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.
As Iran war reshapes the Middle East, Turkey’s regional role looks set to expand
English Summary
As the Iran war reshapes the Middle East, Turkey is poised to expand its regional influence, driven by concerns over Iran’s attempts to redefine regional security dynamics, particularly regarding the Strait of Hormuz. Evidence suggests Turkey fears a prolonged conflict and regional instability, leading to increased security partnerships and defense industry cooperation with Gulf states – a move partially motivated by a desire to diversify away from US security guarantees. Furthermore, the conflict is fueling opportunities for Turkey to expand its role in regional connectivity projects, such as trade corridor redesigns and transport networks, exemplified by initiatives like the Iraq Development Road and the Middle Corridor. This expansion is also underscored by the formation of new regional alignments, like the Turkey-Pakistan-Saudi Arabia-Egypt quartet, aimed at shaping post-war geopolitics.
中文摘要
随着伊朗战争重塑中东，土耳其正有机会扩大其地区影响力，这主要源于土耳其对伊朗试图重新定义地区安全格局，特别是就霍尔木兹海峡的争端所抱有的担忧。证据表明，土耳其担心冲突将持续不断，并导致地区不稳定，从而促成了与海湾国家加强安全伙伴关系和国防工业合作，这部分也受到其希望摆脱美国安全保障的动机驱动。此外，这场冲突也为土耳其在地区互联互通项目中的作用提供了机会，例如贸易走廊的重新设计和交通网络，如伊拉克发展公路和中线项目。这种扩张也体现在新的地区联盟的形成上，例如土耳其、巴基斯坦、沙特阿拉伯和埃及的四方合作，旨在塑造战后地缘政治格局。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
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.
-
3.
Cuba is on a trajectory toward an accelerating state and economic collapse, risking a point of no return. The state is deteriorating into "authoritarian anarchy," retaining its capacity for political repression but losing the ability to provide basic public services like health and safety. Economically, while the private sector is growing, this expansion is highly unequal, fueling cronyism and widening class gaps between the elite and the poor. If the current trend continues, the country risks calcifying these defects into a dysfunctional baseline, severely diminishing the chances of a stable, democratic transition.
-
4.
The article analyzes Finland's agreement to coordinate its conventional forces with French nuclear capabilities, clarifying that no nuclear weapons will be stationed in Finland. The author argues that increased communication between nuclear powers, rather than the deployment of weapons, is beneficial for reducing the risk of miscalculation and inadvertent escalation, particularly near Russia. For Europe, the policy recommendation is a responsible middle course: strengthening non-nuclear military capabilities to deter Russia while simultaneously negotiating a stable system, such as non-aligned buffer states. This approach is presented as a diplomatic alternative to both aggressive military action and surrender.
-
5.
The analysis argues that contemporary warfare is marked by a return to great power competition, often fueled by strategic hubris and historical overconfidence. A key failure across modern conflicts is the 'short-war fallacy'—the assumption that overwhelming military force guarantees a quick, decisive victory. This mindset blinds policymakers to the need for sustained resource mobilization and complex political outcomes. Consequently, effective strategy requires linking military objectives with clear, comprehensive political goals, rather than pursuing rapid, decisive regime changes or military victories in isolation.