A War Without Bombs and Bullets

Not every conflict is marked by tanks, airstrikes, or televised press briefings. Some battles are fought quietly—in boardrooms, in trade agreements, and in the dusty corners of countries most people can’t find on a map. These are the battles for influence in resource-rich regions, and they matter just as much, if not more, than what we see on the evening news.

Throughout my years in the intelligence community, I witnessed how nations, especially the U.S., China, and Russia, compete in ways that are subtle, strategic, and often invisible to the public eye. The battleground is not just ideology anymore. It’s copper, cobalt, lithium, oil, and water. Control over these resources means control over the future.  It is Economic Warfare, and the U.S. – especially our national security establishment – has some catching up to do.

Why Resources Still Rule the Game

No matter how advanced our world becomes, it still runs on physical materials. Rare earth minerals power smartphones and missile systems. Lithium fuels electric vehicles and drones over warzones. Copper is the backbone of electrical grids. And oil, despite the push for renewables, still keeps the global engine running.

Countries with these resources hold leverage, especially if they’re willing to play one power off another. For nations like Peru, Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, or parts of Central Asia, their natural wealth gives them influence far beyond their borders. But it also makes them targets for external pressure and manipulation.

The competition over these materials isn’t just about economics. It’s about national security, technological dominance, and global influence. That’s what makes it a hidden battlefield—quiet, ongoing, and immensely strategic.  Geologists and logisticians are our front line soldiers:  not Navy SEALS.

China’s Long Game

No country has been playing this game more methodically than China. Through its Belt and Road Initiative, China has made major inroads into Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. It funds infrastructure projects—ports, roads, railways—designed to open up access to key resources. In return, Chinese companies often secure long-term contracts and political goodwill.

What makes China’s approach so effective is its patience. It doesn’t always push for immediate returns. Instead, it creates dependence. It loans money for development, then accepts minerals or ports as collateral when debt becomes unsustainable. This approach is subtle, strategic, and in many cases, permanent.

I’ve seen the results of this firsthand. In several African nations, China now effectively controls not only the mines but the means of getting those resources to global markets. That’s influence that can’t be ignored.  Imagine, China’s sells a product (e.g. EV) to an African country that produced the raw materials used in the car in the first place.  

The U.S. Must Catch Up

The United States still has immense capabilities that are economic, technological, military, and diplomatic. But we’ve been late to recognize the importance of competing in these quieter arenas. Too often, our foreign policy is reactive rather than strategic. We focus on immediate threats and headlines, while China and others quietly reshape global supply chains to their advantage.

It is not a secret:  to cite just one example, for a decade in Peru the U.S. focused on terrorism, while China was building a port.  The U.S. was tactical; China was strategic.

To remain competitive, we must take a more proactive role in supporting countries that hold the keys to the global economy. That means investing in infrastructure projects, not just military aid. It means supporting responsible private sector partnerships, and not backing off when things get complicated.

Just as importantly, we must approach these regions with respect and long-term vision. That means listening to what our partners actually need, not dictating terms. Influence is earned, not assumed.

It’s Not Just China

While China is the dominant player in the resource game today, it’s not alone. Russia, too, has used energy as a political weapon. Through its control of natural gas in Eastern Europe and oil partnerships in Africa, it seeks leverage wherever possible. Other countries, including Turkey and Iran, have also inserted themselves into resource deals as a means of extending regional influence.

Private military companies, sometimes backed quietly by governments, have entered the picture as well, protecting mines, pipelines, and shipping lanes. These aren’t just security operations; they’re strategic footholds.

The result is a patchwork of players, each trying to carve out influence in resource-rich regions. This makes the landscape complicated, and potentially unstable.

The Real Stakes

Why should any of this matter to the average American? Because what happens in a cobalt mine in Africa or a copper port in South America affects the price of the phone in your hand, the car in your driveway, and even the weapons we depend on for national defense.

More broadly, whoever controls the world’s critical resources will shape the rules of global trade, technology, and power. If we allow authoritarian regimes to corner these markets, we risk becoming dependent on nations that don’t share our values—or our interests.

This isn’t about going to war. It’s about being smart, strategic, and forward-thinking. It’s about recognizing that the world is changing, and we have to change with it.

Looking Ahead

The competition for influence in resource-rich regions is only going to intensify. Climate change, population growth, and technological demand will put even more pressure on limited supplies of vital materials. That’s why we can’t afford to sit on the sidelines.

We need a foreign policy that integrates economic strategy, private investment, and diplomatic outreach. We need to work with partners who want fair, transparent development, not exploitative deals. And we need to treat these relationships as long-term commitments, not short-term fixes.

Final Thoughts

The quiet battlefield may not make headlines, but it’s shaping the world we live in. As someone who’s spent his life observing discreet movements behind global events, I can tell you this: influence doesn’t always come with fanfare. Often, it arrives in the form of a signed contract, a new road, or a quietly negotiated mining deal.  A decade passes, and we ask ‘How did that just happen.’  It didn’t ‘just happen.’

If the U.S. wants to lead in this century, we need to understand where the real fights are happening—and be willing to show up.