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.
Climate security should be a bigger priority at the Munich Security Conference
English Summary
The article argues that the Munich Security Conference is underweighting climate and environmental risks, even though they are structural drivers of instability and should be treated as core security priorities. It points to climate’s reduced visibility in the 2026 MSC agenda and report, parallel downgrading in other fora, and country cases (including Haiti, Yemen, and Myanmar) where degraded livelihoods, water stress, and climate shocks worsened violence and undermined ceasefires. The author’s reasoning is that security analysis, conflict resolution, and peacebuilding fail when they ignore land, water, food, and energy pressures that shape grievances and state legitimacy. Policy-wise, it calls for embedding land restoration, water access, and climate-resilient livelihoods into stabilization and reconstruction, and advancing practical regional cooperation (e.g., EU, OSCE, NATO, AU) where global consensus is weak.
中文摘要
本文主張，慕尼黑安全會議對氣候與環境風險的重視不足，儘管這些風險是結構性不穩定的驅動因素，且應被視為核心安全優先事項。文章指出，氣候議題在2026年慕安會議程與報告中的能見度下降，其他論壇也出現平行降級，並列舉海地、葉門與緬甸等案例，說明生計惡化、水資源壓力與氣候衝擊如何加劇暴力並削弱停火。作者論證，若忽視形塑社會不滿與國家正當性的土地、水、糧食與能源壓力，安全分析、衝突解決與和平建構都將失效。政策上，文中呼籲將土地復育、用水可近性與氣候韌性生計納入穩定化與重建工作，並在全球共識薄弱時推動務實的區域合作（如歐盟、歐安組織、北約、非盟）。
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.