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.
The AU summit is an opportunity for decisive action to end the war in Sudan
English Summary
Chatham House argues that the African Union’s handling of Sudan has become a major leadership failure and that the February 2026 AU summit is a narrow chance to reset strategy before state fragmentation becomes irreversible. It cites the scale of the crisis (about two-thirds of 53 million people needing aid, 13.6 million displaced, and nearly half facing severe food insecurity) and shows how AU inconsistency and weak enforcement have reduced leverage over both the SAF and RSF. The paper also highlights a fragmented mediation landscape, with the US-led Quad, AU-led Quintet, and AU internal mechanisms pulling in different directions while key regional actors are widely perceived as biased. For policy, it recommends the AU reassert primacy, enforce norm-consistent neutrality, and link ceasefire/humanitarian negotiations to a unified AU-led political process to increase pressure on the warring parties and limit wider regional spillover.
中文摘要
研究指出，非洲聯盟對蘇丹危機的處理已構成重大領導失誤，而2026年2月的非盟峰會是在國家碎片化走向不可逆之前重設整體戰略的狹窄機會。報告援引危機規模：在5,300萬人口中，約三分之二需要人道援助，1,360萬人流離失所，且近半人口面臨嚴重糧食不安全。報告並顯示，非盟政策不一致與執行乏力，已削弱其對蘇丹武裝部隊（SAF）與快速支援部隊（RSF）雙方的槓桿力。論文亦指出調停格局碎片化：美國主導的四方機制、非盟主導的五方機制及非盟內部機制彼此方向分歧，而關鍵區域行為體普遍被視為帶有偏向。政策上，報告建議非盟重申主導地位、落實符合規範的一致中立，並將停火與人道談判連結至統一的非盟主導政治進程，以提高對交戰各方的壓力並抑制更廣泛的區域外溢風險。
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 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.
-
5.
Myanmar has collapsed into Asia’s deadliest conflict, marked by massive economic collapse, widespread famine, and extreme brutality from the military junta. Despite this catastrophic humanitarian crisis, international actors—including major powers and regional blocs like ASEAN—are largely ignoring or withdrawing support for democratic forces. This neglect allows the junta to consolidate power, receiving critical military aid from authoritarian allies such as Russia and Belarus. Policy implications suggest that global indifference is enabling a failed state environment, making Myanmar a highly volatile flashpoint whose instability threatens broader Indo-Pacific security.