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.
Subsea Data Centers: An Opportunity for the State of Israel
English Summary
The INSS argues that subsea data centers could become a strategic infrastructure option for Israel by addressing AI-era pressures on electricity, freshwater, and land while strengthening digital sovereignty. It cites evidence from Microsoft’s Project Natick and Chinese deployments showing major gains in cooling efficiency, reduced freshwater use, lower land footprint, and improved hardware reliability in sealed underwater environments. The paper also stresses that these benefits are offset by unresolved environmental effects, difficult maintenance logistics, heightened sabotage/espionage risks to subsea assets, and legal-regulatory gaps under current maritime law. Strategically, it recommends that Israel proactively assess pilot adoption, integrate planning with existing offshore energy/communications infrastructure, and develop dedicated regulation, environmental monitoring, and maritime protection doctrines in coordination with regional partners.
中文摘要
INSS 主張，海底資料中心可望成為以色列的戰略性基礎設施選項：在 AI 時代可緩解電力、淡水與土地資源壓力，並強化數位主權。報告援引微軟 Project Natick 與中國部署案例，指出在密封式水下環境中可大幅提升冷卻效率、降低淡水消耗與土地占用，並改善硬體可靠性。惟該文亦強調，上述效益仍受多項未解風險抵銷，包括潛在環境影響尚未明確、維護後勤困難、海底資產遭破壞與間諜活動風險升高，以及現行海洋法下法律與監管框架不足。就戰略層面，報告建議以色列應前瞻性評估試點導入，並與既有離岸能源與通訊基礎設施整合規劃，同時在與區域夥伴協調下，建立專門監管制度、環境監測機制與海上防護準則。
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.