The article argues that recent executive overreach and politicization have severely undermined established norms of U.S. civil-military relations. To restore professional standards, the incoming Congress must actively exercise its oversight powers, moving beyond mere criticism to demanding transparency in defense policy and personnel decisions. Key reforms include enforcing meritocratic promotion processes, requiring documented justification for senior officer removals, and preventing the partisan use of the military. These actions are crucial for bolstering public trust and ensuring the military remains a nonpartisan instrument of civilian control.
‘We’re just trying to earn enough to buy rice’: Living through the energy shock in Manila
English Summary
The Philippines faces acute economic vulnerability due to global energy shocks stemming from geopolitical conflicts in the Persian Gulf and potential Strait of Hormuz closures. Rising fuel prices, amplified by the nation's high reliance on imported oil and a weakening peso, are causing severe inflationary spirals that destabilize key sectors like agriculture and public transport. Although the government has implemented emergency measures, structural damage to global energy infrastructure and compounding threats—such as climate-driven agricultural disruption ('Super El Niño')—suggest sustained economic turbulence. Policymakers must therefore prepare for potential job losses, continued price volatility, and increased social instability.
中文摘要
由於波斯灣地區和霍爾木茲海峽潛在關閉的地緣政治衝突，菲律賓面臨嚴重的全球能源衝擊，導致經濟脆弱性加劇。燃料價格上漲，結合國家對進口石油的高度依賴以及本幣貶值，正引發惡化的通貨膨脹螺旋式上升，從而動搖農業和公共運輸等關鍵部門的穩定性。儘管政府已實施了緊急措施，但全球能源基礎設施的結構性損害，加上氣候變遷帶來的複合威脅（如「超級厄爾尼諾」導致的農作物歉收），預示著經濟將持續動盪不穩。因此，政策制定者必須為潛在的工作崗位流失、持續的價格波動和社會不穩定性做好準備。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
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.
-
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.