚不清楚该聊天机器人是市面上的商用产品还是美国政府的产品。
“这些内部工具基本上只是商用产品的翻版,涂了层口红而已,”一位熟悉军方和情报分析师所用 AI 系统的美国前高级官员表示。
该机器人将开源情报与政府持有的机密信号情报融合在一起,就该船所载货物得出了那个决定性的结论。
随后,该分析师再次使用 AI,将调查结果打包成一份标准的的情报报告——那种为军方官员所信任的报告——并将其分发出去。
美国太平洋特种作战司令部和五角大楼均未回应置评请求。
快速采用 AI 的理由在于,它可以帮助军方更快地做出战场决策,比如打击哪些目标,或者将哪些军事资产调往何处。官员们表示,美国承受不起在整合 AI 方面落后的代价,以防有朝一日必须与中国或其他对手作战,而后者可能具备领先美国一步的能力。
今年 1 月,国防部长 Pete Hegseth 发布了他所在机构的“人工智能加速战略”,旨在加快军方对 AI 的使用。
“我们将释放实验精神,消除官僚障碍,集中我们的投资,并展示确保我们在军事 AI 领域保持领先所需的执行方式,”Hegseth 在宣布该战略的演讲中表示。
战争部长 Pete Hegseth 于 2026 年 7 月 21 日在华盛顿特区国会山 Dirksen 参议院办公大楼举行的参议院拨款委员会听证会上作证。
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
该战略还推动 AI 在军队中的广泛使用,命令该部门通过多个项目提供 AI,目标是“将美国世界领先的 AI 模型直接交到我们三百万文职和军事人员手中,覆盖所有密级,从而在全部范围内实现 AI 实验与转型的民主化”,一份宣布该战略的备忘录表示。
但据多位了解相关动态的美国官员称,这项工作分散进行,政府不同部门在不同命令和安全标准下使用不同工具。对于美国如何核实这些工具生成的信息,并没有一套统一的标准。军方和情报界各不相同的角落所部署的一系列不同 AI 系统,意味着其相对可靠性和功能差异很大。
数周以来,在硅谷工程师和科技 CEO 们发出一系列严峻警告,称 AI 有可能摆脱人类约束、并可能带来终结文明的后果之后,华盛顿的政策制定者一直在激烈辩论 AI 问题。
但这次中国船只事件凸显出另一种更直接的风险:人类基于 AI 或其他自动化系统生成的不准确或误导性信息做出灾难性决策。消息人士称,军方正迅速转向使用 AI 来协助目标定位,而这一领域显然存在致命错误的风险。
“AI 在目标定位中的应用无疑正在加速,而对于让人类留在回路中如何防止平民伤亡或友军误伤,并没有真正的指导方针,”另一位了解军方现行政策的消息人士说。
据其中一位消息人士称,自这些工具开始在政府各部门扩散以来,本案中分析人员所用工具所产生的那种“模型幻觉”在整个情报界并非孤立事件。
对于一些较年长的情报官员来说——即便是那些广泛支持在军队内部使用 AI 的人——AI 已对分析人员施加压力,要求他们更快地产出和分发情报,从而为错误打开了大门。多位消息人士称,尤其是年轻的分析人员,他们是这些工具的原生使用者,更有可能不加批判地信任它们。
“AI 让你能更快地得到一个糟糕的想法,”其中一位消息人士说。
The intelligence report, circulated across the US military this spring in the midst of the war with Iran, immediately set off alarm bells: A Chinese ship in the Middle East was transporting components of a nuclear weapons program.
The US military swung into action with plans to intercept the vessel, according to four sources familiar with the episode. According to two of the sources, armed members of the US military were preparing to board the ship. Military planes were in the air, one of those sources and another source familiar with the incident said.
It was only just before the planned operation that officials dug deeper into the report put together by a special operations command analyst and found it had been generated with the help of artificial intelligence (AI) — and that a chatbot the analyst had used inaccurately identified the material the ship was carrying. CNN was not able to learn what the misidentified cargo was.
The report, according to one of the sources, was “entirely false.” But it also “almost started a war,” the source said. Any US operation against a Chinese vessel could have risked spiraling into an armed conflict between the two nations.
Across the US military and the intelligence community, officials are pushing to weave AI into nearly every facet of their work, from analyzing the huge volumes of raw intelligence the US collects and selecting targets for strikes, to more mundane applications like managing budgeting, logistics and supply chains.
But the episode underscores the profound risks of using this powerful, new and relatively poorly understood technology for targeting in the middle of a war. Analysts have long feared that AI could lead to a catastrophic miscalculation if nation states are relying on poor or corrupted data — the kind of miscalculation that might lead the United States to fire on a Chinese ship based on inaccurate information.
In this particular instance, the analyst queried a chatbot about some intelligence reporting on the ship’s manifest that originated with US Special Operations Command Pacific, based in Hawaii. It was not clear whether the chatbot was a commercially available one or a US government product.
“The internal tools are mostly just copies of the commercial stuff wearing lipstick,” a former senior US official familiar with the AI systems used by military and intelligence analysts.
The bot fused together open-source intelligence with secret signals intelligence in government holdings and reached its fateful conclusion about the material the ship was carrying.
The analyst then used AI again to package the findings into a standard intelligence report — the kind that is trusted by military officials — and disseminated it.
US Special Operations Command Pacific and the Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.
The rationale for the rapid adoption of AI is that it can help the military make battlefield decisions, like which targets to strike or which military assets to move where, faster. Officials say the US can’t afford to fall behind in integrating AI in case it must one day fight China or another adversary who would potentially be able to stay one step ahead of the US.
In January, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth released his agency’s “Artificial Intelligence Acceleration Strategy” in a bid to speed up the military’s use of AI.
“We will unleash experimentation, eliminate bureaucratic barriers, focus our investments and demonstrate the execution approach needed to ensure we lead in military AI,” Hegseth said in a speech announcing the strategy.
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on July 21, 2026 in Washington, DC.
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
The strategy also pushes for its broad use across the military, ordering the department to make AI available via several programs with the aim of “democratizing AI experimentation and transformation across the Department by putting America’s world-leading AI models directly in the hands of our three million civilian and military personnel, at all classification levels,” a memo announcing the strategy said.
But the effort is decentralized, multiple US officials familiar with the dynamic said, with different parts of the government using different tools under different orders and safety standards. There’s no one set of standards for how the US verifies the information generated by these tools. The constellation of different AI systems being deployed by disparate corners of the military and intelligence community means that the relative reliability and functionality vary widely.
For weeks, Washington policymakers have been intensely debating AI after a series of dire warnings from Silicon Valley engineers and tech CEOs of the possibility that AI could break free of human constraints, with potentially civilization-ending consequences.
But the episode with the Chinese ship underscores a different, and more immediate risk: human beings making disastrous decisions based on inaccurate or misleading information generated by AI or other automated systems. Sources said that the military is rapidly turning to AI to help with targeting, an area which holds the obvious risk of fatal mistakes.
“AI in targeting is definitely something that is ramping up and there is no real guidance for how having a human in the loop will prevent civilian casualties or fratricide,” another source familiar with the military’s current policies said.
The kind of “hallucination” that the tool used by the analyst in this case conjured has not been an isolated incident across the intelligence community since these tools began proliferating across government, according to one of the sources.
For some older intelligence officials — even those who broadly support the use of AI inside the military — AI has put pressure on analysts to produce and disseminate intelligence faster, opening the door for mistakes. Young analysts in particular, several sources said, are natives on these tools and more likely to trust them uncritically.
“AI allows you to get to a bad idea faster,” one of the sources said.