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 should a more European NATO look like? The US and Europe disagree
English Summary
The article argues that NATO is entering a structural shift: many Europeans now define “doing more” as long-term strategic autonomy, while the US still expects greater European spending within US-led command, planning, and procurement frameworks. It supports this with evidence of collapsing European trust in the US, strong public backing for deeper EU military integration, and concrete moves such as oversubscribed EU defense funding instruments and tighter regional cooperation. Although Europe still faces near-term capability and coordination gaps, the author says current rearmament and political momentum are unlikely to reverse even if US politics change. The policy implication is that Washington and NATO need explicit planning for a more independent Europe now, or face growing alliance friction over command, capabilities, and defense-industrial choices.
中文摘要
本文主張北約正進入一場結構性轉變：許多歐洲國家如今將「做得更多」界定為追求長期戰略自主，而美國仍期待歐洲在美國主導的指揮、規劃與採購架構內增加支出。文章以多項證據支持此論點，包括歐洲對美國信任下滑、民意對更深層歐盟軍事整合的強力支持，以及歐盟防務融資工具超額認購與區域合作趨緊等具體動向。儘管歐洲短期內仍存在能力與協調缺口，作者認為即使美國政治局勢改變，當前再武裝與政治動能也不太可能逆轉。其政策意涵是：華府與北約現在就需明確規劃一個更獨立的歐洲，否則聯盟在指揮體系、能力建設與國防工業選擇上的摩擦將持續升高。
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.