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.
Don’t Partition Sudan Again
English Summary
Sudan is rapidly descending into a de facto partition, characterized by rival military and political control rather than a unified state. The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) has consolidated power in the north and center, while the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) dominate Darfur and Kordofan, each establishing rival governments and diverging economies. This fragmentation risks turning the civil conflict into a permanent, multi-sided struggle for regional dominance. Policymakers must therefore prioritize diplomatic efforts aimed at preventing further fragmentation and supporting a national reconciliation framework, rather than engaging with the warring factions' claims.
中文摘要
蘇丹正迅速走向實質分裂，其特徵是敵對的軍事和政治控制，而非統一的國家體系。蘇丹武裝部隊（SAF）在北部和中部鞏固了權力，而快速支援部隊（RSF）則主導達爾富爾和科爾多法南，兩方各自建立對抗性的政府和分歧的經濟體系。這種碎片化風險可能將內戰轉變為一場永久性的、多方爭奪區域主導權的鬥爭。因此，政策制定者必須將外交努力的重點放在預防進一步的碎片化，並支持國家和解框架，而非介入與交戰派系提出的主張。
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.