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.
The Postliberal Superpower
English Summary
The article argues that the current US foreign policy is undergoing a 'postliberal' shift, moving away from adherence to the rules-based international order and toward a model rooted in raw power politics. This shift is evidenced by the revival of doctrines like the Monroe Doctrine and the emphasis on 'hardnosed realism' in the 2026 National Defense Strategy. The policy signals a preference for unilateral action and power balancing over multilateral cooperation or international norms. Policymakers should anticipate a strategic pivot that prioritizes immediate national power interests, potentially complicating traditional diplomatic alliances.
中文摘要
本文論述當前美國的外交政策正經歷一場「後自由主義」轉變，其趨勢是從遵循基於規則的國際秩序，轉向以原始權力政治為根基的模式。這一轉變的證據包括門羅主義等學說的復興，以及在2026年《國防戰略》中對「堅硬現實主義」的強調。此一政策訊號表明，美國傾向於單邊行動和權力平衡，而非多邊合作或國際規範。政策制定者應預期一場戰略轉向，該轉向將優先考慮眼前的國家權力利益，這可能會使傳統的外交聯盟面臨複雜化。
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.