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.
Why are Middle Eastern governments lobbying against a US attack on Iran?
English Summary
Chatham House argues that many Middle Eastern governments now oppose a US strike on Iran because their threat perception has shifted from fear of Iranian regional dominance to concern about Israeli escalation and the consequences of an Iranian state collapse. It points to the weakening of Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” after 7 October 2023, Israeli military pressure across the region, Assad’s fall, and heightened Gulf alarm after Israel’s September 2025 strike on Doha as evidence of this shift. The analysis says regime-change war and broad containment are viewed by Arab states as dangerous and historically ineffective, with high risks of fragmentation, migration, militancy, and regional spillover. The policy implication is to favor de-escalation and targeted, policy-based pressure on Iran’s nuclear, missile, and proxy activities through diplomacy rather than large-scale military action.
中文摘要
查塔姆研究所指出，許多中東政府如今反對美國對伊朗發動打擊，原因在於其威脅認知已從擔憂伊朗在區域內的主導地位，轉向憂慮以色列升級行動及伊朗國家崩潰的後果。該文以2023年10月7日後伊朗「抵抗軸心」的削弱、以色列在區域各地的軍事施壓、阿薩德政權垮台，以及以色列於2025年9月襲擊杜哈後波灣國家的警戒升高，作為此一轉變的證據。分析認為，阿拉伯國家將政權更替戰爭與廣泛遏制視為危險且在歷史上成效不彰，並伴隨高度的碎片化、移民、激進武裝與區域外溢風險。其政策意涵是，應透過外交手段，對伊朗核計畫、飛彈與代理人活動施加有針對性、以政策為基礎的壓力，優先採取降級而非大規模軍事行動。
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.U.S. Navy Orders Low-cost Missiles to Expand Fleet, Allied Long-Range Maritime Strike Capabilities (USNI)
The U.S. Navy is prioritizing the procurement of low-cost, long-range cruise missiles through programs like CHAOS and CAMS to significantly expand strike capabilities for both its own fleet and allied partners. This strategic shift provides affordable precision munitions capable of striking targets up to 1,000 nautical miles, addressing critical stockpiles depleted by recent conflicts. By developing these systems, the U.S. aims to overcome procurement delays faced by allies (such as Japan and Taiwan) who rely on older missile designs. Ultimately, this initiative strengthens allied deterrence and bolsters long-range maritime strike capabilities necessary for potential conflict with China.