A Proposed US Strategy in the Face of Global Scenario IV: Politics is Not Always Local

by Damian Niolet

Lastly, the statements of the author contained in this report do not reflect the views of the USAF.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

TRENDS THAT LED TO THE CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS The current state of affairs owes its existence to two primary trends. The first trend can be put in no softer terms than this: habitual overextension, ineffectiveness, and exacerbation of problems by state governments. The second trend grew out of the first as a resurgent strong middleclass, particularly in the U.S., took it upon themselves to fill gaps in governments. In the eyes of the people, time and time again state governments demonstrated how unilateral bureaucracies could no longer be relied upon to sufficiently quell global, international, and in some cases even national issues. Likewise, non-state, widespread, and diverse organizations stepped up at critical moments and proved there is power in decentralized entities. Too often state governments endeavored to push political agendas ahead of more pressing issues, until the issues could no longer be ignored, water shortages in China in 2021 being a notable example. The U.S. government, having been handed a military and political defeat at the hands of China in their quest to unify its territories, chose to ignore Chinas plight, while three independent non-governmental organizations (NGOs), two U.S. based, seized the moment as an opportunity to show true international diplomatic grace. The NGOs solved Chinas water crisis when the U.S. government, who endlessly espouses human rights, would do nothing and likely would not have been able to if it had wanted to.1 Likewise, the U.S. government, having essentially painted itself into a corner in regards to healthcare, was rescued by a number of co-ops. Now, healthcare bills, lowered due to anticompetitive agreements in the medical field in 2018, are shared among members.2 Social Security too was shored up by unconventional sharing of consumers assets, such as the Groceries for Care Program.3 Texas and its people, feeling the strain on all fronts manpower,
1 Ronald McMirtri, A Brief History of the Last 15 Years (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2025), 25. 2 McMirtri, 65. 3 McMirtri, 66.

resources, taxes from having to buoy the rest of the U.S. during inundations of poor economics, is sounding the clarion call of cessation more often every day. It is groups like the Texas Nationalist Movement (TNM) to which credit is due. Repeatedly, TNM has brokered vast, contractual economic ties with other nations, and even the United Nations (U.N.).4 Perhaps the pinnacle example of the unresponsiveness of state governments and the adroitness of NGOs, and the like, came in 2024, when Russia, completely bypassing international agreements, established a permanent presence in the Arctic Circle with the construction of an off-shore oil rig tapped into the largest oil deposit the world over. It appeared Russia was very likely going to determine the fate of a number of nations for decades to come, when a global R&D firm announced that it had the means to mass produce fusion energy. The firm explained that it was willing to assist in the construction of energy plants in any nation that would agree to certain peace accords.5 Now, it is not uncommon to see members of the Israeli and Palestinian governments sitting beside each other at international round tables. 6 U.S. GOVERNMENTS OBJECTIVES IN A SHIFTING WORLD In the face of a new era in global, international, and national governance, the U.S. government will still be committed to the security of its people, the vitality of its economy, and the promotion of long-held ideals; however, within each of these areas of commitment, the U.S. must make adjustments to the traditional manner in which it carries out these objectives. The U.S. governments viability rests on not making the same mistakes and/or continuing the same trend as described above. The U.S. government must approach issues from a different angle, must find its place in this new order, and must be ready to act when called upon. Decentralized
4 Burn Hoggs, Why The Texas Nation Should Secede Yesterday! . http://www.tnm-ftw.com (accessed October 29, 2025). 5 Nord Alart, Fusion Energy Bringing Atoms (and People) Together. http://www.wired.com (accessed October 29, 2025). 6 This may also be due to the fact that Israel and Palestine have a common enemy now. (see footnote 18)

