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.
Head of Chatham House Ukraine Forum gives evidence to UK Parliament Defence Committee on Ukraine war
English Summary
Chatham House Ukraine Forum head Orysia Lutsevych testified before the UK Parliament Defence Committee that Ukrainian public support for a ceasefire along current front lines is growing, but remains contingent on credible security guarantees including a multinational deterrent force. She highlighted Ukraine's recent battlefield successes driven by defence industry innovation, national unity, and increased European support offsetting US withdrawal, while acknowledging war fatigue from constant bombardment and conscription debates. Lutsevych urged the UK to scale up production of long-range missiles and air defence interceptors, underscoring that any sustainable ceasefire arrangement must credibly prevent future Russian aggression to avoid imperilling both Ukrainian and broader European security.
中文摘要
英國皇家國際事務研究所（Chatham House）烏克蘭論壇主任奧莉西亞·盧采維奇（Orysia Lutsevych）於英國國會國防委員會作證指出，烏克蘭民眾對沿現有前線停火的支持度正在上升，但仍取決於可信的安全保障，包括多國嚇阻部隊。她強調烏克蘭近期在國防工業創新、國家團結及歐洲支持增加以彌補美國撤出等因素驅動下取得的戰場成果，同時也承認持續轟炸與徵兵爭議所帶來的戰爭疲勞。盧采維奇敦促英國擴大遠程飛彈與防空攔截系統的生產規模，並強調任何可持續的停火安排必須能切實防止俄羅斯未來的侵略行為，否則將危及烏克蘭及更廣泛的歐洲安全。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
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.
-
3.
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.
-
4.
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.
-
5.
Washington's increasing diplomatic and economic support for Morocco's claims over Western Sahara is significantly undermining regional peace efforts and exacerbating existing tensions. This alignment, which sidelines the UN's mandate (MINURSO) and solidifies a pro-Moroccan bloc, is evidenced by U.S. funding and political efforts to undermine the Polisario movement. Critically, this perceived bias is prompting regional rivals, particularly Algeria, to increase their own military and diplomatic involvement to counter the growing influence of the Morocco-Israel axis. Ultimately, the article warns that Washington's zero-sum approach of choosing sides, while aiming for stability, is likely to worsen the conflict outlook across the fragile North African continent.