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.
How global trade can drive fair and sustainable water use
English Summary
Chatham House argues that global trade should be treated as a policy lever for water security, not just a source of pressure on freshwater systems. The event rationale points to recent drought-linked disruptions, including higher prices for grains, olive oil, and chocolate and constraints on major shipping routes such as the Panama Canal and Rhine River, as evidence that water risk is already material to economies. It reasons that climate warming and volatility will intensify these risks across water-intensive supply chains unless water is valued as a shared transboundary resource. Strategically, it implies governments, firms, and investors should coordinate importer-exporter standards for fair water footprints, embed water risk in investment decisions, and pursue governance reforms that expand clean-water access and ecosystem restoration.
中文摘要
查塔姆研究所主張，全球貿易應被視為促進水安全的政策槓桿，而非僅是對淡水系統施加壓力的來源。該活動說明指出，近期與乾旱相關的中斷——包括穀物、橄欖油與巧克力價格上漲，以及巴拿馬運河與萊茵河等主要航運路線受限——顯示水風險已對經濟造成實質影響。其論證認為，若不將水視為跨境共享資源並予以合理定價，氣候暖化與波動性將在高耗水供應鏈中加劇這些風險。在策略層面，這意味著政府、企業與投資人應協調進出口國標準以建立公平的用水足跡、將水風險納入投資決策，並推動治理改革，以擴大潔淨用水可及性與生態系復育。
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.