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.
Director of Chatham House UK in the World Programme gives evidence at Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee
English Summary
Olivia O'Sullivan, Director of Chatham House's UK in the World Programme, testified before the UK Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee on the Integrated Security Fund and its role in addressing high-priority security threats. She highlighted the UK's shifting strategic security landscape driven by a massive contraction in global aid spending, forcing difficult trade-offs between immediate defence priorities, conflict prevention, and long-term complex risks. O'Sullivan warned that conflict-affected states risk being neglected under the new international aid environment and urged the government to ensure the centrally situated Integrated Security Fund is preserved through the FCDO restructure to enable long-term strategic investment. The testimony underscores the need for the UK to maintain institutional capacity for anticipating emerging threats even as budgetary pressures mount.
中文摘要
查塔姆研究所「英國與世界計畫」主任奧利維亞·奧沙利文（Olivia O'Sullivan）出席英國國會外交事務委員會，就「整合安全基金」及其在應對高優先安全威脅中的角色作證。她指出，全球援助支出大幅縮減正驅動英國戰略安全格局的轉變，迫使政府在即時國防優先事項、衝突預防與長期複雜風險之間做出艱難取捨。奧沙利文警告，在新的國際援助環境下，受衝突影響的國家面臨被忽視的風險，並敦促政府確保在外交、國協及發展事務部（FCDO）重組過程中，保留居於核心地位的整合安全基金，以實現長期戰略投資。此證詞凸顯英國在預算壓力日增之際，仍須維持預判新興威脅的制度能力。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
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.
-
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 article argues that bond market behavior is not driven by an 'addiction' to tariff revenue but rather by the government’s overall fiscal health, growth prospects, and debt servicing capacity. Key evidence shows that customs duties generate a fraction of total federal receipts compared to core tax streams, meaning tariffs are too small to fundamentally alter the nation's fiscal trajectory. Furthermore, market reactions were dictated by the aggregate economic damage caused by large tariffs (inflation/growth concerns), not merely the revenue generated. Policymakers should recognize that the real concern for bond investors remains persistent budget deficits and high interest costs, issues that require comprehensive structural reform rather than reliance on tariff income.
-
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.