An e-mail arrives in the inbox of an employee working for the U.S. government or an American corporation. It appears to be from one of the recipient’s bosses or co-workers, and includes a signature complete with the sender’s job title and other information. The language of the e-mail might be slightly odd, but its subject matter is specific to the employee’s job or one of his interests. It includes an enticing link or attachment.

The employee skims the e-mail, and then positions his mouse cursor over that link or attachment.

He clicks.

With that click, not only is his computer compromised, but he has also given the e-mail’s sender a platform for movement throughout the organization’s network. The sender was not actually his co-worker, but a crafty cyber predator who did his research—combing through social networking sites, blogs, etc. to obtain the information needed to make the e-mail appear legitimate.

This practice of “spear phishing” is the favored attack method for more and more hackers because it’s the path of least resistance into an organization’s network. This route is unhindered by antivirus software because it dupes a human being into bypassing all of that and swinging the doors wide open for cyber predators. For all the savvy employees who spot the ruse, there are usually a few who don’t.

All it takes is one.

Who are the cyber predators sending the counterfeit e-mails? Much of the time it’s the Chinese Army.

U.S. intelligence says Chinese cyberattacks wreak so much havoc on American companies that they threaten the nation’s global economic competitiveness. Yet it’s rare to hear about severe damage in the reports companies file with the government. The number of disclosures and the extent of the damage revealed in them doesn’t even begin to bear out the picture of rampant, economy-bleeding cyberattacks painted by America’s intelligence community.

Why the discrepancy?

Sometimes corporations just don’t know they are being punctured and leeched. In other cases, executives believe revealing a breech would only invite other attacks, so they keep mum about their company’s soft digital underbelly. In other situations, firms fear that disclosures would rattle the confidence of their customers or shareholders, reducing stock values, and potentially incurring legal liabilities.

The Chinese market holds the most lucrative business opportunities for many U.S. firms. American tycoons don’t want to risk a loss of business from the world’s second-largest economy and its largest trade nation. They prioritize profits above patriotism. They want to turn another check, so they turn the other cheek.

Then there is the competition. Many executives fear that if they upset China by disclosing Beijing’s attacks, not only could they lose China’s business, but they could lose it to their American rivals. If competitor duos like PepsiCo and Coca-Cola, or Airbus and Boeing would collaborate on a united front, they could pressure the Chinese markets in a way no single corporate entity could. But American firms often view and treat each other as adversaries more menacing than the Chinese cyberterrorists.

The god of too many U.S. policymakers and businessmen is the almighty dollar. Those who worship in its skyscrapers are often willing to sacrifice national security on the altar of profit. Obsession with the bottom line keeps American firms from sharing information with each other or with the U.S. intelligence community that could help the whole nation defend against the blight.

On the National Level

In 2009, China’s intellectual property theft cost the U.S. $48 billion and eliminated 2 million jobs. In the time since then, the attacks have steadily intensified.

Last week, the New York Times called the quiet cybersecurity standoff between the U.S. and China “a new Cold War.” In some ways this war is “more complex and pernicious” than the superpower conflicts of past decades, it said. If it is so potentially pernicious, why does Washington keep so quiet about it? The Obama administration—even when confronted with undeniable evidence—has refused to so much as name China as its enemy in this war.

“We were told that directly embarrassing the Chinese would backfire,” an unnamed intelligence official said. “It would only make [the Chinese] more defensive and more nationalistic.”

American leaders cringe at the thought of a China that is more defensive and more nationalistic than it already is.

The U.S. has the power to pummel China with conventional or cyberattacks. Why not use it? Another unnamed intelligence official said Washington won’t confront Beijing because of “huge diplomatic sensitivities.” These “sensitivities” link mostly to the fact that China is the debt-ridden U.S.’s biggest creditor. America’s suicidal spending and borrowing habits have helped to break the nation’s will to use its military might. American leaders hope that if they keep quiet, the attacks will stop. But Chinese policymakers see America’s refusal to confront their belligerence as the weakness that it is. Beijing sees that America no longer has the stomach for confrontation, so the Chinese continue these acts of war without fear of retaliation.

In the near term, those unsuspecting U.S. employees will keep on clicking on false links. Infiltrated organizations will continue to keep quiet—obscuring and downplaying the damages they sustain. And American leaders will continue to flee confrontation. The broken will, greed and fear of U.S. leaders are all indications of the country’s precipitous decline. The slide toward destruction is past the point of no return, but that sobering trend is closely tied to the best news this world could ever hear: Jesus Christ is just about to return to usher in an era of unprecedented peace, cooperation and prosperity for all men and all nations!

To understand more about the causes behind the U.S.’s faltering leadership, read Character in Crisis.