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.
Global Governance and Security Centre
English Summary
Chatham House argues that the post-1945 international order is under growing strain from renewed interstate aggression, coercive diplomacy, and great-power competition over future global rules. It reasons that credibility gaps—such as perceived Western double standards on Ukraine and Gaza—and a more transactional US foreign policy are accelerating institutional fragmentation. The centre’s approach is to identify which legacy norms can be preserved, where new rules are needed, and how to give greater weight to smaller states, aspiring middle powers, and Global South voices across security, law, digital, and health domains. For policymakers, the implication is that effective strategy now requires pragmatic institutional reform and broader coalition-building, rather than reliance on legacy governance frameworks alone.
中文摘要
查塔姆研究所指出，1945年後形成的國際秩序正日益承受壓力，主因在於國家間侵略行為再起、脅迫式外交，以及大國對未來全球規則主導權的競爭。該機構認為，可信度落差——例如外界對西方在烏克蘭與加薩議題上採取雙重標準的觀感——再加上美國外交政策更趨交易化，正加速制度性碎片化。其研究取徑在於辨識哪些既有規範可予以維持、哪些領域需要新規則，並在安全、法律、數位與公共衛生等面向提升小型國家、崛起中的中等強國與全球南方聲音的權重。對決策者而言，其政策意涵是：有效戰略如今須倚賴務實的制度改革與更廣泛的聯盟建構，而非僅依靠既有治理框架。
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 built environment workforce, comprising 15.3 million workers across 95 occupations, is foundational to modern infrastructure and economic stability. While highly paid, the workforce suffers from significant demographic imbalances, being disproportionately white and male, and often lacking clear career progression pathways. To prevent project delays and cost overruns, policy must mandate that capital asset owners treat labor market forecasting as core to project planning. Strategic interventions are required to strengthen career pipelines through robust apprenticeships, improve retention, and actively recruit younger and more diverse workers.
-
5.
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.