This analysis reviews pivotal U.S. foreign policy decisions over 250 years, ranking them by their historical impact on global stability and American leadership. Key successes—such as the Marshall Plan, the creation of NATO, and the establishment of the Bretton Woods system—are attributed to proactive diplomacy and institutional building that stabilized post-war international order. The findings suggest that effective U.S. strategy relies heavily on establishing multilateral frameworks and managing geopolitical risks through careful statecraft. Ultimately, the article implies that historical analysis guides policy by emphasizing the necessity of strategic alliances and economic cooperation to maintain global influence.
Perspectives on Ankara: The security and defence implications of the NATO summit
English Summary
The 2026 NATO Summit highlights that future alliance security requires not only increased burden sharing but also significantly stronger defense capabilities and closer public-private cooperation. The core finding is a shift in focus from mere spending commitments to practical implementation, industrial capacity, and overall resilience. Policy implications center on redesigning defense investment models, establishing mechanisms to ensure summit pledges translate into coordinated action, and accelerating the adoption of transformative technologies through robust public-private partnerships.
中文摘要
2026年北約峰會強調，未來的聯盟安全不僅需要增加負擔分攤，更要求大幅提升防衛能力並加強公私部門的合作。核心發現指出，焦點已從單純的開支承諾轉向實際執行、工業產能和整體韌性。政策意涵集中於重新設計國防投資模式、建立確保峰會承諾能夠轉化為協調行動的機制，以及透過穩健的公私夥伴關係加速採用變革性技術。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
This CFR project analyzes two and a half centuries of U.S. foreign policy decisions, arguing that historical patterns offer crucial lessons for current strategic challenges. The core finding, derived from surveys of leading historians, identifies the Marshall Plan as the consensus best decision due to its stabilizing role in post-WWII Europe and its humanitarian impact. These findings imply that successful long-term U.S. strategy often involves large-scale diplomatic investments aimed at rebuilding key international partners or promoting regional stability. Policymakers should view historical success not just through military action, but through sustained efforts to stabilize global systems.
-
3.
The relationship between Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and former US President Trump is deteriorating due to fundamental disagreements over geopolitical goals, particularly concerning conflicts in Iran and Lebanon. Evidence points to Trump publicly criticizing Israel for actions that jeopardize US-brokered ceasefires, while Netanyahu continues to push for sustained military pressure against Hezbollah and Iran. This rift significantly weakens Netanyahu politically ahead of upcoming elections, limiting his diplomatic maneuverability and forcing him into difficult strategic compromises despite maintaining a strong military presence in Lebanon.
-
4.The US government’s latest U-turn on Anthropic’s Mythos sends mixed signals on AI governance (Chatham House)
The US government's fluctuating regulatory approach to advanced AI models, exemplified by its repeated policy reversals regarding Anthropic’s Mythos, sends mixed signals on global AI governance. This volatility stems from a tension between promoting innovation (deregulation) and managing national security risks, leading to ad hoc controls like limited access for 'trusted partners.' While the latest moves aim to broaden international access, the unpredictable nature of these restrictions creates significant market uncertainty and undermines confidence in US policy stability. Consequently, this protectionist regulatory environment complicates efforts toward necessary global governance and hinders cooperation with allies on shared AI safety risks.
-
5.
The article argues that high-profile interactions between Donald Trump and Turkish President Erdoğan, particularly at the NATO summit, significantly legitimize Erdoğan's autocratic rule and his global ambitions. This legitimacy is reinforced by the U.S.'s willingness to overlook Turkey’s domestic crackdown on dissent and its geopolitical actions (such as maintaining ties with Russia despite Western pressure). Consequently, European powers face a difficult strategic predicament: they must rely on Turkey for crucial security ties while simultaneously confronting an increasingly authoritarian regime that has eroded democratic institutions. This dynamic forces Western policy into a pragmatic, transactional approach centered on military necessity rather than shared democratic values.