governance has shown itself to be effective in some cases, but multipolar and diffused organizations can only achieve so much. The people will still need that sense of security that only a strong military can provide. Despite the successes of the Coexist Movement in championing an air of relative peace,7 the U.S. still has enemies, both state and non-state, who seek to take advantage of perceived U.S. vulnerabilities at home and abroad. The manner in which the U.S. military is employed must be precise and efficient. The objective must be clearly understood. No longer can the U.S. military be engaged as a blanket, global-police force in protracted wars. The will of the people, the lifeblood of the U.S., is intricately tied to the economy; yet another downturn in the economy will have a similar, though exponential, effect on the will of the people.8 The U.S. government will continue to strive to bolster the U.S. economy and bring it back to its pinnacle glory as the leader in the global economy. The U.S. government must be open to change in this realm and promote to progressive partnerships. The people must be more intimately involved in the process of financial decision making. For over a century now, the U.S. government has sought to spread its particular ideals of human rights, freedom, and democracy across the international landscape despite religious, ethnic, and cultural dissimilarities as compared to the U.S.9 The intent was noble, but the method unsound. The U.S government must not cease promoting these ideals; however, it must change the emphasized connotations of the ideals and it must promote them by proxy, through global and international organizations, such as the Coexist Movement and the U.N. WAYS AND MEANS UTILIZATION
7 Hip Peters, Coexisting Never Felt this Right, Man. http://www.foxsnews.com (accessed October 29, 2025). 8 Countto Ifineti, Every Time the Debt Clock Rings, an Angel Losses Its Wings. http://www.slate.com (accessed October 29, 2025). 9 Lay Man, What They Teach You Over and Over Again in School. (New York: Scribner, 2018), 247.

The strategy by which the U.S. government must go about meeting its objectives could be said to be a two pronged approach in two separate spheres, those spheres being internal and external or national and international. Together, the prongs would seem to be the antithesis of one another and in many ways they are, but considering the current state of affairs, where the authority to rule and govern states has reached a cross roads, it is important that a strategy be devised that walks both roads. On one road, state and international governments preserve a healthy modicum of authority; while on the other, non-state organizations present a formidable challenge to that authority. The U.S. government must concede to some degree to these rivals for the greater good of society. In time, measures may see that the roads converge. INTERNALLY / NATIONALLY - DECENTRALIZATION The first prong of the strategy can be summed up by one umbrella concept. The concept goes against the grain of years of conventional politics in the U.S., but in times of change, the worst that any government could do is conduct business as usual. The U.S. government must adapt and it must follow-through, promoting the new order as if it had known no other. The umbrella concept, under which many of the initiatives proposed in this report will fall, is decentralization. First, politically speaking, internally the U.S. government must model itself after the nonstate organizations that are guiding recent transformations in world order and governance. This does not mean that the U.S. government should seek to completely dismantle itself and piecemeal itself out to various state governments. On the contrary, the U.S. Federal Government must maintain a strong presence and exert national power where and when appropriate, but such places and times will be dictated by new satellite departments, spread out across the country, and the globe, sensing the pulse of the people. The Department of Energy, for instance, will retain its

headquarters in Washington D.C., but will maintain a satellite office in every state and in other nations as seen fit. These satellite departments will be the face of the U.S. government that people will look to for guidance and/or to whom they will express their opinions. No longer can governmental employees be just a name on a ballot, or a suit in a distant capital, only walking among the people during election periods. The people need to see their government as people just like themselves, but charged with working tirelessly to ensure society acts to assist in, not hinder, meeting needs. The purpose of decentralization is not merely a public affair tactic; the U.S. government must also seek to work alongside NGOs, and the like, at every opportunity in order to understand the currents of change and influence that change as needed. The best way to do this is to mirror their organizations and meet them on their level. In order to accomplish decentralization, the U.S. government is going to have to employ telecom firms to construct secure communications networks that allow for the full spectrum of work flows, from immediate person to person calls to extended group meetings and hearings. U.S. government employees must make use of the same technological avenues as the non-state organizations, such as the internet and smartbooks, for daily operations. These same firms can be tasked with an even bigger project, one that will imbue the U.S. people with an even greater sense of involvement with the process of governance a high-tech voting system. We are at the point in our technological history, especially with the advent of quantum computing in the U.S.,10 when nearly all of humanity is constantly wired into a network and able to declare their sentiments at will. That capability should be harnessed and the democratic system enhanced to its truest form.

