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.
Book reviews: The social science behind the CIA and counting Russia’s crimes against nature
English Summary
Recent analyses emphasize that modern conflict requires integrating technological shifts, environmental accountability, and deep historical context into strategic planning. Key findings include how smartphones are fundamentally changing warfare through 'the stack' of global communications, and the necessity of applying international law concepts like 'ecocide' to document war damage (e.g., in Ukraine). Furthermore, effective intelligence demands a rigorous social science approach—as demonstrated by the professionalization of CIA analysis—and requires understanding regional powers, such as Iran, on their own strategic terms rather than through caricature. Policy implications mandate that national security strategies must anticipate tech-driven escalation while building analytical frameworks that account for environmental and historical dimensions.
中文摘要
近期分析強調，現代衝突的戰略規劃必須整合技術轉變、環境責任和深層歷史背景。主要發現包括智能手機如何透過全球通訊的「堆疊」（the stack）從根本上改變戰爭形式；以及應用國際法概念如「生態滅絕罪」（ecocide）來記錄戰爭破壞（例如在烏克蘭）。此外，有效的情報工作要求採用嚴謹的社會科學方法——正如中央情報局（CIA）分析專業化所證明的那樣——並且必須從區域強權（例如伊朗）自身的戰略視角去理解，而非依賴刻板印象。政策意涵要求國家安全戰略必須預測技術驅動的升級，同時建立能夠納入環境和歷史維度考量的分析框架。
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 author argues that the new 'Section 301' tariffs, ostensibly targeting forced labor, are not a genuine human rights measure but rather an attempt to re-establish a broad, punitive tariff wall. Key evidence supporting this claim includes the rushed nature of the investigation (98 pages for 60 economies), the lack of specific economic harm analysis, and the imposition of disproportionately high tariffs that far exceed any proportional response. Strategically, the use of human rights language to generate revenue sets a dangerous precedent, potentially allowing future administrations to bypass legislative processes and misuse trade law. The article concludes by urging Congress to reform these laws before they cause further damage to international trade frameworks.