The article argues that recent executive overreach and politicization have severely undermined established norms of U.S. civil-military relations. To restore professional standards, the incoming Congress must actively exercise its oversight powers, moving beyond mere criticism to demanding transparency in defense policy and personnel decisions. Key reforms include enforcing meritocratic promotion processes, requiring documented justification for senior officer removals, and preventing the partisan use of the military. These actions are crucial for bolstering public trust and ensuring the military remains a nonpartisan instrument of civilian control.
The Islamic Republic’s Power Centers
English Summary
CFR’s core finding is that Iran’s system is institutionally complex but functionally centered on the supreme leader’s clerical-security network, which constrains elected officials and limits meaningful reform. The article’s reasoning maps how formal bodies—the presidency, majlis, Guardian Council, Expediency Council, Assembly of Experts, and Supreme National Security Council—are structurally shaped by appointment authority, candidate vetting, and IRGC-linked influence tied to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. It argues that recent shocks, including the June 2025 Israeli strikes and the late-2025/2026 protest wave, exposed regime vulnerabilities, yet the state’s coercive response also demonstrated enduring control by hard-line power centers. The policy implication is that strategy toward Tehran should focus on the supreme leader’s orbit and security institutions, combining calibrated pressure and diplomacy while preparing for episodic instability rather than expecting elected offices alone to drive change.
中文摘要
外交關係協會（CFR）的核心發現是：伊朗體制在制度層面雖然複雜，但在實際運作上以最高領袖主導的教士—安全網絡為中心，因而牽制民選官員並限制具實質意義的改革。文章論證梳理了正式機構——總統職位、伊斯蘭議會（Majlis）、監護委員會、權宜委員會、專家會議與最高國家安全委員會——如何在任命權、候選人審查，以及與阿亞圖拉阿里・哈米尼相連並受伊斯蘭革命衛隊（IRGC）影響的權力結構下被塑造。文章主張，近期衝擊（包括2025年6月以色列的打擊行動，以及2025年底至2026年的抗議浪潮）暴露了政權脆弱性；然而，國家以強制手段回應，也顯示強硬派權力核心仍具持久控制力。其政策意涵是：對德黑蘭的策略應聚焦最高領袖權力圈與安全機構，在校準式施壓與外交並行下，同時為間歇性不穩定預作準備，而非期待僅靠民選職位推動變革。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that Donald Trump's unique and prolonged lame-duck period, coupled with domestic political pressures, makes him dangerously prone to international instability. Having exhausted major diplomatic gambits, Trump is expected to channel his energy into high-stakes, unilateral actions, primarily targeting adversaries such as Iran and Cuba. These potential actions—ranging from fresh strikes in the Persian Gulf to attempts at regime change—carry a significant risk of destabilizing regional security and triggering a global economic crisis. Policymakers must anticipate this pivot to high-risk foreign policy to mitigate potential international flare-ups.
-
3.
The Blue Wave signals significant voter frustration with cost of living and inflation, giving Congress a mandate to prioritize affordability and cost-reduction measures. Economically, the rapid build-out of AI data centers is creating localized stress, driving up skilled labor wages and straining resources, while also facing constraints from power grids and potential local regulatory backlash. Policymakers must manage this 'sequencing issue'—addressing rising costs before full productivity gains from AI can materialize—and anticipate shifts in global data center infrastructure as the market matures.
-
4.
The built environment workforce, comprising 15.3 million workers across 95 occupations, is foundational to modern infrastructure and economic stability. While highly paid, the workforce suffers from significant demographic imbalances, being disproportionately white and male, and often lacking clear career progression pathways. To prevent project delays and cost overruns, policy must mandate that capital asset owners treat labor market forecasting as core to project planning. Strategic interventions are required to strengthen career pipelines through robust apprenticeships, improve retention, and actively recruit younger and more diverse workers.
-
5.
The U.S. is drastically reducing core funding to multilateral institutions, withdrawing from numerous bodies due to perceived misalignment with national interests. While multilateral channels offer critical advantages—such as pooling resources for global public goods and managing risk in fragile settings—the U.S.'s funding remains heavily 'earmarked,' which effectively 'bilateralizes' the system and undermines shared burden-sharing. This practice, coupled with deep cuts, diminishes the multilateral system's effectiveness and efficiency, particularly in humanitarian aid. Policy recommendations suggest the U.S. must adopt a systematic, published strategy for aid channel choice and shift from restrictive project-level earmarking to broader thematic funding to restore global cooperation.