10 Nord Alart, Quantum Leap, Meet the Personal Computer. http://www.wired.com (accessed October 29, 2025).

Economically, the U.S. government must also endeavor to decentralize. There are those organizations that would wrest control over the U.S. economy away from the U.S. government.11 A thriving economy being the ultimate goal, rather than adamantly rejecting the notions of such organizations, the U.S. government must entertain them bringing them into the fold as much as possible. Control will not be handed over, but there is no reason why such organizations should not be permitted participation in economic matters; they represent the interests of the people after all, and it is to the people that the U.S. owes its future economic success. The U.S.s greatest economic success story is on the horizon. At yet another point in history, the U.S. has spearheaded a technological revolution and the U.S. government must aid the continued capitalization of its high-tech industry by spurring on its utilization at home and limiting trade barriers between international corporations.12 EXTERNALLY / INTERNATIONALLY - CENTRALIZATION The second prong of the strategy can be summed up in one word as well, centralization. What this prong primarily entails is the U.S. government taking a backseat to the U.N. in all international matters and global governance. For many years, especially after 2001, the U.S. has been acting as though it was the U.N. on the international stage. This caused the U.S. government to overextend its reach, particularly militarily, and overstep its bounds, making many enemies.13 The U.S. government must show restraint and poise internationally in order to show those whom have been offended that the U.S. accepts responsibility. At the same time, the U.S. government must show strength of purpose and courage before international bodies. The motivation for heeding to the U.N. is twofold. It is the belief of
11 Countto Ifineti, Ill Give You a Hamburger Tuesday for Control of the Economy Today. http://www.slate.com (accessed October 29, 2025). 12 Nord Alart, Quantum Leap, Meet the Personal Computer. http://www.wired.com (accessed October 29, 2025). 13 Isis Wyde, Any Article Concerning The US and the Middle East from 2002 - 2015. http://www.ap.com (accessed October 29, 2025).

this administration that there must be some form of strong government within nations and internationally; therefore, the U.S. government will lead by example and support and defer to the U.N. on international affairs from this time forth, in hopes that the U.S. people support and defer to the U.S government. To this end, that of centralizing international authority under the U.N., the U.S. government will relinquish control of its diplomats abroad to the U.N. No longer will U.S. diplomats reside in virtually every country in the world, many of which do not even want them. They will only enter and remain in those countries that request (via the U.N.) a U.S. presence in the country. Not only will such a tactic promote U.N. authority, but it will also dispel longstanding resentment for supposed U.S. infiltration and manipulation.14 In this same vain, the U.S. government will hand over to the U.N. the majority of its internationally positioned military forces and assets. The U.N. will thus possess greater military reach and command at its disposal during international dealings. This measure is not without its caveats. The U.S. government intends to be compensated monetarily, in installments as necessary, and the U.S. will have a say in which international crisis U.S. soldiers are involved. With the dismantling of NATO, it is important that some international organization be committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes, and when diplomacy fails, employment of military might.15 The remainder of the U.S.s military force will be positioned so as to better protect the homeland, not as a preemptive strike force, but as a purely defensive power. Emphasis will be placed on air, sea, and space defense. The National Guard forces will be reinforced, particularly along coastlines, as will the Coastguard be greatly enhanced. The militarys purpose will only be

14 Isis Wyde, Any Article Concerning The US and the Rest of the World from 2002 - 2015. http://www.ap.com (accessed October 29, 2025). 15 Conte Nental, RIP NATO. http://www.foreignmatters.com (accessed October 29, 2025).

for defense from international military threats. It will remain the obligation of law enforcement to maintain civil order, to respond domestic uprisings, and enforce the law. The U.S.s intelligence agencies will likewise be vested in the U.N. and at home. Those agencies that remain at home will focus their efforts on foreseeing immediate threats to the U.S.s vicinity and warning proper authorities. Internationally, the intelligence agencies, under the direction of the U.N., will seek to pinpoint aggressors to the current world order, even in the U.S. It is this administrations hope that all nations will follow suit that other nations deploy intelligence specialists to the U.N. in hopes that a transparency of national borders be created. In an age when the enemy is not likely to be a nation, but a dispersed organization across the globe whose actions might disrupt a tenuous world order,16 such an intelligence service is essential. OBSTACLES AND RISK ASSESSMENT Thus far this report has cited examples of well-meaning, non-governmental organizations, but there is a fair share of organizations similarly formed with less than altruistic intents. Most of these organizations are focused on monetary pursuits through elicit means, some are engaged in intense territorial acquisitions, and a smaller number are aiming to undermine state governments. Like the U.S. enemy of the past and present, Al Qaeda, these groups are widespread, not easily spotted, and have safe havens. The U.S. government, through its military, was not able to snuff out Al Qaeda17 and it must not attempt to contend against these new factions in the same vein, and certainly not alone in any vein. The most notorious organizations grew out of China, Russia, and Mexico. Some people would simply label these organizations as mafia, but unlike mafia they have representatives who
16 National Intelligence Council, Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World. (Washington DC, 2008), 81. 17 Genie Patron, Our Most Valiant Effort A Postmortem on the GWT. (New York: Scribner, 2020), 10.

