The Necessity of Transnational Warfare


A new type of warfare has sprung up in our era: transnational warfare. These are not wars between states; that was the old model: Germany attacks France, France takes Egypt, and so on. These, rather, are wars conducted only incidentally through states. And they present a serious threat to the future.

By now we’re all familiar with the four big transnational wars:

  • The War on Drugs

  • The War on Terror

  • The War on the Internet (Cybercrime)

  • The War on Cash

All four of these wars are being fought across borders… with just a polite hat tip to those borders as they step over. More importantly, these wars were begun with little or no explanation of how they were modifying the Westphalian order of states that has been the world model since 1648. They were well-sold to the public of course, with the typical and always-effective applications of fear, but how these wars would modify the world order and what might come of it was very little discussed.

A Brief Overview

Briefly, here are background facts on the big four:

The War on Drugs

The American “war on drugs” began in the early 20th century and has steadily escalated to the point where the Drug Policy Alliance estimates that it spends $51 billion per year, with absolutely disastrous results. It was sold initially as a quasi-racist and anti-immigrant measure, then escalated in the Nixon presidency as a sop to the conservative half of the country. (See FMP #11 for details.)

The war on drugs was the program that cleared the way for subsequent implementations of transnational warfare.

The War on Terror

This war, as we all know, took form after the 9/11 tragedy (though it was hardly new at that time). The costs of this war are well into the trillions of dollars and has a death toll in the hundreds of thousands. And of course, it is continuing as it moves through the Middle East and Africa.

The War on the Internet

This is a newer one, and the fear is ginned up every time some large entity gets hacked. (I will refrain from inserting a discussion on how the government-corporate alliance makes cyber-attacks inevitable.)

The War on Cash

Switzerland, Denmark, and other countries are now charging interest on deposits at their banks. France and Italy have banned any transaction over €1,000 from using physical cash; Spain has banned transactions over €2,500; and Uruguay has banned transactions over US$5,000. Furthermore, several countries have said they want to move to a cashless society.

Beyond this, the OECD, the US, and others are trying very hard to shut down offshore commerce.

The Reasons

Again very briefly, here are the reasons why Western governments require transnational warfare:

The sovereignty trap. Nation-state rule is being undermined by something I call a “sovereignty trap.” It works like this:

  1. The system of sovereign states requires the operators of nation states to respect borders and not to cross them without publicly declaring their reasons.

  2. By hiding in a state that can’t or won’t hurt them, criminal groups are insulated from the other states of the world. Al Qaeda for example hid for a long time in Sudan, then in Afghanistan. National borders can provide excellent protection for criminal groups.

Certain non-state organizations are able to create and support corrupt states, essentially renting their infrastructure and hiding behind their sovereignty. This strategy was held in check under a bipolar US/Soviet world, but it has since become viable. This is why the US, UK, and other large powers require transnational warfare; without it, they’d have to reconsider the system of sovereign states.

In addition to this, each of the big four carries its own reasons.

The war on drugs thrives on inertia. It is far too large for any politician to cut. Furthermore, it is surrounded by childish but effective rhetoric. (“So, you want children to have access to cocaine?”) And the US program, while clearly the largest, is far from alone.

The war on terror keeps militaries and intel groups rich and powerful. They are keeping US police departments rich as well. And at this point, a good deal of Western culture is focused around the war on terror; breaking the expectations of millions of people at once would call far more into question.

Uncontrolled information is bad for obedience. Thus the war on the Internet. Once minds get unfiltered information, thoughtless obedience tends to decline. At the same time, modern political systems are built on an assumption of near-100% obedience. Most Internet traffic has by now been routed into government-aligned systems like Facebook, and regulations to drive out noncompliant outlets are circulating in capital cities.

The war on cash protects governments from fiscal collapse. If the fiat currencies of the major nations collapse (as they must eventually), readily available cash and other untraceable currencies would make governance in its current form impossible. Therefore, they must be eliminated or controlled.


Beyond all this, the entire industrial model of civilization is fading away and must be maintained contrary to nature. You can find details on this in issue #65 of my subscription newsletter.

Paul Rosenberg

17 thoughts on “The Necessity of Transnational Warfare”

    1. I’m actually a long-term optimist. ๐Ÿ™‚
      It’s just that right now we have a lot of dark things standing before us. If we want hope for the near term, we’ll have to work for it.

      1. Having watched this trend ever since the very early 1960s, “working for it” is quite beyond me. Nothing I’ve observed has seemed to have worked at all. Almost all the major pols are in it for power and money. Our “leader” is a consummate joke. And those vying for the job just make me shake my head in disbelief. And the populace in general is entirely blind to the rigged game. ๐Ÿ™

        1. Sorry if I was unclear, Peter. I’m referring to progress outside the system.
          You’re right that inside the system is hopeless. It’s time to leave that mess behind and build better.

