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.
How to Fight an Economic War
English Summary
The article argues that the era of mutual benefit through globalization is ending, giving way to intensifying economic warfare. Great powers are increasingly weaponizing economic tools—including tariffs, financial infrastructure, and supply chains—to exert coercion and leverage against rivals. This shift means that economic integration can no longer be viewed as purely beneficial, but rather as a source of potential subordination. Policymakers must therefore develop new strategies to navigate and counter these geopolitical economic threats.
中文摘要
本文論述，透過全球化實現互利共贏的時代正在終結，取而代之的是經濟戰的加劇。大國正日益將經濟工具——包括關稅、金融基礎設施和供應鏈——武器化，以對競爭對手施加強制性壓力與槓桿。這一轉變意味著，經濟整合已不能再被視為純粹有益，反而可能成為潛在的從屬地位來源。因此，政策制定者必須制定新的策略，以應對和抵禦這些地緣經濟威脅。
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 article analyzes the deep ideological split within the Democratic Party regarding the future of U.S. foreign policy, pitting centrists against progressives. Centrists generally advocate for restoring a reformed U.S.-led international order and strengthening alliances, while progressives argue for a multipolar world that prioritizes transnational threats like climate change and AI over geopolitical competition. This division is most pronounced in the Middle East, where centrists push for greater pressure on Israel and a regional settlement, a shift largely welcomed by progressives. The core finding is that these internal debates threaten to consume a future administration with indecision, making it difficult for the U.S. to project a coherent and unified global strategy.
-
5.
The article argues that the Nordic model of deep, regional military cooperation (minilateralism) provides a crucial blueprint for sustaining NATO's collective defense against escalating Russian threats. This success is evidenced by the Nordic states' transition from cost-saving measures to a unified security imperative, establishing integrated command structures and specialized regional roles. Policy-wise, the report urges NATO to replicate this regionalization approach in other frontline areas, such as the Baltic and Black Seas. Establishing these subregional 'deterrence clusters' would enhance local response capabilities, strengthen the alliance's overall posture, and provide a vital hedge against potential paralysis of the main NATO structure.