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.
Who will be the next UN Secretary-General? Rafael Mariano Grossi and Rebeca Grynspan each present their vision
English Summary
The UN is facing profound institutional pressure due to great-power divisions, funding crises, and questions regarding the selective application of international rules. Candidates Rafael Grossi and Rebeca Grynspan are presenting distinct visions for the next Secretary-General, drawing on their expertise in specialized areas. Grossi emphasizes navigating complex technical diplomacy, such as nuclear non-proliferation, while Grynspan focuses on equitable development and the interests of vulnerable economies. The core challenge for the incoming leader is to restore confidence in the rules-based multilateral framework and implement deep structural reforms to ensure the UN's continued relevance and funding stability.
中文摘要
聯合國目前正因大國分裂、資金危機，以及國際規則選擇性執行的問題，面臨深層的制度壓力。候選人拉斐爾·格羅西（Rafael Grossi）和蕾貝卡·格林斯潘（Rebeca Grynspan）針對下一任秘書長提出了各自的願景，並運用了其專業領域的知識。格羅西強調應處理複雜的技術外交議題，例如核不擴散；而格林斯潘則著重於公平發展和弱勢經濟體的利益。新任領導人核心的挑戰在於，必須恢復對基於規則的多元體系的信心，並實施深層的結構性改革，以確保聯合國持續的相關性和資金穩定性。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
China's economic strategy is characterized by a persistent 'economics of denial,' prioritizing massive state-directed investment in advanced technology over addressing weak domestic consumption. This approach is rooted in a flawed belief that controlling physical capital will automatically generate productivity and wage growth, ignoring the structural imbalance where domestic demand consistently falls short of supply. This overinvestment and underconsumption model is unsustainable. Consequently, Beijing's policies will continue to generate global deflationary pressures and escalating trade friction, necessitating a fundamental pivot toward consumption-led growth for long-term stability.
-
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 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.
-
5.
The article analyzes the deep ideological split within the Democratic Party regarding the future of U.S. foreign policy, pitting centrists against progressives. Centrists generally advocate for restoring a reformed U.S.-led international order and strengthening alliances, while progressives argue for a multipolar world that prioritizes transnational threats like climate change and AI over geopolitical competition. This division is most pronounced in the Middle East, where centrists push for greater pressure on Israel and a regional settlement, a shift largely welcomed by progressives. The core finding is that these internal debates threaten to consume a future administration with indecision, making it difficult for the U.S. to project a coherent and unified global strategy.