          1. I will look forward to any suggestions as to how that might be done…without being vanquished by the current powers. Do we all have to move elsewhere? Elsewhere already seems to imported the failed systems we have here.

          2. Pick a spot and start: Bitcoin, home school, 3D printing, intentional communities, temporary autonomous zones, agorism, etc., etc. If nothing else, you can always sit at the bus stop and talk to people.
            The “right time” never comes. Either we happen to the world, or the world happens to us.

          3. Good points. I’m 80 years old and just this year began writing a feature film script (have never tried this before) dealing with the “new” children appearing all over the world, often referred to as Indigo children. I hope you’ve heard of them. Utterly fascinating development apparently happening just about everywhere. That film, and a potential documentary or docudrama will be linked into the effort. I figure I’ve got at least 40 years in front of me! ๐Ÿ™‚

          4. Well, at 80, you don’t need to strain too much. ๐Ÿ™‚
            Indigo children: I’ve heard the idea, and it is certainly very encouraging. Haven’t looked into it particularly.

          5. “Strain” is not part of my vocabulary, m’friend. ๐Ÿ™‚ And I’m quite serious about an additional 40 years. I got turned onto the Indigo kids by a friend and have been looking into it for over a year. Very exciting potential for humankind’s future.

          6. Btw, Paul, I find that the link to your replies via Gmail does not work. Keep getting an error message, though it isn’t specific.

  1. Brilliant insight Paul, as usual. I must take issue with the idea that insolvent governments will suddenly collapse. It is obvious to me that they will slowly deteriorate because the powers-that-be will do everything in their power (which is considerable) to prevent a sudden collapse. If they must confiscate American’s wealth, they will do it; if they must turn American’s into virtual slaves, who are given just enough resources to barley survive, then that is what they will do; if they must euthanize millions of Americans in order to make the diminishing resources last longer, then that is what they will do. I can’t understand why Americans just stand by and watch this happen. Do we have no pride? Do we have no dignity? Do we have no courage? Wake up America while you still can!

    1. “I must take issue with the idea that insolvent governments will suddenly collapse… they will slowly deteriorate…”
      That’s not an unreasonable position, Steve, and neither of us knows what’s going on in the back rooms. But I do know that the operators are concerned about a serious break, so I’m leaning that way. See the links in this article:

      1. Hi Paul,
        My personal definition of “collapse” is a sudden deterioration, but, after some consideration, I can see that a collapse can also happen over a long period of time. There can be absolutely no doubt that the small group of individuals, who comprise the “powers-that-be”, are coming for the wealth and freedom of the rest of us “average” naรฏve, gullible, and trusting Americans, and every other person in this world for that matter. The problem is that, in the end, all of our wealth and freedom will not be enough to solve problem – not even close! What then? What kind of nightmare will unfold then?
        If I put myself in the shoes of the “power clique” It’s obvious to me that I would want to maintain my luxurious, powerful lifestyle by eliminating any and every one who would threaten my privileged position. Consequently, I would need to eliminate all of those “non-essential” people, who were not directly involved in my support; especially the dissidents and the free thinkers, who could very easily incite a rebellion against my omnipotent control. I believe that this is the inescapable future of America and the rest of the world unless proud, free-thinking individuals stand up for their inalienable rights immediately, and the chances of that are essentially zero. May God, or some other powerful force, help us now!
        I think that it is safe to assume that man created governments to solve a problem. Yet in their blind haste to create a better world, nobody stopped to consider if the “cure” could eventually become worse that the disease. For all anyone knows, the world would be as perfect as it could get without any man-made government whatsoever!
        It is very possible that at some point in the future the government “cure” will become much more destructive that the disease the “cure” was supposed to alleviate! I firmly believe that this is now the case! Consequently, the anarcho-capitalists have been right all along! Please keep your brilliant insights coming!
        Warmest regards,

        1. Steve:
          I can recommend reading “Cambodia”s Curse”. The scenario you illustrate was played out in Cambodia by the Khmer Rouge(who are still in power by the way, only under a different name, The Cambodian People’s Party). Where did Pol Pot get his training? When he was in Europe being “educated”.

          1. Hi Lew,
            Thanks very much for the recommendation. I just purchased the book and I look forward to reading it!
            Al the best,

  2. Paul:
    Great article. Some may find your comments demoralizing. Some may call you negative and pessimistic. I find your to be a realist. How we have arrived at this point is the result of looking at everything “through rose colored glasses”, political correctness, etc.
    Your realist point of view helps us to analyze what is happening and plan accordingly. Those who take this tack will be the survivors.

Comments are closed.