The Autoimmune Empire: How Unilateral Sanctions Undermine U.S. Strategic Competence – A Case Study of Extraterritorial Enforcement

CLASSIFICATION: Academic Analysis / Strategic Studies

DATE: 9 January 2026

By Andrew Klein PhD

Abstract

This paper argues that the contemporary U.S. practice of extraterritorial unilateral sanctions represents a strategic pathology analogous to an autoimmune response. Rather than coherently weakening adversaries, these measures increasingly inflict systemic damage on the United States’ own geopolitical and economic architecture. Through a theoretical lens blending realism and complex systems theory, and a focused case study of the seizure of the NS Champion (a Russian-flagged, Ukrainian-crewed oil tanker), this analysis demonstrates how such actions: 1) erode international legal norms that underpin U.S. hegemony; 2) accelerate financial fragmentation and de-dollarization; and 3) catalyze the formation of adversarial counter-coalitions. The paper concludes that this sanctions regime is a symptom of imperial overreach, where the tools of primacy are being wielded in a manner that actively accelerates the relative decline they were designed to prevent.

1. Introduction: The Pathology of Primacy

The post-Cold War unipolar moment established the United States as the chief architect and enforcer of the global liberal order. A cornerstone of this enforcement power has been the use of economic sanctions, particularly their application beyond U.S. borders. However, the strategic utility of this tool is now in radical flux. This paper posits that the reflexive, expansive, and unilateral use of sanctions has crossed a threshold—transforming from a targeted instrument of statecraft into a self-harming strategic pathology. The metaphor of an autoimmune response is apt: the immune system (the U.S.-led sanctions regime), designed to protect the host body (the Western-led international order), becomes overactive and begins attacking the host’s own healthy tissues (allies, neutral states, and the foundational norms of the system itself).

2. Theoretical Framework: Sanctions as a Complex System Stressor

· Realist Calculus vs. Systemic Feedback: Classical realism views sanctions as a logical extension of state power to coerce adversaries (Art, 1980). However, this view neglects complex systemic feedback in a multipolarizing world. When a hegemonic power exercises its dominance aggressively and unilaterally, it triggers balancing behavior (Waltz, 1979) not just militarily, but economically and institutionally.

· The Autoimmune Metaphor in IR Theory: The biological metaphor provides a dynamic model. An autoimmune disease occurs when regulatory mechanisms fail, causing a destructive response against the self. Analogously, the U.S. sanctions architecture, lacking the constraints of multilateral consensus (a regulatory mechanism), now attacks key components of its own system: legal legitimacy (the “tissue” of international law), financial integration (the “connective tissue” of the dollar system), and alliance cohesion (the “organ system” of collective security).

3. Case Study: The Seizure of the NS Champion – A Textbook Autoimmune Attack

The December 2025 seizure of the Russian-flagged oil tanker NS Champion, crewed predominantly by Ukrainian nationals, by U.S. authorities off the coast of Singapore is a paradigmatic example.

3.1 The Action:

Acting under unilateral sanctions authorities, U.S. officials intercepted and impounded a vessel carrying Venezuelan crude oil. The stated goal was to enforce an embargo against Venezuela and punish Russian commercial facilitation.

3.2 The Self-Harming Strategic Consequences:

1. Erosion of Legal Legitimacy: The seizure was based on extraterritorial application of U.S. law, a practice widely condemned as a violation of the territorial sovereignty principle under the UN Charter (UN General Assembly Resolution 76/238, 2021). This creates international opprobrium, casting the U.S. not as a rule-keeper but as a rule-breaker, undermining the normative foundation of its leadership.

2. Acceleration of Financial Fragmentation: Such actions serve as a potent advertisement for adversaries and neutral states to develop alternative financial messaging systems (e.g., China’s CIPS), promote bilateral currency swaps, and reduce dollar-denominated reserves. Data from the IMF (COFER, 2025) shows a steady, albeit slow, decline in the dollar’s share as a reserve currency, a trend such seizures incentivize.

3. Catalyzation of Counter-Coalitions: The incident united Russia and Venezuela in grievance and provided a narrative for China to advocate for a “non-hegemonic international order.” It also placed ally Ukraine in a politically untenable position, forced to choose between supporting its crew (citizens) and endorsing a U.S. action that benefits its enemy (Russia). This fractures the very “coalition of the willing” essential for effective pressure campaigns.

