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.
What Britain can learn from its struggle to rearm in the 1930 s
English Summary
This article draws parallels between Britain’s current rearmament challenges and its 1930s struggle, arguing that the UK must transition from economic caution to an urgency driven by the fear of strategic defeat. Historically, this shift required overcoming political paralysis and eventually framing defense spending as a means to protect democratic values and stimulate economic revival. Consequently, modern policy may need to embrace a more interventionist state role, utilizing defense contracts to foster domestic innovation while preparing the public for the social and political costs of increased security.
中文摘要
本文將英國當前的重整軍備挑戰與1930年代的困境進行類比，主張英國必須從經濟審慎轉向由戰略失敗恐懼所驅動的緊迫感。歷史上，這種轉變需要克服政治癱瘓，並最終將國防開支界定為保護民主價值與刺激經濟復甦的手段。因此，現代政策可能需要採取更具干預性的國家角色，利用國防合約促進國內創新，同時讓公眾為提升安全水平所帶來的社會與政治代價做好準備。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
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.
-
3.
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.
-
4.
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.
-
5.
The article argues that bond market behavior is not driven by an 'addiction' to tariff revenue but rather by the government’s overall fiscal health, growth prospects, and debt servicing capacity. Key evidence shows that customs duties generate a fraction of total federal receipts compared to core tax streams, meaning tariffs are too small to fundamentally alter the nation's fiscal trajectory. Furthermore, market reactions were dictated by the aggregate economic damage caused by large tariffs (inflation/growth concerns), not merely the revenue generated. Policymakers should recognize that the real concern for bond investors remains persistent budget deficits and high interest costs, issues that require comprehensive structural reform rather than reliance on tariff income.