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.
Why a Nervous Mideast Braces for a New Round of Upheaval
English Summary
The article argues that the unusually large U.S. military buildup around Iran has put the Middle East on edge because regional governments see a high risk of conflict but still lack clarity on Washington’s objectives. It points to Gulf states’ refusal to join an attack, dual U.S. carrier deployments, and fears of Iranian retaliation through Strait of Hormuz disruption and proxy strikes, while noting Geneva talks produced only vague “guiding principles” rather than a concrete deal. It also highlights the contradiction between launching a Gaza reconstruction-oriented Board of Peace and simultaneously signaling readiness for military escalation against Tehran. The policy implication is that U.S. strategy must align deterrence with explicit end-states, coalition reassurance, and escalation-control mechanisms to avoid a broader regional war that could derail both Gulf economic priorities and Gaza stabilization.
中文摘要
文章主張，美國在伊朗周邊異常大規模的軍事集結已使中東局勢高度緊張，因為區域各國政府雖普遍認為衝突風險偏高，卻仍不清楚華府的戰略目標。文章指出，波灣國家拒絕參與對伊攻擊、美軍同時部署兩個航母打擊群，以及外界對伊朗可能透過擾亂荷莫茲海峽與代理人打擊進行報復的憂慮；同時也提到，日內瓦會談僅產出籠統的「指導原則」，未形成具體協議。文章並強調一項政策矛盾：一方面推出以加薩重建為導向的「和平委員會」（Board of Peace），另一方面又釋出對德黑蘭升高軍事行動的訊號。其政策意涵是，美國策略必須在嚇阻之外明確界定終局目標、安撫盟友並建立升高控制機制，以避免更廣泛的區域戰爭，否則恐衝擊波灣經濟優先議程與加薩穩定進程。
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.