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.
What Nouri al-Maliki’s prime minister bid tells us about Iraq
English Summary
Chatham House argues that Nouri al-Maliki’s brief comeback bid exposed how Iraq’s political system remains highly vulnerable to external power competition despite official claims of restored sovereignty. The article cites Iran’s rapid backing of Maliki through networks tied to the Coordination Framework and PMF-linked actors, alongside Washington’s late but forceful intervention (including Trump’s public warning) to block an Iran-aligned outcome. It also frames Maliki’s candidacy as a break from Iraq’s post-2003 pattern of selecting weak consensus premiers, showing how quickly elite bargains can shift under foreign pressure. Strategically, the piece implies Iraq’s near-term stability depends on fast government formation, tighter management of militia-state fragmentation, and a balancing approach that reduces exposure to escalating US-Iran confrontation.
中文摘要
Chatham House主張，努里・馬利基（Nouri al-Maliki）短暫的回歸競逐，暴露出伊拉克政治體系儘管官方宣稱主權已恢復，仍高度易受外部強權競爭影響。文章指出，伊朗透過與「協調框架」（Coordination Framework）及與人民動員部隊（PMF）相關行動者相連的網絡，迅速支持馬利基；同時，華盛頓則在較晚階段但以強硬方式介入（包括川普的公開警告），以阻止親伊朗結果。文章亦將馬利基參選界定為對伊拉克2003年後偏好選擇弱勢共識型總理模式的突破，顯示在外部壓力下，菁英協議可迅速轉向。從戰略層面看，該文暗示伊拉克短期穩定取決於快速完成政府組建、加強管理民兵與國家體系碎片化，以及採取可降低暴露於美伊對抗升級風險的平衡策略。
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.
China's economic strategy is characterized by a persistent 'economics of denial,' prioritizing massive state-directed investment in advanced technology over addressing weak domestic consumption. This approach is rooted in a flawed belief that controlling physical capital will automatically generate productivity and wage growth, ignoring the structural imbalance where domestic demand consistently falls short of supply. This overinvestment and underconsumption model is unsustainable. Consequently, Beijing's policies will continue to generate global deflationary pressures and escalating trade friction, necessitating a fundamental pivot toward consumption-led growth for long-term stability.
-
4.
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.
-
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.