The China-Russia partnership is a highly consequential geopolitical alignment driven by a shared goal of countering U.S. hegemony and reshaping the international order into a multipolar system. While not a formal alliance, this relationship is strengthened by Russia's increasing economic reliance on China following Western sanctions, which allows Beijing to leverage its influence. Policymakers should note that while the partnership projects deep solidarity (as seen in high-level summits), it remains complex and limited by mutual mistrust and competing strategic interests. This enduring alignment poses a significant challenge to U.S. interests and requires continued diplomatic vigilance.
Global Economy and Finance Programme
English Summary
Chatham House’s Global Economy and Finance Programme argues that independent, policy-oriented analysis can improve international economic decision-making when it is tightly connected to real-world policymakers and practitioners. Its reasoning rests on a three-part operating model: original research on emerging global finance issues, convening expert dialogues across academia, government, and business, and running private briefings for senior decision-makers. The programme’s topic coverage, from G7/G20 governance and trade to debt, climate economics, and monetary system reform, indicates a systems-level approach to interconnected global risks. Strategically, this implies policymakers should prioritize cross-border coordination, use evidence-led forums to build consensus, and translate technical analysis into actionable policy pathways quickly.
中文摘要
查塔姆研究所（Chatham House）全球經濟與金融計畫主張，若能與第一線政策制定者及實務工作者緊密連結，獨立且以政策為導向的分析可提升國際經濟決策品質。其論證建立於三部分運作模式：針對新興全球金融議題進行原創研究、召集學術界與政府及企業之間的專家對話，以及為高階決策者提供非公開簡報。該計畫涵蓋議題橫跨 G7／G20 治理、貿易、債務、氣候經濟學與貨幣體系改革，顯示其以系統層次處理彼此連動的全球風險。從策略意涵看，政策制定者應優先推動跨境協調，運用以證據為基礎的論壇建立共識，並迅速將技術分析轉化為可執行的政策路徑。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The Chatham House analysis concludes that the UK's Defence Investment Plan (DIP) will be viewed by NATO allies as a mixed bag, primarily due to its failure to commit to higher GDP spending targets. However, the plan signals critical strategic improvements by emphasizing novel technologies—such as autonomous systems and digital infrastructure—and enhancing readiness. Crucially, the DIP adopts an international focus through major collaborative programs (e.g., AUKUS, GCAP) and establishes a new National Armaments Director Group (NADG). This structural shift toward flexible, portfolio-based collaboration is strategically valuable for NATO allies seeking reliable partners as US conventional forces reduce their European presence.
-
3.
The CSIS analysis finds that the U.S. grid's regulatory framework for connecting large loads is severely fragmented and unprepared for the massive electricity demands posed by AI data centers. FERC has mandated significant reforms across six regional operators, requiring them to modernize interconnection studies, prevent cost-shifting, and establish clear tariffs for co-located generation. Evidence shows that most operators fall far short of these new standards, necessitating complex, multi-year policy adjustments rather than simple compliance. Policymakers must coordinate federal regulation (FERC) with state utilities to accelerate grid modernization, ensuring energy affordability while maintaining technological competitiveness.
-
4.
The article argues that while Ukraine's deep strikes and Russia's mounting economic instability create a window for peace talks, President Putin remains committed to maximalist demands and may escalate conflict through increased air assaults. Key evidence supporting this tension includes the strain on Russian energy infrastructure versus Moscow's refusal to negotiate in good faith, preferring instead to expand its claims. Consequently, the immediate strategic implication is that Washington must lead intensive diplomacy—a 'shuttle diplomacy'—to establish a framework agreement centered on a ceasefire along current lines and defining long-term European security arrangements.
-
5.
Russia utilizes long-range missile and drone strikes as a sophisticated coercive strategy, concentrating attacks on critical geographical nodes—including energy grids, ports, industrial centers, and major urban areas—to impose cumulative costs. This campaign aims to degrade Ukraine's logistics, strain its infrastructure, and apply sustained psychological pressure rather than achieving rapid military victory. The analysis suggests that modern coercion leverages civilian vulnerability and systemic damage as primary tools of geopolitical leverage, weakening the adversary’s ability to govern or sustain resistance. Policymakers must recognize this shift toward using economic and infrastructural attrition to achieve strategic political outcomes.