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.
Can a Burnham government make Britain a global leader in science and technology?
English Summary
The article argues that while Britain has scientific potential, it lacks a sustained, coherent national strategy to compete in the technological landscape defined by US-China rivalry. Current government efforts are criticized for lacking long-term focus and strategic discipline, necessitating a shift from broad aspirations to identifying niche areas of genuine strategic leverage. For policy success, the UK must prioritize key technologies (like AI and quantum), establish permanent governmental foresight capabilities, and rigorously safeguard academic research security against foreign state acquisition, particularly from China.
中文摘要
本文指出，儘管英國具備科學潛力，但在面對美中科技競爭的格局下，卻缺乏持續且連貫的國家戰略。文章批評當前的政府努力缺乏長期焦點和戰略紀律，主張必須將重點從宏觀願景轉移到識別真正的戰略槓桿點的利基領域。為實現政策成功，英國應優先發展關鍵技術（如人工智慧與量子計算），建立常態化的政府前瞻預警機制，並嚴格保護學術研究安全，以防範外國國家（特別是中國）的獲取或竊取。
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 article argues that the U.S., through recent policy signals—such as questioning NATO's value or sympathizing with great-power territorial claims—is inadvertently adopting the core tenets of non-alignment, prioritizing transactional national interests over binding alliances. Historically, while non-alignment allowed developing nations to gain benefits without commitment, the analysis notes that this approach lacks the deep trust and shared obligations necessary for robust security structures. The implication is critical: by undermining established alliances, the U.S. risks losing its greatest strategic asset—the network of mutual commitments—as allies actively seek alternative bilateral or regional defense pacts.
-
4.
Myanmar has collapsed into Asia’s deadliest conflict, marked by massive economic collapse, widespread famine, and extreme brutality from the military junta. Despite this catastrophic humanitarian crisis, international actors—including major powers and regional blocs like ASEAN—are largely ignoring or withdrawing support for democratic forces. This neglect allows the junta to consolidate power, receiving critical military aid from authoritarian allies such as Russia and Belarus. Policy implications suggest that global indifference is enabling a failed state environment, making Myanmar a highly volatile flashpoint whose instability threatens broader Indo-Pacific security.
-
5.
Global tech governance is rapidly maturing, with nations implementing stringent regulations across AI, data privacy, and model risk management (e.g., India's mandated 'kill switches' and Singapore’s GenAI guidelines). Industrial policy remains a key focus, evidenced by South Korea's semiconductor special act and China's comprehensive plans for green energy infrastructure and data centers. These coordinated state efforts signal a trend toward highly regulated, nationalistic technological development, requiring policymakers to navigate complex regulatory fragmentation while securing critical supply chains and maintaining economic resilience.