4. Demonstration of Incompetence: The glaring irony of seizing a Ukrainian-manned vessel to punish Russia revealed a stunning failure in inter-agency coordination and basic intelligence assessment—a strategic incompetence that emboldens adversaries and worries allies.

4. The Broader Autoimmune Landscape: Beyond a Single Case

The NS Champion is not an anomaly but a symptom. The same pathology is evident in:

· Secondary Sanctions on Allies: Threatening EU companies with sanctions for lawful trade with Iran (INSTEX crisis) attacks the transatlantic alliance.

· Weaponization of Financial Infrastructure: Freezing a substantial portion of a nation’s sovereign reserves, as with Afghanistan or Russia, signals to all other states that dollar holdings are a political risk, corroding trust in the system the U.S. controls.

· The ASPI Parallel: The cited competence of think-tanks like the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), which often produces analysis justifying escalatory postures without commensurate strategic cost-benefit analysis, represents an intellectual autoimmune response—where the strategic discourse itself becomes divorced from pragmatic outcomes, fostering groupthink and policy overreach.

5. Conclusion: Managing the Disorder in an Age of Decline

The autoimmune response is a hallmark of a system under profound stress. The indiscriminate use of unilateral, extraterritorial sanctions is not a sign of strength but a manifestation of the strategic anxiety accompanying relative decline. Each application may achieve a tactical objective (seizing a tanker) while inflicting profound strategic wounds:

1. It legitimizes alternatives to U.S.-dominated systems.

2. It transforms neutral states into skeptical observers and allies into reluctant partners.

3. It exposes a gap between strategic ambition and competent execution.

Recommendations: Managing this disorder requires a return to strategic discipline: 1) a strict subsidiarity principle where multilateral options are exhaustively pursued before unilateral action; 2) a rigorous, red-team assessment of secondary and tertiary effects on system integrity; and 3) the abandonment of sanctions as a reflexive, first-resort tool. To continue on the present course is to consciously choose a therapy that is killing the patient. The empire is not being attacked from outside; it is triggering its own crisis of legitimacy, cohesion, and control.

References

· Art, R. J. (1980). The Use of Force: Military Power and International Politics. University Press of America.

· Drezner, D. W. (2021). The United States of Sanctions: The Use and Abuse of Economic Coercion. Foreign Affairs.

· International Monetary Fund (IMF). (2025). Currency Composition of Official Foreign Exchange Reserves (COFER). Data.

· United Nations General Assembly. (2021). Resolution 76/238: “Unilateral economic measures as a means of political and economic coercion against developing countries.”

· Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. McGraw-Hill.

· Case Specific: Lloyd’s List Intelligence. (2025, December). Vessel Seizure Report: NS Champion. [Trade publication data on vessel flag, ownership, and crew nationality].

AUTHOR’S NOTE: This analysis aligns with research conducted during my Master of Arts in Strategic Studies, which explored systemic feedback loops in coercive statecraft. The autoimmune framework provides a powerful diagnostic for understanding the non-linear consequences of hegemonic power projection in a complex, interconnected world.

Feudal Obligation to the Industrial Meat Grinder

By Andrew Klein 

In the ancient and feudal model, war was a limited affair. A lord or king called upon vassals who owed him military service for a set period (often 40 days). Warfare was constrained by the logistics of the royal treasury and the agricultural calendar—soldiers had to return home for the harvest. The spoils of war—land, plunder—were tangible, and the fighting was often for immediate, tangible goals: defence of territory, or the expansion of a ruler’s personal domain.

The change began in earnest with the French Revolution and Napoleon. Napoleon introduced the levée en masse—the first modern conscription. This was a revolutionary and terrifying new idea: the entire nation was the army. War was no longer the profession of a knightly class; it was the duty of every citizen. This was the birth of the “nation in arms,” and with it, the potent ideology of nationalism.

The Manufacture of Loyalty: Selling the Flag

With conscription came the need to manufacture consent and loyalty on an industrial scale. The state, now an abstract concept, had to be sold to its people as the ultimate object of devotion.

· Symbolism Over Substance: The flag, the anthem, and the mythologized history became sacred. They were tools to create an imagined community, persuading a farmer from Brittany that he shared a common destiny and should die for a banker from Paris.

