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.
Europe after Nord Stream: The limits of energy security
English Summary
The sabotage of Nord Stream exposed profound vulnerabilities in Europe's energy security and critical undersea infrastructure to geopolitical threats. This event highlighted that reliance on interconnected networks makes the continent susceptible to sophisticated grey-zone warfare tactics, challenging traditional notions of energy stability. Consequently, the analysis argues that merely achieving energy independence is insufficient; Europe must urgently build systemic resilience and develop robust defense strategies to deter future attacks on its vital physical and digital infrastructure.
中文摘要
北溪管線的蓄意破壞，暴露了歐洲在能源安全和關鍵海底基礎設施方面面臨的地緣政治威脅下的深層脆弱性。此事件凸顯出，對相互連接網絡的依賴使大陸容易受到複雜的灰色地帶戰術攻擊，挑戰了傳統的能源穩定觀念。因此，本分析認為，單純達成能源獨立是遠遠不夠的；歐洲必須緊急建立系統性的韌性，並制定強健的防禦策略，以威懾未來針對其重要實體和數位基礎設施的襲擊。
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.
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.
-
4.
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.
-
5.
Escalating tensions between Iran and the U.S., coupled with renewed Houthi blockades in the Red Sea, have severely disrupted critical shipping chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz. Key evidence includes sharply reduced transit numbers and repeated attacks by Iranian-linked vessels off Oman's coast, while the Houthis enforce a maritime embargo on Saudi-linked ships. Strategically, this instability threatens global energy markets, forcing major powers to weigh their import needs. The continued volatility suggests that both Iran and the U.S. are willing to absorb significant economic pain to gain geopolitical leverage over regional stability.