The article argues that Donald Trump's unique and prolonged lame-duck period, coupled with domestic political pressures, makes him dangerously prone to international instability. Having exhausted major diplomatic gambits, Trump is expected to channel his energy into high-stakes, unilateral actions, primarily targeting adversaries such as Iran and Cuba. These potential actions—ranging from fresh strikes in the Persian Gulf to attempts at regime change—carry a significant risk of destabilizing regional security and triggering a global economic crisis. Policymakers must anticipate this pivot to high-risk foreign policy to mitigate potential international flare-ups.
Can a Burnham government make Britain a global leader in science and technology?
English Summary
The article argues that while Britain has scientific potential, it lacks a sustained, coherent national strategy to compete in the technological landscape defined by US-China rivalry. Current government efforts are criticized for lacking long-term focus and strategic discipline, necessitating a shift from broad aspirations to identifying niche areas of genuine strategic leverage. For policy success, the UK must prioritize key technologies (like AI and quantum), establish permanent governmental foresight capabilities, and rigorously safeguard academic research security against foreign state acquisition, particularly from China.
中文摘要
本文指出，儘管英國具備科學潛力，但在面對美中科技競爭的格局下，卻缺乏持續且連貫的國家戰略。文章批評當前的政府努力缺乏長期焦點和戰略紀律，主張必須將重點從宏觀願景轉移到識別真正的戰略槓桿點的利基領域。為實現政策成功，英國應優先發展關鍵技術（如人工智慧與量子計算），建立常態化的政府前瞻預警機制，並嚴格保護學術研究安全，以防範外國國家（特別是中國）的獲取或竊取。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
China's economic strategy is characterized by a persistent 'economics of denial,' prioritizing massive state-directed investment in advanced technology over addressing weak domestic consumption. This approach is rooted in a flawed belief that controlling physical capital will automatically generate productivity and wage growth, ignoring the structural imbalance where domestic demand consistently falls short of supply. This overinvestment and underconsumption model is unsustainable. Consequently, Beijing's policies will continue to generate global deflationary pressures and escalating trade friction, necessitating a fundamental pivot toward consumption-led growth for long-term stability.
-
3.
The Blue Wave signals significant voter frustration with cost of living and inflation, giving Congress a mandate to prioritize affordability and cost-reduction measures. Economically, the rapid build-out of AI data centers is creating localized stress, driving up skilled labor wages and straining resources, while also facing constraints from power grids and potential local regulatory backlash. Policymakers must manage this 'sequencing issue'—addressing rising costs before full productivity gains from AI can materialize—and anticipate shifts in global data center infrastructure as the market matures.
-
4.
The article analyzes the deep ideological split within the Democratic Party regarding the future of U.S. foreign policy, pitting centrists against progressives. Centrists generally advocate for restoring a reformed U.S.-led international order and strengthening alliances, while progressives argue for a multipolar world that prioritizes transnational threats like climate change and AI over geopolitical competition. This division is most pronounced in the Middle East, where centrists push for greater pressure on Israel and a regional settlement, a shift largely welcomed by progressives. The core finding is that these internal debates threaten to consume a future administration with indecision, making it difficult for the U.S. to project a coherent and unified global strategy.
-
5.
The article argues that the AI sector risks undergoing a 'digital Morganization,' where financial instability and overinvestment could lead to the consolidation of power among a few large hyperscalers. This concentration is driven by the financial vulnerability of independent data centers, which may struggle to support the massive debt financing the AI boom. While AI demand is soaring and costs are falling (Jevons Paradox), the resulting market structure threatens to eliminate competitive alternatives, leaving application developers reliant on the dominant Big AI players. Policymakers must proactively identify and mitigate these risks to prevent the loss of competitive infrastructure and maintain market diversity.