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.
250 Years of American Foreign Policy
English Summary
The article traces U.S. foreign policy over 250 years, arguing that American history is defined by recurring tensions between protecting national self-interest and articulating stated ideals. Key evidence highlights how the US has navigated this tension through strategic actions—such as securing alliances (France), establishing regional authority (Monroe Doctrine), and expanding territory via diplomacy or conflict (Louisiana Purchase). The enduring policy challenge, therefore, remains determining when to intervene in foreign conflicts, how to balance moral principles with strategic needs, and managing the responsibilities inherent in growing global power. These historical dilemmas continue to shape modern American geopolitical strategy.
中文摘要
本文追溯了美國跨越兩百五十年的外交政策，論點指出美國歷史的定義，源於保護國家自身利益與闡述既定理想之間不斷重複的張力。關鍵證據突顯了美國如何透過一系列戰略行動來應對這種張力——例如確保聯盟（法國）、建立區域權威（門羅主義），以及透過外交或衝突擴張領土（路易斯安那購買）。因此，持續存在的政策挑戰在於判斷何時介入外國衝突、如何在道德原則與戰略需求之間取得平衡，以及管理作為一個日益強大的全球性力量所固有的責任。這些歷史困境至今仍持續形塑著現代美國的地緣政治策略。
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.