The analysis argues that Iran's long-standing political and military influence in Iraq is rapidly diminishing due to internal shifts and growing Iraqi resentment over foreign interference. Key evidence includes prominent Iranian-backed militias beginning to disarm or integrate with state forces, signaling a loss of independent power and control within the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF). This shift suggests that Baghdad is prioritizing national sovereignty and centralizing authority, allowing Iraq to potentially pivot its economic and political alignment toward the wider Gulf region. The primary implication is that Iran will lose its ability to use Iraq as a stable staging ground for projecting regional power, significantly weakening its broader 'axis of resistance.'
How to Survive in a Hostile World: Power, Politics, and the Case for Realism
English Summary
The core argument of this piece is that international relations are inherently anarchic and dangerous, making power the ultimate currency for state survival. Realism posits that because global cooperation is unreliable, states must prioritize the pursuit of national interests above idealistic moral considerations. Key reasoning emphasizes that stability is best achieved not through universal ideals, but through the pragmatic, artful management of state power and self-interest. Policymakers should therefore adopt a realist framework, focusing on robust statecraft and power projection to navigate a volatile world where trust is scarce.
中文摘要
本文的核心論點是，國際關係本質上是無政府且充滿危險的，這使得權力成為國家生存的終極貨幣。現實主義主張，由於全球合作不可靠，國家必須將追求國家利益置於理想化的道德考量之上。其關鍵論證強調，穩定並非透過普世理想來實現，而是透過對國家權力和自身利益的務實且高明管理。因此，政策制定者應採納現實主義框架，專注於穩健的國家治理和權力投射，以應對一個信任稀缺、變動不居的世界。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that Ukraine's success in modern warfare stems not from specific weapons, but from building a resilient ecosystem—including local software, sensors, and mass production capacity—to deploy cheap, abundant unmanned systems. Taiwan is criticized for missing this critical lesson by prioritizing the purchase of expensive traditional platforms over developing its own indigenous technological architecture. For effective deterrence against China, Taiwan must shift its focus from mere procurement to institutional reform, building a localized command-and-control system (analogous to Ukraine's Delta) and mastering distributed, affordable maritime defenses tailored for an island theater.
-
3.
The article argues that traditional concepts of nuclear deterrence are facing a "strange defeat" due to modern asymmetric warfare capabilities. Key evidence is Ukraine’s deep strike operation into Russia, where operatives used remote-launched drones and infiltration tactics to destroy strategic heavy bombers and damage nuclear command and control assets. This successful attack demonstrates the vulnerability of fixed military infrastructure, signaling that large-scale conventional or nuclear doctrines are increasingly obsolete. Policymakers must adjust strategies to account for low-cost, high-impact unconventional attacks rather than relying solely on traditional deterrence models.
-
4.
The article argues that maintaining strict civil control over the military is paramount to the health of the republic, warning that using armed forces for domestic or political issues constitutes dangerous 'mission creep.' Historically, leaders like Washington established this principle by deferring authority to civilian representatives; however, modern times show a public tendency to rely on the military to solve complex national problems. This reliance risks diverting the force from its primary combat mission and undermining democratic institutions. For policy, the implication is that national strength depends not on military capability alone, but on citizens actively engaging in political life and local communities, thereby strengthening civilian governance.
-
5.
The article posits that the United States must embrace a 'New Americanism,' signaling a fundamental shift in how Washington defines its national identity and global role. It argues that current geopolitical pressures—such as rising multipolarity and shifting alliances—require a re-evaluation of traditional, unilateral foreign policy doctrines. Strategically, this necessitates moving beyond purely transactional diplomacy toward a more integrated approach that balances domestic social cohesion with renewed international partnerships to maintain influence in key theaters.