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.
Global cooperation on nuclear disarmament looks even further away
English Summary
The 2026 NPT Review Conference failed to reach consensus, marking the third consecutive unsuccessful outcome and signaling a significant deterioration in global efforts towards nuclear disarmament. Key evidence points to a fractured international environment, exacerbated by disputes over Iran, Ukraine, and North Korea, with the ‘P5’ states actively resisting commitments to disarmament. The expiration of New START without a replacement, coupled with accelerating nuclear build-ups by China and other nations, further weakened the NPT regime and the ‘grand bargain’ of non-proliferation in exchange for disarmament. Ultimately, the conference highlighted a shift towards bilateral leverage among major powers, diminishing the effectiveness of consensus-based multilateral processes.
中文摘要
2026年《不拡散條約》審查會議未能達成共識，標誌著第三次失敗結果，並預示著全球對核裁軍努力的顯著惡化。關鍵證據表明，國際環境呈現分裂，主要受到伊朗、烏克蘭和朝鮮等爭端加劇的影響，而‘五國’國家積極抵制裁軍承諾。新START條約到期且沒有替代方案，同時中國和其他國家的核武器擴張加速，進一步削弱了《不拡散條約》的效力以及非核裁軍換取裁軍的‘大交易’。最終，會議凸顯了主要大國之間雙邊權力提升的趨勢，削弱了以共識為基礎的多邊程序效力。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
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.
-
3.
The Pacific region is identified as the top priority for U.S. military deterrence due to intensifying strategic competition with China and the critical nature of regional trade routes. Maintaining stability, particularly across the Taiwan Strait, and upholding alliance commitments are central to preventing conflict. Strategically, the U.S. must invest heavily in joint warfighting capabilities, technological innovation, and operationalizing asymmetric defense measures to improve regional readiness.
-
4.
The core finding is that the stability and success of any political system depend less on its formal institutions and more on the moral sentiments and ethical character of its citizens. The analysis argues that ethics guides all human relationships, rendering clever institutional designs—such as the separation of powers—ineffective if the populace lacks a virtuous concern for the public good. Consequently, policy and strategic efforts must prioritize fostering ethical discourse and individual liberty (liberalism) rather than relying on state coercion or attempting to mandate equality of outcome. The implication is that structural reforms alone are insufficient; true progress requires cultivating a responsible, self-respecting citizenry.
-
5.
The article argues that antitrust enforcement in strategically vital technology markets must expand beyond traditional consumer welfare analysis. Current remedies, such as divestiture or behavioral restrictions, can have profound national security consequences by weakening U.S. firms' global competitive standing and ability to invest in foundational technologies. This vulnerability could create durable market advantages for PRC competitors, making it difficult for U.S. companies to maintain global scale. Therefore, the federal government must mandate a separate, proactive national security assessment to inform antitrust decisions involving foundational technologies, ensuring that U.S. technological leadership is protected from the outset.