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.
Trump Should Aim to Neutralize the Iran Regime, Not Destroy It
English Summary
Charles Kupchan argues that the Trump administration should pursue a strategy of neutralizing Iran's regime rather than attempting to topple it, advocating for an 'Islamic Republic 2.0' with moderate leadership and strict constraints on its nuclear, missile, and proxy capabilities. He draws on the disastrous outcomes of U.S.-led regime change in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria to warn that dismantling the Islamic Republic would likely produce state fracture, civil war, and regional instability rather than democracy. The article notes that Iran's deeply embedded security apparatus—over one million troops plus paramilitary forces—makes regime collapse unlikely through airpower alone, while arming ethnic minorities risks igniting a multi-country civil war. Kupchan recommends focusing military strikes on degrading Iran's military capability while maintaining diplomatic channels to pragmatic Iranian elites, arguing that a defanged regime, even if imperfect, is far preferable to the chaos of state collapse.
中文摘要
乔治城大學教授乔尔斯·库普坎（Charles Kupchan）主張，川普政府應採取「中和」伊朗政權的策略，而非試圖推翻它。他倡議打造一個「伊斯蘭共和國2.0」，由溫和派領導並對其核武、飛彈及代理人能力施加嚴格限制。庫普坎援引美國在阿富汗、伊拉克、利比亞及敘利亞推動政權更迭的災難性後果，警告瓦解伊斯蘭共和國極可能導致國家分裂、內戰及區域動盪，而非民主轉型。文章指出，伊朗根深蒂固的安全體系——逾百萬正規軍加上準軍事部隊——使得僅憑空中打擊難以促成政權崩潰，而武裝少數族裔則有引發跨國內戰的風險。庫普坎建議將軍事打擊聚焦於削弱伊朗的軍事能力，同時保持與伊朗務實派菁英的外交管道，認為一個被「去爪」的政權即便不完美，也遠優於國家崩潰所帶來的混亂。
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.