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.
The new Eurasian chessboard: Power, connectivity and strategic resources
English Summary
Central Asia is identified as a critical geopolitical pivot point, sitting at the nexus of East-West connectivity, energy transition, and global order restructuring. The region's governments are increasingly asserting strategic independence from Moscow while maintaining non-alignment with the West, making it a key testing ground for new geopolitical dynamics. Consequently, the report stresses that external powers—including the EU, US, UK, and Türkiye—must enhance cooperation. This coordinated effort is crucial for supporting regional stability, mitigating great power competition, and effectively harnessing Central Asia's substantial growth potential.
中文摘要
中亞被認定為一個關鍵的地緣政治樞紐點，處於東西方互聯、能源轉型和全球秩序重組的交匯點。該地區的政府正日益從莫斯科主張戰略獨立，同時與西方保持不結盟立場，使其成為檢驗新地緣政治動態的關鍵場域。因此，報告強調，包括歐盟、美國、英國和土耳其在內的外部大國必須加強合作。這種協調的努力對於支持區域穩定、緩解大國競爭，以及有效發揮中亞巨大的增長潛力至關重要。
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.