attend international meetings and promote political agendas just as any nations representatives would. These organizations, more often than not, act without regard for human life, dignity, or rights. They have no known moral fiber to which they adhere. They will pursue their aims with fervor and as passionately as any religious extremist group we have seen in the past. Many of these groups have already spread their tentacles into U.S. soil.18 The U.S. government must not retreat or give into to these organizations, but it also must not attempt to apply kinetic force in combating them. State actors across the world may find themselves on a proverbial fence as these non-state organizations attempt to persuade, lure, or force the state actors to their side of the pasture. For instance, the global R&D firm is promising fusion technology on one side while an ethnoreligious group, with ties to police and military forces, is guaranteeing continued political, economic, and social stability if the states stay the course, abstain from peace accords, and continue hostilities towards their enemies. Nowhere is this more evident than in Israel. Israels stance is due in great part to Irans involvement in covertly activating Israels nuclear bomb in 2013. While the blast was contained in an underground bunker, the physical damage to the country is still most evident, and the mental and emotional damage will remain for years to come.19 State actors at this time do not pose a significant threat as governments, like the U.S. government, are aware of the power shift occurring globally. Lines are being drawn in the sand by non-state organizations and state governments are mostly concerned with helping to determine where those lines are being drawn. Trust is being granted in respect to those forthright and principled organizations, but there is ambiguity in respect to less straightforward
18 McMirtri, 209. 19 Conte Nental, What Hath Israel Wrought? http://www.foreignmatters.com (accessed October 29, 2025).

organizations.20 How the U.S government must address these unknown or unsavory non-state organizations is by, as stated above, deferring to the U.N. The U.N. or an off-shoot organization will be the legitimizing body. If these organizations want a say in national or international affairs, they are going to have to legitimize their cause to the U.N. In cases where the U.N. determines an organization to be committing a foul, it will be up to the U.N. to enforce an embargo, or the like, and call upon the organizations nations people to declare the organization just. THE SUITABILITY, FEASIBILITY, AND ACCEPTABILITY TEST This strategy must stand the test of suitability, feasibility, and acceptability. The strategy meets the criteria for suitability in that change has already begun to take place; the people have shown a growing allegiance to powers other than governmental entities. The U.S. government, in implementing this strategy, is simply meeting the pace. The strategy meets the criteria for feasibility. In regards to decentralizing government departments, while it is unorthodox, it is no less feasible. On the technological piece, building a vast network to accommodate the new manner of governance, the means are well within the U.S. grasp. Concerning the economic measures, the feasibility goes hand-in-hand with the suitability of the measure. On the military side, it should prove far more feasible that the nations force be centralized under one authority, called on to protect the homeland at a moments notice, rather than spread thin across the globe as previous strategic plans have demanded.21 The acceptability of the strategy is sound as it is not likely to garner significantly strong opposition. Time will ultimately be the determinant as to its acceptability. IN SUMMATON
20 McMirtri, 210. 21 The White House, National Security Strategy (Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 2010)

10

In this time of almost imperceptible upheaval, when the authority to govern has been gradually placed onto a scale, the state being on one side and non-state organizations on the other, the best a government can do is to remain steadfast in but one duty to care for its people: physically, economically, and ideologically. The manner in which a government accomplishes this task requires assimilation to the will of the people. The people, having seen firsthand how multilateral bureaucracies have been ineffective in carrying out its single duty, are beginning to put their faith in non-state organizations, tipping the scales in their favor. The strategy of this administration, understanding the need to adapt, has formulated a strategy that aims to better meet the needs of the people while fostering greater international relations. The strategy is one of decentralization internally and centralization internationally. This report has explored the actions deemed most appropriate in pursuit of this strategy, weighed the obstacles and risks, and assessed the suitability, feasibility, and acceptability. It is up to the U.S. government to follow through and do so unerringly. With the assistance of the U.S. people, we will all prevail.

11

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK