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.
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 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 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.
The Brookings analysis highlights that while U.S. security assistance has increased significantly, its efficacy remains inconsistent, citing past failures in theaters like Mali alongside successes in Ukraine. The core argument is that the US must reform its approaches to maximize return on investment (ROI) and build genuinely effective partner forces. This strategic recalibration is critical for achieving central national security goals, especially within regions often deemed lower priority, such as Africa. Policy recommendations suggest moving toward more targeted, sustainable assistance models rather than broad military deployments.