The China-Russia partnership is a highly consequential geopolitical alignment driven by a shared goal of countering U.S. hegemony and reshaping the international order into a multipolar system. While not a formal alliance, this relationship is strengthened by Russia's increasing economic reliance on China following Western sanctions, which allows Beijing to leverage its influence. Policymakers should note that while the partnership projects deep solidarity (as seen in high-level summits), it remains complex and limited by mutual mistrust and competing strategic interests. This enduring alignment poses a significant challenge to U.S. interests and requires continued diplomatic vigilance.
Golden Dome: From Bad to Worse
English Summary
The article argues that the proposed 'Golden Dome' homeland missile defense project is fiscally unsound and strategically infeasible, citing a projected cost of $1.2 trillion that consumes a massive portion of the defense budget for limited defensive capability. It contends that such systems are unlikely to protect against advanced threats and could dangerously increase the risk of preemptive conflict. Instead of funding this costly infrastructure, policymakers should focus on pragmatic, proven methods to de-escalate tensions and deter the use of nuclear weapons, rather than attempting to 'win' a nuclear war.
中文摘要
本文論證，提議的「金穹」本土導彈防禦計畫在財政上不穩健，且戰略上不可行。文章指出，該計畫預計成本高達一.二兆美元，將消耗防禦預算的大部分，卻只能提供有限的防禦能力。其主張，此類系統難以抵禦先進威脅，反而可能危險地增加發生先發制人衝突的風險。政策制定者不應將資金投入此類成本高昂的基礎設施，而應將重點放在實用且經證實的方法上，以降低緊張局勢和威懾核武使用，而非試圖「贏得」一場核戰。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The Chatham House analysis concludes that the UK's Defence Investment Plan (DIP) will be viewed by NATO allies as a mixed bag, primarily due to its failure to commit to higher GDP spending targets. However, the plan signals critical strategic improvements by emphasizing novel technologies—such as autonomous systems and digital infrastructure—and enhancing readiness. Crucially, the DIP adopts an international focus through major collaborative programs (e.g., AUKUS, GCAP) and establishes a new National Armaments Director Group (NADG). This structural shift toward flexible, portfolio-based collaboration is strategically valuable for NATO allies seeking reliable partners as US conventional forces reduce their European presence.
-
3.
The article argues that the U.S., through recent policy signals—such as questioning NATO's value or sympathizing with great-power territorial claims—is inadvertently adopting the core tenets of non-alignment, prioritizing transactional national interests over binding alliances. Historically, while non-alignment allowed developing nations to gain benefits without commitment, the analysis notes that this approach lacks the deep trust and shared obligations necessary for robust security structures. The implication is critical: by undermining established alliances, the U.S. risks losing its greatest strategic asset—the network of mutual commitments—as allies actively seek alternative bilateral or regional defense pacts.
-
4.
The roundtable established that implementing generational bans represents a powerful, long-term strategy for tackling deeply entrenched public health crises like tobacco use. Using the UK’s permanent ban on selling cigarettes to those born after 2009 as key evidence, experts analyzed how such policies fundamentally alter market dynamics and consumer behavior over time. These lessons suggest that other nations facing persistent addiction challenges should consider adopting similar age-gating or generational restrictions to accelerate decline and set a precedent for future public health policy interventions.
-
5.
The CSIS analysis finds that the U.S. grid's regulatory framework for connecting large loads is severely fragmented and unprepared for the massive electricity demands posed by AI data centers. FERC has mandated significant reforms across six regional operators, requiring them to modernize interconnection studies, prevent cost-shifting, and establish clear tariffs for co-located generation. Evidence shows that most operators fall far short of these new standards, necessitating complex, multi-year policy adjustments rather than simple compliance. Policymakers must coordinate federal regulation (FERC) with state utilities to accelerate grid modernization, ensuring energy affordability while maintaining technological competitiveness.