The White House (via OMB) strongly protests Congressional efforts within the FY 2027 NDAA to prohibit the purchase of warships from foreign shipyards. The Administration argues that these restrictions undermine national security by limiting flexibility and hindering its strategy of leveraging allied yards, such as in the 'Finland model,' to drive investment into U.S. shipbuilding capacity. This signals a significant policy shift toward integrating international partners into advanced naval construction, suggesting the Pentagon is prepared to bypass traditional domestic build requirements for future combat vessels.
Tracking Trump’s Trade Deals
English Summary
CFR argues that Trump’s second-term trade strategy is not a single tariff reset but a rolling, country-by-country restructuring of U.S. trade relations through mostly nonbinding framework deals. The tracker shows that while Liberation Day tariffs set high baselines, subsequent bilateral agreements and exemptions lowered effective rates unevenly and exchanged tariff relief for market-access concessions, purchase pledges, investment commitments, and alignment with U.S. economic-security measures. It also finds these deals are highly flexible and unilateral in design, with weak legal durability, quick-termination provisions, and little congressional constraint, making them closer to instruments of leverage than traditional trade agreements. The policy implication is a less predictable global trade environment where partners must continuously bargain with Washington and balance access to the U.S. market against sovereignty costs and geopolitical exposure, especially vis-a-vis China.
中文摘要
CFR 主張，川普第二任期的貿易策略並非一次性的關稅重置，而是透過多數不具法律拘束力的框架性協議，按國別持續重構美國對外貿易關係。該追蹤報告顯示，儘管「解放日」關稅設定了高基準，後續雙邊協議與豁免措施卻以不均衡方式降低了實際稅率，並以關稅減讓交換市場准入讓步、採購承諾、投資承諾，以及與美國經濟安全措施的一致性。報告亦指出，這些協議在設計上高度彈性且偏向單邊，法律持久性薄弱，包含快速終止條款，且幾乎不受國會制衡，因此更接近施壓槓桿工具，而非傳統貿易協定。其政策意涵是，全球貿易環境將更難預測，各國夥伴必須持續與華府談判，並在取得美國市場准入與主權成本及地緣政治曝險（尤其相對於中國）之間權衡。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The Western Pacific remains a highly active theater defined by sustained U.S.-led military exercises and escalating great power competition. Key evidence includes continuous joint operations, such as RIMPAC 2026 in Hawaii and the deployment of CSGs into the South China Sea, juxtaposed with increased naval activity from both China (PLAN task groups) and Russia near Japan's critical straits. These movements underscore a strategic push by non-allied powers to assert presence and challenge regional norms. Policy implications dictate that allied nations must maintain robust multilateral cooperation and interoperability to safeguard freedom of navigation and manage escalating tensions in the Indo-Pacific.
-
3.
The article argues that the post-Cold War era of U.S. unipolarity, established by the perceived invincibility demonstrated during the Gulf War, has ended. This decline is driven by globalization and technological diffusion, which have democratized advanced military capabilities, allowing regional actors to challenge major powers. Consequently, policymakers must prepare for a more volatile international order marked by frequent crises, heightened costs for securing global trade chokepoints, and reduced predictability from American power. The new rules dictate that great powers can no longer effortlessly impose their will through force.
-
4.
The article argues that current market borrowing costs are rising independently of the Federal Reserve's policy stance, challenging the assumption that the Fed controls all rates. Evidence shows significant increases in key rates—such as 2-year Treasuries and mortgages—even while the effective federal funds rate remains steady. This divergence occurs because market rates reflect complex factors like inflation expectations, credit risk, and geopolitical volatility, which are outside the central bank's direct control. Policymakers should therefore recognize that sustainable rate moderation requires credible disinflation and disciplined government budgets, rather than relying solely on Fed intervention.
-
5.
Despite recent trade setbacks, the U.S. retains fundamental structural economic leverage over China, particularly in high-tech sectors and intermediate goods. While Beijing can temporarily weaponize specific resources like rare earths, these chokepoints are vulnerable to diversification efforts by the West. The article argues that the most effective strategy is not unilateral action but coordinated multilateral pressure from U.S. allies across Asia and Europe. Washington must therefore coordinate its economic statecraft with partners to maximize damage to China’s export-dependent model.