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.
Imperfect Equilibrium: Civil-Military Relations in Russian Defense Policymaking
English Summary
The article argues that Russian defense policymaking operates within an "imperfect equilibrium" between presidential authority and military leadership, characterized by cycles of reform and centralization. Key evidence traces Putin's efforts to control the armed forces, from the sweeping reforms of Anatoly Serdyukov to the subsequent rearmament under Sergei Shoigu. However, the military's structural flaws became critically evident during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Consequently, effective military improvement requires deeper presidential involvement in decision-making and the significant militarization of the national economy.
中文摘要
本文論述俄羅斯國防政策制定在總統權威與軍方領導之間，運作於一種「不完美的平衡」之中，其特徵是改革與集權化的循環。關鍵證據追溯了普丁試圖控制武裝部隊的努力，從 Anatoly Serdyukov 進行的全面改革，到隨後由 Sergei Shoigu 推動的再武裝化。然而，軍方結構性的缺陷在 2022 年入侵烏克蘭期間變得極為明顯。因此，要實現有效的軍事提升，需要總統在決策過程中更深入地介入，並推動國家經濟的顯著軍事化。
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.