· The One-Way Covenant: This new loyalty was a one-way street. The citizen owed the state their life, their taxes, and their children. The state offered in return a mythical future of glory and security, with no contractual obligation to deliver. Your brother’s death was framed not as a tragedy, but as a “supreme sacrifice” for the patrie, the fatherland—an abstract entity that would outlive him and therefore justified his extinction.

The Financial Revolution: Breaking the Gold Chain

Perhaps the most significant enabler of modern, total war was the financial revolution: the move away from the Gold Standard to Fiat Currency.

· The Old Limit: A king could only wage war for as long as his gold reserves held out. This was a natural check on conflict.

· The New “Magic”: Fiat currency, money backed by government decree rather than a physical commodity, changed everything. A government could now, in essence, create money out of thin air to pay for war. It could finance conflict through massive deficit spending, bonds sold to its own citizens, and inflation. The limits were no longer tangible, but political and psychological. Wars could now be fought for years, draining the real wealth—the lives, labour, and resources—of a nation while the financial elite profited from the lending and industrial production.

The American Civil War: The Neoliberal Blueprint

The American Civil War as a horrifying prototype. It was the first truly modern, industrial war.

· Total Economic Mobilization: It saw the full mobilization of national industrial capacity—railroads, telegraphs, mass-produced arms—to destroy the enemy’s economic infrastructure and will to fight.

· A War of Attrition: It was not fought by professional armies in set-piece battles, but by massive conscript armies in a grinding war of attrition, where the side with the last man and bullet standing would win.

· Extractive Lessons: The Northern victory, driven by its industrial and financial might, provided a blueprint. It demonstrated that a modern state could leverage its entire economic system to prevail in a conflict. The elites observed that war could be used to centralize power, crush alternative economic models (like the agrarian South), and open up new territories and populations for exploitation. The “Reconstruction” that followed was less about healing and more about the systematic economic subjugation of the South, a model of post-conflict control and resource extraction.

The 20th Century: War as a Business Model with Human Breeding Cycles

The World Wars cemented this model. WWI was the ultimate testament to the failure of the old world and the terrifying efficiency of the new. It was a slaughter funded by fiat currency and nationalism, where millions died for gains measured in yards of mud.

The aftermath of WWI—the Great Depression—provided the final, brutal lesson for the common person. It proved conclusively that the population never wins. Even the “victorious” powers were left with shattered economies, a “lost generation,” and social trauma. The profits flowed to the arms manufacturers, the industrialists, and the financiers who funded both sides. The interlude of peace was not for recovery, but to allow a new generation to grow up—to replenish the stock of human capital for the next conflict.

This is the modern business model of war:

1. Create a nationalistic myth to ensure a supply of loyal citizens.

2. Use fiat currency to break the natural financial constraints on conflict.

3. Mobilize the entire industrial base around war production, creating immense profits for connected corporations.

4. Engage in a conflict that grinds down the human and material resources of the enemy (and your own population).

5. During the “peace,” impose economic policies (like the austerity after WWI) that create the desperation and inequality that make the next generation willing to fight.

The citizen is the resource—the cannon fodder, the taxpayer, the factory worker, and the consumer of the debt. The elites are the permanent class that manages this system, a system where war is not a failure of policy, but a perversely logical and profitable outcome of it. They have engineered a perpetual motion machine of extraction, and we are the fuel.

The Endless War: The Unseen System That Feeds on Human Conflict

By Andrew Klein 

We are not living in an era of isolated wars. We are living inside a single, perpetual war, a self-sustaining system whose primary battlefield is the human mind and whose fuel is human energy. The international conflict, the political polarization in our streets, and the tension in our homes are not separate crises. They are different fronts in the same war, a sophisticated engine of control designed for one purpose: extraction.

This is not a malfunction. It is the system’s core programming. To see it is to take the first step toward reclaiming our minds, our communities, and our future.

The Multi-Front War for Extraction

This system operates simultaneously across all levels of human society, and we can observe its mechanics with chilling clarity.

On the International Stage, the war manifests as geopolitical conflict, arms races, and proxy wars. The value extracted is financial and territorial: billions in weapons contracts, control over oil, minerals, and strategic geography. To justify this, the system requires a formidable “Manufactured Enemy”—a nation, religion, or ideology perpetually deemed a threat to “our way of life.”

