The article argues that recent executive overreach and politicization have severely undermined established norms of U.S. civil-military relations. To restore professional standards, the incoming Congress must actively exercise its oversight powers, moving beyond mere criticism to demanding transparency in defense policy and personnel decisions. Key reforms include enforcing meritocratic promotion processes, requiring documented justification for senior officer removals, and preventing the partisan use of the military. These actions are crucial for bolstering public trust and ensuring the military remains a nonpartisan instrument of civilian control.
“The Strategy of Terrorism”
English Summary
The article argues that terrorism is fundamentally a strategy of weakness whose success hinges entirely on the opponent’s response, rather than its own capability. Its ultimate weakness is that it cannot force an outcome; therefore, its fate rests solely with those targeted. To defeat terrorism, states must resist responding in the manner desired by the perpetrators, even when faced with escalating threats or demands for capitulation. Policy efforts should prioritize maintaining resolve and upholding civil liberties, as yielding to pressure or compromising laws only fuels the cycle of violence.
中文摘要
本文論述恐怖主義本質上是一種弱點的策略，其成功與否完全取決於對方的回應，而非自身的實力。其根本之虛弱在於無法強迫任何結果；因此，其命運僅由目標國家決定。要擊敗恐怖主義，各國必須抵抗按照煽動者期望的方式作出反應，即使面對日益升級的威脅或投降的要求。政策努力應著重於維持堅定決心和捍衛公民自由權利，因為屈服於壓力或妥協法律只會助長暴力循環。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that Donald Trump's unique and prolonged lame-duck period, coupled with domestic political pressures, makes him dangerously prone to international instability. Having exhausted major diplomatic gambits, Trump is expected to channel his energy into high-stakes, unilateral actions, primarily targeting adversaries such as Iran and Cuba. These potential actions—ranging from fresh strikes in the Persian Gulf to attempts at regime change—carry a significant risk of destabilizing regional security and triggering a global economic crisis. Policymakers must anticipate this pivot to high-risk foreign policy to mitigate potential international flare-ups.
-
3.
China's economic strategy is characterized by a persistent 'economics of denial,' prioritizing massive state-directed investment in advanced technology over addressing weak domestic consumption. This approach is rooted in a flawed belief that controlling physical capital will automatically generate productivity and wage growth, ignoring the structural imbalance where domestic demand consistently falls short of supply. This overinvestment and underconsumption model is unsustainable. Consequently, Beijing's policies will continue to generate global deflationary pressures and escalating trade friction, necessitating a fundamental pivot toward consumption-led growth for long-term stability.
-
4.
The article analyzes the deep ideological split within the Democratic Party regarding the future of U.S. foreign policy, pitting centrists against progressives. Centrists generally advocate for restoring a reformed U.S.-led international order and strengthening alliances, while progressives argue for a multipolar world that prioritizes transnational threats like climate change and AI over geopolitical competition. This division is most pronounced in the Middle East, where centrists push for greater pressure on Israel and a regional settlement, a shift largely welcomed by progressives. The core finding is that these internal debates threaten to consume a future administration with indecision, making it difficult for the U.S. to project a coherent and unified global strategy.
-
5.
The article argues that the Nordic model of deep, regional military cooperation (minilateralism) provides a crucial blueprint for sustaining NATO's collective defense against escalating Russian threats. This success is evidenced by the Nordic states' transition from cost-saving measures to a unified security imperative, establishing integrated command structures and specialized regional roles. Policy-wise, the report urges NATO to replicate this regionalization approach in other frontline areas, such as the Baltic and Black Seas. Establishing these subregional 'deterrence clusters' would enhance local response capabilities, strengthen the alliance's overall posture, and provide a vital hedge against potential paralysis of the main NATO structure.