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.
Bridging two worlds: economic and technology governance
English Summary
Chatham House argues that global governance in 2026 can no longer treat economic/financial governance and digital-technology governance as separate domains. The event supports this by centering practical cross-cutting questions on digital currencies, AI’s economic impact, reform bottlenecks, and how global shocks affect both systems at once. Its core reasoning is that technological competition and retreat from multilateralism have created shared risks and interdependent policy choices across these fields. The policy implication is that governments should build integrated governance strategies, strengthen emerging economies’ influence in rule-shaping, and use digital tools to modernize economic and financial governance capacity.
中文摘要
查塔姆研究所主張，在2026年，全球治理已無法再將經濟／金融治理與數位科技治理視為彼此分離的領域。該活動以數位貨幣、人工智慧對經濟的影響、改革瓶頸，以及全球衝擊如何同時影響兩套系統等務實且跨領域議題為核心，支持此一觀點。其核心論證指出，科技競爭加劇與多邊主義退潮，已在這些領域之間形成共同風險與相互依存的政策選擇。其政策意涵是，各國政府應建立整合式治理策略，強化新興經濟體在規則塑造中的影響力，並運用數位工具提升經濟與金融治理能力的現代化。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The Brookings report argues that while modern economies are fundamentally regional in nature, effective governance requires states to align their authority and resources with empowered local cross-sector networks. Current state economic development systems are often fragmented and ill-equipped to manage structural shifts like AI or the energy transition. To modernize, policymakers must adopt a structured 'state-regional' model where states define strategic clusters and allocate capital, while regions coordinate execution using deep local knowledge. This approach has proven successful in catalyzing billions in private investment by ensuring state resources are deployed strategically across multiple sectors to achieve measurable economic growth.
-
3.
The cancellation of Formula 1 races in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia demonstrates how geopolitical conflict risk directly threatens major international economic events. The core finding is that high-profile global gatherings are highly vulnerable to modern long-range strike capabilities, as evidenced by Iran's operational threat against Gulf infrastructure. This vulnerability signals a broader regional instability that undermines the Gulf states’ efforts to diversify their economies through tourism and foreign investment. Consequently, this risk allows actors like Iran to exert coercive pressure on US policy by manipulating perceptions of safety and predictability across critical economic sectors.
-
4.
Global tech governance is rapidly maturing, with nations implementing stringent regulations across AI, data privacy, and model risk management (e.g., India's mandated 'kill switches' and Singapore’s GenAI guidelines). Industrial policy remains a key focus, evidenced by South Korea's semiconductor special act and China's comprehensive plans for green energy infrastructure and data centers. These coordinated state efforts signal a trend toward highly regulated, nationalistic technological development, requiring policymakers to navigate complex regulatory fragmentation while securing critical supply chains and maintaining economic resilience.
-
5.
Despite deep strategic competition and lack of mutual trust, US-China dialogue remains critical because both powers share a profound anxiety regarding AI's potential to destabilize national security and lead to unintended conflict. The analysis suggests that sustained engagement—particularly through Track II dialogues—is necessary to identify shared vulnerabilities, such as the use of AI in bio or cyber warfare by non-state actors. For policy, high-level talks must move beyond mere rhetoric, requiring meticulously aligned agendas to achieve concrete progress on global risks. Ultimately, dialogue is framed not as a path to trust, but as an essential mechanism driven by mutual interest for broader global stability.