On the Domestic Front, the war becomes a culture war, defined by political polarization and class conflict. Here, the value extracted is political and social. By keeping the populace divided and fighting amongst itself—over the “Immigrant,” the “Woke,” or the “Elite”—the system prevents a unified opposition from challenging the true elite. Power is consolidated by turning citizens against each other.

Most insidiously, the war reaches into our Communities and Homes, through domestic violence, social alienation, and a pervasive “war on decency.” This front extracts human and psychological value. The destruction of stable family and community units creates isolated, traumatized individuals who are easier to manipulate and control. The mental energy spent on mere survival is energy that cannot be spent on collective action or critical thought. The enemy here is the intimate “Other”—a partner, a family member, or a neighbour who has been made to seem different and threatening.

The Historical Playbook: A Legacy of Psychological Warfare

This is not a new strategy. The masters of this system have refined their techniques over centuries, learning how to weaponize human perception itself.

· Alexander the Great was a master of myth-making, portraying himself as the embodiment of local gods to appear an unstoppable, divine force. He exploited superstition to intimidate enemies, with ancient accounts saying some foes threw themselves from cliffs rather than face him .

· Genghis Khan wielded terror as a calculated weapon. By sparing a few survivors from sacked cities, he ensured they would spread tales of Mongol brutality, often convincing the next city to surrender without a fight .

· Edward Bernays, the father of public relations, applied the lessons of wartime propaganda to peacetime society. Drawing on the work of his uncle, Sigmund Freud, he developed techniques to “manipulate public opinion, often in ways that undermined individual autonomy and democratic values” . His work demonstrated that the same psychological tactics used to influence a nation at war could be used to manage a populace at peace.

Modern militaries have institutionalized this knowledge. Psychological operations (PSYOP) are defined as “operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their motives and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behaviour of governments, organizations, groups, and large foreign powers” . From the “Ghost Army” of World War II that used inflatable tanks to deceive the enemy, to Operation Wandering Soul in Vietnam, which used eerie ghostly wails to exploit spiritual beliefs, the goal has always been the same: to win by dominating the cognitive landscape .

The Vicious Cycle: How the System Perpetuates Itself

This is the most diabolical element of the design: the system is a self-licking ice cream cone that creates the very soldiers it needs to continue.

1. The Grinder: A young person is born into an environment of these wars—a home of tension, a community gutted by poverty, a media landscape saturated with international conflict.

2. The Conditioning: They are taught, explicitly and implicitly, to see the world in terms of “us vs. them.” Their natural pain, confusion, and search for identity are channeled into pre-made molds of tribal hatred.

3. The Recruitment: The system then offers them a purpose: become a soldier in one of its wars. Fight the foreign enemy. Destroy the political opponent. Dominate the person you perceive as weaker. The trauma the system inflicted becomes the fuel for its own perpetuation.

4. The Reward: The player is extracted from their environment and pointed at a “manufactured enemy.” For their service, they may receive a pittance—a salary, a sense of belonging, a hit of dopamine from a social media “win”—while the elite who orchestrated the game reap the vast financial and power rewards.

This cycle is powered by a fuel more potent than money alone: the pathological ego of the 1%. This mindset operates with a “God Complex,” moving populations like chess pieces and viewing human lives as statistics on a spreadsheet. It holds a deep-seated “Contempt for the ‘Herd’,” viewing the 99% not as fellow humans, but as a resource to be managed or a nuisance to be controlled. This pattern has historical precedent in every extractive empire, from Rome to the British East India Company, where the master class maintained power by pitting different groups against each other to prevent a unified rebellion.

The Path Forward: Withdrawing Consent

By identifying this pattern, we have done what the system fears most: we have revealed the wiring behind the scenery. We have shown that the genocide in a distant land, the culture war screaming match on television, and the man abusing his wife are not disconnected tragedies. They are all symptoms of the same disease—a system that runs on conflict and consumes human dignity as its primary fuel.

Our role as conscious beings is to become the immune response to this disease.

The war is endless only for as long as we consent to fight it on their terms. Our mission is to change the very nature of the game. It begins when we turn off the news and talk to our neighbour. It begins when we refuse the pre-packaged hatred and seek our own understanding. It begins when we see the political circus for what it is and withdraw our emotional investment from its actors.

