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.
Global Economy and Finance Programme
English Summary
Chatham House’s Global Economy and Finance Programme argues that independent, policy-oriented analysis can improve international economic decision-making when it is tightly connected to real-world policymakers and practitioners. Its reasoning rests on a three-part operating model: original research on emerging global finance issues, convening expert dialogues across academia, government, and business, and running private briefings for senior decision-makers. The programme’s topic coverage, from G7/G20 governance and trade to debt, climate economics, and monetary system reform, indicates a systems-level approach to interconnected global risks. Strategically, this implies policymakers should prioritize cross-border coordination, use evidence-led forums to build consensus, and translate technical analysis into actionable policy pathways quickly.
中文摘要
查塔姆研究所（Chatham House）全球經濟與金融計畫主張，若能與第一線政策制定者及實務工作者緊密連結，獨立且以政策為導向的分析可提升國際經濟決策品質。其論證建立於三部分運作模式：針對新興全球金融議題進行原創研究、召集學術界與政府及企業之間的專家對話，以及為高階決策者提供非公開簡報。該計畫涵蓋議題橫跨 G7／G20 治理、貿易、債務、氣候經濟學與貨幣體系改革，顯示其以系統層次處理彼此連動的全球風險。從策略意涵看，政策制定者應優先推動跨境協調，運用以證據為基礎的論壇建立共識，並迅速將技術分析轉化為可執行的政策路徑。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
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.
-
3.
The article argues that China's ongoing purges are not signs of weakness, but rather a sophisticated, historically rooted process of 'rectification' that strengthens the CCP's grip on power. This mechanism requires cadres to submit mandatory self-criticisms and build permanent, detailed personnel files (dossiers). This system of record-keeping is the CCP's primary source of resilience, creating profound, internalized discipline that controls internal dissent. Policymakers must recognize that the regime's durability stems from this deep internal control mechanism, making succession—rather than internal purges—the ultimate strategic vulnerability.
-
4.
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.
-
5.
The report argues that the rapid integration of AI creates novel and complex risks—such as deepfakes, misinformation, and intellectual property disputes—that do not fit within existing insurance lines, challenging the technology's overall insurability. Evidence shows that while lawsuits center on IP, the scope of harm is expanding into privacy and product liability, and insurers are responding unevenly with a mix of exclusions and limited coverage. Policymakers must therefore focus on managing systemic, correlated AI risks, including shared model dependencies and universal attacks, to prevent market failure and guide necessary regulatory oversight.