The article argues that the Federal Reserve's recent rate hike decision, while justifiable on inflation grounds, highlights a critical lack of an underlying, transparent policy framework. The core problem is that the Fed's decisions appear discretionary, leading to market uncertainty because the committee's judgment, rather than clear data, dictates policy shifts. The author proposes that the Fed adopt a formal monetary policy rule—an algebraic formula linking the target rate to indicators like inflation and unemployment—to replace subjective guidance. Implementing such a rule would provide market predictability, enhance transparency, and shield the Fed from political attacks by making deviations from the standard easily quantifiable.
Iran Is a Test of Trump’s National Defense Strategy
English Summary
The column argues that Trump’s 2026 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is built on prioritization and burden-sharing, but the Iran crisis could expose a gap between that framework and the president’s willingness to intervene aggressively. Froman points to NDS language that shifts U.S. focus toward homeland and hemispheric defense, expects allies in Europe and the Indo-Pacific to assume more conventional responsibilities, and seeks a limited “decent peace” with China rather than outright dominance. He contrasts that restraint with Trump’s military signaling toward Iran, including carrier redeployment and maximal demands, while warning that Iran is far harder to coerce or reshape than Venezuela and could produce prolonged instability after any regime shock. The strategic implication is that U.S. policy must keep Iran actions tightly bounded to avoid a costly quagmire that would undermine NDS prioritization and broader force posture goals.
中文摘要
該專欄主張，川普於2026年提出的《國家防衛戰略》（NDS）建立在「優先排序」與「責任分擔」之上，但伊朗危機可能暴露此一框架與總統積極干預意願之間的落差。Froman指出，NDS的措辭將美國重點轉向本土與半球防衛，要求歐洲與印太盟友承擔更多常規防務責任，並尋求與中國達成有限度的「體面和平」，而非追求全面主導。他將此種克制與川普對伊朗的軍事訊號形成對比，包括航艦重新部署與極限施壓式要求；同時警告，伊朗比委內瑞拉更難以脅迫或重塑，任何政權衝擊後都可能引發長期不穩定。其戰略意涵在於，美國政策必須將對伊行動嚴格限縮，以避免陷入高成本泥淖，進而削弱NDS的優先排序與更廣泛的兵力態勢目標。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The ongoing Ebola outbreak in the DRC serves as a critical warning that the global health security system is fundamentally unprepared for future biological threats. The difficulty in containing this outbreak is compounded by the rising risk of emerging pathogens and the growing potential for AI misuse in bioweapon development. Policy must therefore shift from reactive, crisis-driven funding to sustained, proactive investment in resilient public health infrastructure, particularly in conflict zones. Addressing this requires strengthening global surveillance, ensuring consistent international cooperation, and mitigating the intersection of conflict, climate change, and disease spread.
-
3.A Design Lab Pilot to Inform Strategies for Expanding Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Community Mental Health Centers (RAND)
Despite MOUD being the standard of care for opioid use disorder, access remains severely limited in Community Mental Health Centers (CMHCs), which serve the primary population with co-occurring disorders. A Design Lab pilot identified payment limitations and regulatory complexity as the chief barriers to implementation. The most feasible and high-impact strategy identified was establishing a structured learning exchange between CMHC leaders and insurers to improve reimbursement understanding. Policymakers and payers are therefore advised to pilot this learning exchange model to initiate broader payment reform and expand evidence-based care for this vulnerable population.
-
4.
The article argues that modern conflicts are increasingly defined by attrition, driven by three strategic gaps: the difference between nominal military power and usable capacity; the difficulty of achieving breakthroughs in a technologically advanced battlefield; and the detachment of military means from clear political objectives. Evidence from Ukraine and the Middle East demonstrates that sustained logistics, rapid technological adaptation, and proxy networks are now more decisive than sheer military size. For policymakers, this implies a strategic shift away from seeking short, decisive victories toward preparing for prolonged, high-cost engagements, requiring a focus on sustainable supply chains and defining concrete, attainable political end-states.
-
5.
Congress has significantly expanded presidential tariff authority by passing the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, allowing the executive to impose up to 100% tariffs on key buyers of Russian energy and sanctions enablers. The article argues that this legislation represents a dangerous abdication of Congress's Article I authority, as it grants the executive vast, discretionary power without specifying criteria for enforcement. Historically, the executive could claim tariffs were its own doing; however, by writing and passing this new authority, Congress now owns the resulting trade policy and its economic consequences. This shift implies that future tariffs will be viewed by the public as a direct legislative action, potentially undermining the administration's credibility and creating political vulnerability.