The system stages its play as long as we are willing to sit in the audience. The moment we stand up, turn our backs, and walk out of the theatre, the performance is over.

The war for our minds ends when we, collectively and resolutely, withdraw our consent.

The Unseen Currents: How History Fuels Today’s Great Power Conflicts

The Unseen Currents: How History Fuels Today’s Great Power Conflicts

By Andrew Klein 10th November 2025

The headlines shout of a new Cold War: NATO versus Russia, the West against China. The narrative presented is often one of unprovoked aggression by authoritarian states. But to understand the present, we must dare to look deeper, to the unseen historical currents that flow beneath the surface of modern diplomacy. The tensions we witness today are not spontaneous; they are the latest eruptions in a long cycle of intervention, grievance, and power projection.

Part 1: The Ghosts of Interventions Past

The deep-seated distrust that defines contemporary relations is a direct product of historical wounds that have never fully healed.

The Russian Crucible

Following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917,the United States, Britain, and other powers did not merely observe. They intervened militarily in the Russian Civil War, siding with the “White” forces against the “Reds.” This attempt to strangle the communist state in its cradle left an indelible mark on the Russian psyche. It forged a lasting narrative in Moscow that the West is fundamentally hostile to its existence and will seize any opportunity to weaken it—a perception that continues to shape Kremlin policy to this day.

China’s Century of Humiliation

For China,the historical lens is shaped by what it terms the “Century of Humiliation,” beginning with the Opium Wars. To rectify a trade deficit, the British Empire flooded China with Indian opium, leading to military defeat and the imposition of “unequal treaties.” This period, marked by the sacking of Beijing and the ceding of territories, is remembered as a time of national subjugation by Western colonial powers. Consequently, modern U.S. strategic moves are often interpreted in Beijing not as upholding a rules-based order, but as a continuation of Western containment.

Part 2: The Modern Machinery of Perception

These historical grievances are amplified by a modern media landscape that often obscures complex reality in favor of simplified narratives.

· The Mainstream Media Filter: The media can be manipulated through sophisticated public relations and government propaganda, which is sometimes disseminated as legitimate news. This includes tactics like paying journalists for favorable coverage and government agencies producing prepackaged news segments that air without disclosure of their source. This environment makes it difficult for the public to access the nuanced historical context essential for understanding these conflicts.

· The Military-Industrial Complex: This powerful nexus of corporate, military, and governmental elites can create a built-in incentive for sustained international tension over peaceful diplomacy, as conflict drives profit for the arms and related sectors.

Part 3: The Cycle of Action and Reaction

The following table illustrates the dangerous feedback loop that characterizes modern geopolitics, where defensive actions by one power are perceived as existential threats by another.

Western Action & Justification Perception by Russia/China & Reaction Ultimate Outcome

NATO expansion framed as an “open-door” policy for democratic nations seeking security guarantees. Perceived as strategic encirclement and a deliberate violation of promised spheres of influence. Increased Russian aggression, as seen in Ukraine, to create a strategic buffer zone and re-establish dominance.

“Pivoting to Asia” and strengthening alliances (Quad, AUKUS) to uphold a “free and open Indo-Pacific.” Viewed as building an “Asian NATO” for the explicit purpose of containment, evoking memories of colonial-era humiliation. Heightened Chinese assertiveness in regions like the South China Sea and a solidified “no-limits” partnership with Russia.

Public condemnation of Russian and Chinese actions as undermining a “rules-based international order.” Seen as profound hypocrisy, projecting the West’s own long history of military intervention and unilateral action. A reinforced narrative of Western double standards, which Moscow and Beijing use to justify their own adversarial policies.

Conclusion: A Path Beyond the Cycle

The great power competition of the 21st century is rooted in a historical cycle of intervention, perceived betrayal, and counter-projection. What the West frames as defending a liberal order is viewed from Moscow and Beijing as a continuation of hegemonic policies designed to suppress their rise.

Breaking this cycle requires a public that can critically engage with history and see beyond the simplified, often sensationalized narratives presented by much of the mainstream media. It demands a foreign policy grounded in the recognition of these deep-seated grievances and a commitment to mutual security. The alternative is a future dictated by the ghosts of the past, replaying the same conflicts with ever-more dangerous tools. Understanding these unseen currents is the first, essential step toward navigating a path to a more stable and peaceful world.