The Western Pacific remains a highly active theater defined by sustained U.S.-led military exercises and escalating great power competition. Key evidence includes continuous joint operations, such as RIMPAC 2026 in Hawaii and the deployment of CSGs into the South China Sea, juxtaposed with increased naval activity from both China (PLAN task groups) and Russia near Japan's critical straits. These movements underscore a strategic push by non-allied powers to assert presence and challenge regional norms. Policy implications dictate that allied nations must maintain robust multilateral cooperation and interoperability to safeguard freedom of navigation and manage escalating tensions in the Indo-Pacific.
Blind-Spot Politics: Appeasement, Authoritarianism, and Hypocrisy in Europe
English Summary
The article argues that European leaders have historically failed to adequately deter authoritarian threats, citing both the failures in the Balkans and the appeasement of Hitler's regime. Specifically, the author critiques contemporary European leaders (including those in Austria, Germany, and Hungary) for appeasing modern authoritarians, such as Russia's Vladimir Putin. This appeasement is characterized not merely as naiveté, but often as an opportunistic pursuit of material gain. The implication is that this pattern of willful disregard for authoritarian dangers poses a significant strategic risk to European stability and democratic integrity.
中文摘要
本文論述歐洲領導人歷來未能有效威懾威權主義威脅，援引了巴爾幹地區的失敗經驗以及對希特勒政權的綏靖政策作為例證。作者特別批評當代歐洲領導人（包括奧地利、德國和匈牙利的相關人士）對現代威權主義政權，例如俄羅斯總統普丁，採取了綏靖態度。這種綏靖行為的特點並非僅止於天真，而往往是為了尋求機會主義的物質利益。其潛在的含義是，這種有意識地忽視威權主義危險的模式，對歐洲的穩定和民主完整性構成了重大的戰略風險。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that the post-Cold War era of U.S. unipolarity, established by the perceived invincibility demonstrated during the Gulf War, has ended. This decline is driven by globalization and technological diffusion, which have democratized advanced military capabilities, allowing regional actors to challenge major powers. Consequently, policymakers must prepare for a more volatile international order marked by frequent crises, heightened costs for securing global trade chokepoints, and reduced predictability from American power. The new rules dictate that great powers can no longer effortlessly impose their will through force.
-
3.
Despite recent trade setbacks, the U.S. retains fundamental structural economic leverage over China, particularly in high-tech sectors and intermediate goods. While Beijing can temporarily weaponize specific resources like rare earths, these chokepoints are vulnerable to diversification efforts by the West. The article argues that the most effective strategy is not unilateral action but coordinated multilateral pressure from U.S. allies across Asia and Europe. Washington must therefore coordinate its economic statecraft with partners to maximize damage to China’s export-dependent model.
-
4.
The author argues that the new 'Section 301' tariffs, ostensibly targeting forced labor, are not a genuine human rights measure but rather an attempt to re-establish a broad, punitive tariff wall. Key evidence supporting this claim includes the rushed nature of the investigation (98 pages for 60 economies), the lack of specific economic harm analysis, and the imposition of disproportionately high tariffs that far exceed any proportional response. Strategically, the use of human rights language to generate revenue sets a dangerous precedent, potentially allowing future administrations to bypass legislative processes and misuse trade law. The article concludes by urging Congress to reform these laws before they cause further damage to international trade frameworks.
-
5.
Escalating tensions between Iran and the U.S., coupled with renewed Houthi blockades in the Red Sea, have severely disrupted critical shipping chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz. Key evidence includes sharply reduced transit numbers and repeated attacks by Iranian-linked vessels off Oman's coast, while the Houthis enforce a maritime embargo on Saudi-linked ships. Strategically, this instability threatens global energy markets, forcing major powers to weigh their import needs. The continued volatility suggests that both Iran and the U.S. are willing to absorb significant economic pain to gain geopolitical leverage over regional stability.