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.
What’s Next for Trade and Tariffs?
English Summary
Following the Supreme Court's rejection of IEEPA-based reciprocal tariffs, the U.S. is pivoting to Section 122 and 301 authorities to maintain a high-tariff regime that is increasingly used for non-trade geopolitical leverage. Experts suggest that while the administration has secured several asymmetric bilateral deals, this unilateralist approach risks fragmenting global trade and isolating the U.S. from the allies needed to counter China's systemic industrial overcapacity. The panel highlights that China's growing trade surplus and manufacturing dominance remain unresolved by current protectionist measures or the existing WTO framework. Consequently, U.S. strategy may be drifting toward a 'Fortress America' posture that increases domestic costs while ceding influence over future global trade rules and market opportunities.
中文摘要
在最高法院駁回基於《國際緊急經濟權力法》（IEEPA）的對等關稅後，美國正轉向運用第122條與第301條授權，以維持日益被用作非貿易地緣政治槓桿的高關稅體制。專家指出，儘管政府已達成數項不對稱的雙邊協議，但這種單邊主義做法恐導致全球貿易碎片化，並使美國與應對中國系統性工業產能過剩所需的盟友隔絕。專家小組強調，中國日益增長的貿易順差及製造業主導地位，仍是當前保護主義措施或現行世貿組織（WTO）框架無法解決的難題。因此，美國戰略可能正趨向「美利堅堡壘」姿態，在增加國內成本的同時，也削弱了對未來全球貿易規則及市場機遇的影響力。
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.