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.
De-Hamasification of the Gaza Strip: Learning from Western and Arab Models of Deradicalization
English Summary
The memorandum argues that rebuilding Gaza after the October 7 war requires more than disarmament and infrastructure repair; it requires a deliberate "de-Hamasification" process to dismantle Hamas’s ideological and institutional dominance. INSS contends that Western deradicalization templates (e.g., postwar Germany and Japan) are poorly suited to Gaza’s current social and political conditions, and instead highlights contemporary Arab "civic-transformative" models as more applicable. Its reasoning emphasizes a combined approach: sustained security demilitarization, Arab-led religious and political legitimization, re-education toward tolerance, and economic rehabilitation tied to a credible political horizon. Strategically, the paper implies that Israel and regional partners should pursue an integrated security-political-religious framework to build a durable post-Hamas governing alternative and reduce long-term instability.
中文摘要
該備忘錄主張，於 10 月 7 日戰爭後重建加薩，不能僅止於解除武裝與修復基礎設施；更需要一套有意識、具規劃性的「去哈瑪斯化」進程，以瓦解哈瑪斯在意識形態與制度層面的主導地位。INSS 認為，西方去激進化範本（如戰後德國與日本）與加薩當前社會與政治條件契合度不足，因而強調當代阿拉伯「公民轉型」模式更具適用性。其論證重點在於綜合性路徑：持續性的安全去軍事化、由阿拉伯方面主導的宗教與政治正當化、導向寬容的再教育，以及與可信政治前景掛鉤的經濟復健。就戰略層面而言，本文意涵是以色列與區域夥伴應推動一體化的安全—政治—宗教框架，以建立可持續的後哈瑪斯治理替代方案，並降低長期不穩定風險。
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.
Myanmar has collapsed into Asia’s deadliest conflict, marked by massive economic collapse, widespread famine, and extreme brutality from the military junta. Despite this catastrophic humanitarian crisis, international actors—including major powers and regional blocs like ASEAN—are largely ignoring or withdrawing support for democratic forces. This neglect allows the junta to consolidate power, receiving critical military aid from authoritarian allies such as Russia and Belarus. Policy implications suggest that global indifference is enabling a failed state environment, making Myanmar a highly volatile flashpoint whose instability threatens broader Indo-Pacific security.