House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) is sounding the alarm about a new era of threats targeting the United States, emphasizing that intelligence agencies must undergo sweeping reforms to address a battlefield unlike any previous one. Unlike conventional warfare, these threats often blur the line between foreign and domestic actors, using subtle influence rather than overt attacks. Crawford highlights the rise of malign operations from China, Russia, and Iran, alongside non-state actors who act in alignment with these powers. He warns that these coordinated efforts exploit political divisions and fractures within parties, using influence, propaganda, and covert networks to destabilize America from within.
Crawford describes this new conflict as a quiet yet pervasive war, one waged not by soldiers on the battlefield but through digital manipulation, lobbying, and ideological operations. Algorithms, cyberattacks, and orchestrated campaigns are employed to manipulate trust and public perception, often in ways that remain invisible to the general public. The congressman points to examples such as foreign cyberattacks, organized influence by expatriate communities, and covert mobilization of loyal actors as evidence of a sophisticated ecosystem of threat. This nuanced approach to national security requires a paradigm shift in how the United States perceives and combats foreign influence.
Central to Crawford’s argument is the idea of a “whole-of-nation” counterintelligence ethic. He calls for a proactive strategy that goes beyond reactive measures, advocating for coordination across law enforcement, intelligence agencies, and private-sector experts. Crawford praises efforts led by FBI Director Kash Patel, who has introduced innovative approaches to counterintelligence, and urges the intelligence community to adopt a broader culture of vigilance. He stresses the importance of detecting, intercepting, and disrupting influence campaigns early, rather than waiting for damage to occur. By turning assets, exploiting networks, and integrating civilian expertise, Crawford envisions a robust and adaptive defense posture.
The article highlights concrete examples of foreign influence operations that illustrate the complexity of modern threats. From Chinese nationals attempting to manipulate local communities in Michigan to hacks targeting United Nations communications, Crawford underscores that these incidents are not isolated but indicative of a larger ecosystem. Similarly, domestic channels such as nonprofits and ideological networks are being used to funnel foreign money into U.S. causes, effectively blurring the line between internal and external threats. This observation underlines the need for comprehensive reform and oversight to ensure agencies can respond effectively without overstepping civil liberties.
Parallel efforts within the Treasury Department, IRS, and FBI illustrate the growing recognition that financial flows are a critical component of modern destabilization. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has emphasized tracing foreign funding for domestic unrest as “mission-critical,” drawing parallels to past intelligence operations such as those following 9/11. Director Patel notes that financial monitoring, combined with collaboration with independent reporters and community observers, allows law enforcement to map influence networks that might otherwise operate in the shadows. These efforts aim to uncover the sources of ideological and financial support, highlighting that modern counterintelligence involves both traditional espionage and economic scrutiny.
Ultimately, Crawford suggests that defending against these invisible wars requires more than technical solutions—it demands an ethical and cultural renewal. Beyond monitoring cyberattacks and foreign funding, the nation must cultivate trust, discernment, and collective responsibility among its citizens. The most resilient defense is a public that refuses to succumb to fear, manipulation, or tribal outrage. In this sense, counterintelligence extends beyond government operations into society itself, emphasizing civic unity, moral clarity, and the cultivation of shared values. Crawford’s call for reform is thus both structural and spiritual, advocating a comprehensive approach that blends ethics, strategy, and vigilance to safeguard the nation in an era where threats are increasingly subtle but profoundly consequential.
