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.
There Is Only One Sphere of Influence
English Summary
The article challenges the notion of competing global spheres of influence, arguing instead that the United States maintains a singular and dominant sphere of influence. This dominance is rooted in the US's vast home region, which serves as a powerful, unconstrained hemispheric base. Consequently, American power and commerce can project outward globally, largely unhindered by major geopolitical rivals such as China or Russia. Policymakers should recognize this structural advantage, as it suggests a sustained capacity for the US to dictate global terms of engagement and maintain its leading role in international commerce.
中文摘要
本文質疑「全球競爭性勢力圈」的觀點，主張美國維持著單一且主導的勢力範圍。這種主導地位根植於美國廣闊的本土區域，使其成為一個強大、不受限制的半球基地。因此，美國的實力與商業能夠向全球投射，而不會受到中國或俄羅斯等主要地緣政治競爭對手的重大阻礙。政策制定者應認識到這一結構性優勢，因為它暗示了美國持續制定全球參與規則和維持其國際商業領先地位的能力。
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.
The roundtable established that implementing generational bans represents a powerful, long-term strategy for tackling deeply entrenched public health crises like tobacco use. Using the UK’s permanent ban on selling cigarettes to those born after 2009 as key evidence, experts analyzed how such policies fundamentally alter market dynamics and consumer behavior over time. These lessons suggest that other nations facing persistent addiction challenges should consider adopting similar age-gating or generational restrictions to accelerate decline and set a precedent for future public health policy interventions.
-
5.
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.