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.
What can financial regulators learn from Formula 1?
English Summary
The article argues that financial regulators should draw lessons from Formula 1's complex governance model, which successfully balances safety, commercial spectacle, and technical innovation. F1’s success stems from the FIA's ability to implement detailed, adaptable regulations—such as mandatory safety features or overhauls focusing on sustainable fuels—and rigorously enforce them. Policy implications suggest that regulators should adopt a more proactive and directive approach: being willing to block potentially risky innovations where societal benefits are unclear (e.g., stablecoins), while aggressively directing resources toward critical areas like cybersecurity or the net-zero transition. Ultimately, this model suggests that a complex, intrusive regulatory framework can optimize both safety and long-term economic growth.
中文摘要
本文論述金融監管機構應從F1方程式賽車的複雜治理模式中汲取經驗，該模式成功地平衡了安全、商業觀賞性與技術創新。F1的成功源於國際汽聯（FIA）能夠實施詳細且具適應性的法規——例如強制性的安全設施或著重於永續燃料的全面改革——並嚴格執行這些規定。政策意涵指出，監管機構應採取更主動和指導性的方法：當社會效益不明確時，應願意阻止潛在風險的創新（例如穩定幣），同時積極將資源導向網路安全或淨零轉型等關鍵領域。最終而言，此模式表明，一個複雜且具有介入性的監管框架能夠優化安全性和長期經濟增長。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
This RAND report assesses how energy and water technologies can sustain rapid, agile U.S. Air Force operations in contested environments. The analysis finds that near-term operational resilience is achievable through advancements in existing systems, such as improved batteries, vehicle-to-grid integration, and atmospheric water harvesting. While transformational solutions like fusion power or microreactors are progressing, they remain early stage and face significant regulatory challenges. Strategically, the findings imply a dual focus: immediate investment in maturing current technologies for deployability, alongside sustained R&D into advanced systems to ensure long-term military energy and resource independence.
-
3.
The article argues that Congress lacks effective mechanisms to oversee the vast number of international deals the executive branch concludes outside formal treaty processes, particularly nonbinding agreements (QNIs). Despite amendments like the Case Act aimed at transparency, oversight fails because administrations routinely miss reporting deadlines and exclude critical areas, such as Department of Defense commitments. This lack of timely disclosure and robust checks diminishes Congress's influence over US foreign policy. To regain control, the author suggests Congress must adopt stronger measures, such as automatically restricting appropriated funds for late-reported agreements or implementing 'report-and-wait' frameworks.
-
4.
The article argues that smaller states are becoming disproportionate victims of a collapsing global order, as great powers increasingly erode international law through unilateral actions, tariffs, and geopolitical coercion. Key evidence includes the neutering of institutions like the WTO and the withdrawal of global public goods (e.g., development aid), leaving small nations vulnerable to economic barriers and instability. For policy, the text stresses that while smaller states must collaborate to reinforce international norms and strengthen their collective voice, great powers must commit to reforming existing institutions rather than undermining them for short-term strategic gains.
-
5.
The article argues that proposed app store regulations, such as the App Store Freedom Act (ASFA), are misguided because they impose a counterproductive 'one-size-fits-all' model on digital markets. Key criticisms include how these mandates undermine genuine competition by forcing third-party payment systems and homogenizing business models, thereby harming stores reliant on third-party apps. Furthermore, the bill’s prohibition on price matching removes a critical competitive mechanism used in both physical and digital retail. Ultimately, adopting such sweeping regulations risks reducing consumer choice, stifling diverse business practices, and significantly increasing cybersecurity vulnerabilities by compromising secure operating environments.