The article argues that the Federal Reserve's recent rate hike decision, while justifiable on inflation grounds, highlights a critical lack of an underlying, transparent policy framework. The core problem is that the Fed's decisions appear discretionary, leading to market uncertainty because the committee's judgment, rather than clear data, dictates policy shifts. The author proposes that the Fed adopt a formal monetary policy rule—an algebraic formula linking the target rate to indicators like inflation and unemployment—to replace subjective guidance. Implementing such a rule would provide market predictability, enhance transparency, and shield the Fed from political attacks by making deviations from the standard easily quantifiable.
Economic Warfare and Military Power
English Summary
The article argues that modern economic warfare (EW) is a strategic competition targeting the fundamental 'machinery'—the flows of capital, materials, and technology—used by rivals to convert resources into military power, rather than attacking fielded forces directly. To maximize utility, policymakers must adopt three core principles: fungibility, elasticity, and market making, while ensuring transaction-level visibility to prevent adversaries from evading sanctions. Strategically, the U.S. must harmonize the traditionally contradictory logics of open markets and coercive warfare by leveraging private finance to accelerate the production of critical goods. This requires operationalizing economic pressure by identifying decisive economic pressure points and applying them carefully to constrain rivals without destabilizing allied markets.
中文摘要
本文主張，現代經濟戰（EW）是一種戰略競爭，其目標是針對對手將資源轉化為軍事力量所依賴的根本「機制」——即資本、物資和技術的流動，而非直接攻擊其已部署的戰力。為最大化效用，政策制定者必須採納三個核心原則：可替代性、彈性以及市場建構，同時確保交易層級的可視性，以防止敵對勢力規避制裁。從戰略角度來看，美國必須透過利用私人金融，加速關鍵商品的生產，從而調和傳統上相互矛盾的開放市場邏輯與強制性戰事邏輯。這要求透過識別決定性的經濟壓力點，並謹慎地施加壓力，來操作經濟壓力，從而約束競爭對手，同時避免破壞盟國市場的穩定。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The ongoing Ebola outbreak in the DRC serves as a critical warning that the global health security system is fundamentally unprepared for future biological threats. The difficulty in containing this outbreak is compounded by the rising risk of emerging pathogens and the growing potential for AI misuse in bioweapon development. Policy must therefore shift from reactive, crisis-driven funding to sustained, proactive investment in resilient public health infrastructure, particularly in conflict zones. Addressing this requires strengthening global surveillance, ensuring consistent international cooperation, and mitigating the intersection of conflict, climate change, and disease spread.
-
3.A Design Lab Pilot to Inform Strategies for Expanding Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Community Mental Health Centers (RAND)
Despite MOUD being the standard of care for opioid use disorder, access remains severely limited in Community Mental Health Centers (CMHCs), which serve the primary population with co-occurring disorders. A Design Lab pilot identified payment limitations and regulatory complexity as the chief barriers to implementation. The most feasible and high-impact strategy identified was establishing a structured learning exchange between CMHC leaders and insurers to improve reimbursement understanding. Policymakers and payers are therefore advised to pilot this learning exchange model to initiate broader payment reform and expand evidence-based care for this vulnerable population.
-
4.
The article argues that modern conflicts are increasingly defined by attrition, driven by three strategic gaps: the difference between nominal military power and usable capacity; the difficulty of achieving breakthroughs in a technologically advanced battlefield; and the detachment of military means from clear political objectives. Evidence from Ukraine and the Middle East demonstrates that sustained logistics, rapid technological adaptation, and proxy networks are now more decisive than sheer military size. For policymakers, this implies a strategic shift away from seeking short, decisive victories toward preparing for prolonged, high-cost engagements, requiring a focus on sustainable supply chains and defining concrete, attainable political end-states.
-
5.
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.