Last Updated on April 10, 2025
In 1996, when David Ronfeldt and John Arquilla wrote their prophetic paper on netwar, they foresaw the powerful impact new forms of social organization could have on international politics. Using the Zapatistas and other examples of networks involved in opposing such things as globalization, Ronfeldt and Arquilla went so far as to suggest that civil society might have the upper hand — at least for a while — as institutional actors scrambled to catch up with the dynamics involved.
Examining the 1999 WTO Ministerial in Seattle, Paul de Armond expounded on the netwar aspects of anti-globalization networks. In 2001, Ronfeldt and Arquilla examined its usage by terrorists and transnational criminal networks, in addition to social activists as they engage in the fight for the future. In 2005, Michelle Shumate, J. Alison Bryant and Peter R. Monge looked at how storytelling in the form of narratives about globalization are deployed in netwar.
Today, as noted by observers like Wrong Kind of Green, it appears institutions have caught on. Using corporate and government funding to create and co-opt international NGOs like Amnesty International, covert agencies like the CIA now work hand in hand with State Department puppets manipulated by USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy. Able to choreograph fake revolutions as well as control dissidents, institutions like the National Security Agency are arguably back in the drivers seat.
Networks, of course, are only as effective as their understanding of conflict, and that means having a working knowledge of the principles of psywar. False front networks, with the aid of corporate media, might be able to deceive public opinion, but they also present an opportunity to illustrate the difference between cover stories and back stories through investigative journalism. Using authentic communications networks to differentiate between players and pawns exposes both the hubris and moral corruption of institutions, while simultaneously using research as organizing tool.
Keeping our eyes open to the reality of netwar is as vital to indigenous networks as any. Given our limited resources, we need to conserve our energy, choose our battles, and pick our targets, before we marshall our resources. Otherwise, we risk being played against each other by powerful forces working behind the scenes.
Across the world right now, Indigenous peoples are facing a renewed assault on their lands, rights, and ways of life.
From extractive industries pushing deeper into ancestral territories, to governments rolling back hard-won protections,
the threat is global—and it is growing.
What makes this moment especially dangerous is how little attention it receives.
Stories like this are disappearing in real time. Mainstream media
barely covers it and the coverage is fragmented. The public is left without the context
needed to understand what is truly at stake.
That is exactly why IC Magazine exists..
For more than 20 years, IC has reported on Indigenous struggles worldwide — consistently, independently, and without compromise.
We don’t follow news cycles; we trace patterns. We don’t sensationalize; we provide context.
And when the world looks away, we stay focused.
But this work is increasingly difficult to sustain.
We refuse to lock our reporting behind a paywall. We don’t sell access through subscriptions.
And we don’t answer to advertisers. IC Magazine survives solely because readers like you choose to
support independent Indigenous journalism.
Please donate today if you can. Every contribution helps us to continue this crucial work.
Thank you,
John Ahni Schertow
Founder and Editor in Chief
