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.
Integration or deregulation? Europe’s split over how to achieve sovereignty
English Summary
The article argues that Europe’s sovereignty debate is increasingly split between an integrationist strategy (more EU-level coordination, financing, and industrial policy) and a deregulatory growth strategy (less bureaucracy, stronger national competitiveness). It supports this by contrasting leaders and policy preferences: Macron and Draghi push pooled instruments such as joint procurement and common financing, while De Wever, Merz, and Meloni prioritize regulatory simplification and nationally driven industrial revival. The piece warns that the main danger is not institutional rupture but policy incoherence, where parallel national and EU initiatives in defense and energy create duplication and underpowered outcomes. Strategically, it suggests the most viable path is a calibrated hybrid: selective integration in scale-dependent sectors (defense, tech, energy infrastructure) combined with targeted deregulation to restore growth, with Germany’s choices likely to determine whether that synthesis holds.
中文摘要
該文主張，歐洲的主權辯論正日益分裂為兩條路線：一是整合主義策略（加強歐盟層級的協調、融資與產業政策），二是去監管成長策略（減少官僚負擔、強化國家競爭力）。文章透過對比領導人及其政策偏好加以論證：馬克宏與德拉吉推動聯合採購、共同融資等共享工具；德韋弗、梅爾茨與梅洛尼則優先推進法規簡化與國家主導的產業復興。文中警告，主要風險不在制度性斷裂，而在政策不一致：國家與歐盟在國防與能源領域並行推進的倡議，可能導致重複投入與力度不足的結果。從戰略上看，最可行的路徑是經過校準的混合模式：在依賴規模效應的部門（國防、科技、能源基礎設施）採取選擇性整合，同時配合定向去監管以恢復成長，而德國的政策選擇很可能決定此一綜合方案能否維持。
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 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.