This analysis summarizes Orville Schell's observations of the Trump-Xi summit, arguing that the interactions between the two leaders are critical indicators of the future stability of U.S.-China relations. Schell's key reasoning focuses not only on what was discussed but also on the sensitive issues that were deliberately avoided or downplayed during the meeting. The overall finding suggests that the summit may represent a potential inflection point, signaling a possible shift in the strategic relationship between the two global powers. Policymakers must monitor these subtle dynamics to anticipate whether the relationship is moving toward de-escalation or renewed strategic tension.
The Curse of Middle-Sized Wars
English Summary
The article posits that democratic nations are structurally optimized for two extremes of conflict: small, professional 'little wars' or massive, total wars requiring full societal mobilization. The core finding is that democracies face a unique strategic vulnerability when confronted with 'middle-sized wars.' These conflicts are sufficiently destructive to cause immense bloodshed but are too limited to necessitate the full commitment of the home front, creating a profound dilemma. This structural mismatch suggests that modern democracies may be poorly equipped to manage conflicts that fall between the spectrum of limited and total warfare, impacting strategic planning and military readiness.
中文摘要
本文提出，民主國家在結構上僅針對兩種極端的衝突類型進行優化：即小型、專業化的「小規模戰爭」，或是需要全面社會動員的大規模「全面戰爭」。核心發現指出，當民主國家面對「中等規模戰爭」時，會面臨一種獨特的戰略弱點。這類衝突的破壞力足以造成巨大傷亡，但其範圍又過於有限，無法觸發動員整個後方的必要性，從而產生了深刻的兩難困境。這種結構性不匹配暗示，現代民主國家可能難以應對介於有限戰爭與全面戰爭之間的衝突，這將對戰略規劃和軍事準備狀態產生影響。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that the concept of great power spheres of influence has evolved beyond traditional military boundaries, now manifesting in functional domains like critical technology and digital infrastructure. This shift allows powerful states, such as China, to consolidate an 'open sphere' by leveraging economic and technological influence, particularly if the United States makes unilateral concessions or is strategically distracted. The author warns that the U.S.'s willingness to make policy concessions regarding Taiwan and its diminishing reliability as a security guarantor could hasten China's consolidation of influence in the Indo-Pacific. Strategically, this necessitates that Washington update its understanding of modern spheres to prevent a major geopolitical division that could escalate into conflict.
-
3.
Following a period of appeasement to the US under a volatile administration, European nations have undergone a strategic pivot toward self-reliance and collective action. This shift was catalyzed by perceived US overreach, prompting Europe to coordinate joint military exercises, activate anti-coercion tools, and establish a collective defense financing program. Economically, the EU is rapidly constructing a parallel trading system through major bilateral deals (e.g., India, Australia), reducing dependence on traditional transatlantic markets. These developments signal that Europe is building a more resilient, sovereign security and economic core, materially altering its geopolitical trajectory toward strategic autonomy.
-
4.
The article argues that corporate America's current silence regarding systemic threats—such as the erosion of the rule of law or the independence of federal institutions—poses a significant risk to democratic capitalism. This quietude contrasts sharply with past corporate activism, as business leaders fear political backlash rather than confronting fundamental institutional assaults. The core finding is that the rule of law and independent agencies (like the Federal Reserve) are the 'sine qua non' of stable economic activity, making their integrity paramount to market function. Policy implication suggests that corporate leaders must coordinate efforts to identify and defend these systemic 'redlines,' ensuring that the foundational laws and norms necessary for commerce remain protected.
-
5.
Despite the public appearance of stabilization, the summit failed to resolve fundamental structural disputes between the U.S. and China, suggesting the competition remains deeply entrenched. Key issues, particularly Taiwan, trade imbalances, and geopolitical rivalry, were merely 'kicked down the road' through diplomatic rhetoric of 'strategic stability.' The analysis suggests that China is unlikely to make major concessions, viewing them as signs of weakness, meaning the relationship will continue to be managed through guarded competition rather than genuine cooperation. Policymakers must therefore anticipate persistent friction points and maintain vigilance regarding unresolved flashpoints to navigate the ongoing great power rivalry.