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.
US and North America Programme
English Summary
Chatham House’s US and North America Programme argues that understanding policy shifts in Washington and Ottawa is essential to navigating wider global realignment. Its reasoning is based on a mix of policy-focused research, expert analysis, and cross-sector convenings that track how North American decisions shape geopolitical, security, and economic outcomes. The programme emphasizes durable structural trends rather than only short-term political cycles, including US-China strategy, trade-policy renegotiation, and evolving alliance structures. For policymakers and strategists in the UK, Europe, and other middle powers, the implication is to prepare for sustained changes in US external behavior through diversified partnerships, adaptive economic strategy, and long-horizon security planning beyond 2028.
中文摘要
英國皇家國際事務研究所（Chatham House）的美國與北美計畫主張，要掌握全球更廣泛的重組態勢，關鍵在於理解華盛頓與渥太華的政策轉向。其論證基礎來自以政策為導向的研究、專家分析，以及跨部門對話與會議，持續追蹤北美決策如何形塑地緣政治、安全與經濟結果。該計畫強調的是可持續的結構性趨勢，而非僅聚焦短期政治週期；相關議題包括美中戰略、貿易政策再談判，以及同盟結構的演變。對英國、歐洲及其他中等強權的政策制定者與戰略規劃者而言，其意涵在於：應透過夥伴關係多元化、具調適性的經濟策略，以及超越 2028 年的長期安全規劃，為美國對外行為的持續變化預作準備。
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 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.
-
5.
The article argues that while Ukraine's deep strikes and Russia's mounting economic instability create a window for peace talks, President Putin remains committed to maximalist demands and may escalate conflict through increased air assaults. Key evidence supporting this tension includes the strain on Russian energy infrastructure versus Moscow's refusal to negotiate in good faith, preferring instead to expand its claims. Consequently, the immediate strategic implication is that Washington must lead intensive diplomacy—a 'shuttle diplomacy'—to establish a framework agreement centered on a ceasefire along current lines and defining long-term European security arrangements.