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 a Russia–Ukraine ceasefire could imperil Ukrainian and European security
English Summary
Chatham House warns that a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine poses significant risks to European and Ukrainian security. The primary concern is that Russia has a history of manipulating agreements, and a poorly defined pause could allow Russian forces to regroup and rearm. Furthermore, Moscow could continue exerting pressure through non-military means, including cyberattacks, sabotage, and election interference. Therefore, the paper advises that Ukraine and its partners must proactively mitigate these risks to ensure long-term European security and stability.
中文摘要
查塔姆學會警告，俄烏之間的停火行動對歐洲和烏克蘭的安全構成重大風險。主要擔憂在於俄羅斯有操縱協議的歷史記錄，而定義不清的暫停可能會讓俄軍有機會重整部署和重新武裝。此外，莫斯科可能會透過非軍事手段持續施壓，包括網路攻擊、破壞行為和干預選舉。因此，該報告建議烏克蘭及其夥伴必須主動減輕這些風險，以確保長期的歐洲安全與穩定。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
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.
-
3.
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.
-
4.
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.
-
5.
Washington's increasing diplomatic and economic support for Morocco's claims over Western Sahara is significantly undermining regional peace efforts and exacerbating existing tensions. This alignment, which sidelines the UN's mandate (MINURSO) and solidifies a pro-Moroccan bloc, is evidenced by U.S. funding and political efforts to undermine the Polisario movement. Critically, this perceived bias is prompting regional rivals, particularly Algeria, to increase their own military and diplomatic involvement to counter the growing influence of the Morocco-Israel axis. Ultimately, the article warns that Washington's zero-sum approach of choosing sides, while aiming for stability, is likely to worsen the conflict outlook across the fragile North African continent.