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.
The Price of Peace in Ukraine
English Summary
The article argues that the initial Western objective of restoring Ukraine's full pre-2022 sovereignty over all internationally recognized territory has become strategically implausible. This shift in goal is attributed to the failure of Ukraine's 2023 counteroffensive, which forced Western leaders to concede a new reality. Consequently, policy and strategy must pivot away from demanding full territorial restoration and instead focus on a more pragmatic, negotiated settlement that accepts Russia's de facto control over occupied regions. This suggests a necessary re-evaluation of victory conditions for international support.
中文摘要
本文論述，西方最初旨在恢復烏克蘭在所有國際承認領土上完全的、戰前2022年的主權目標，已在戰略上難以實現。這種目標轉變歸因於烏克蘭2023年反攻的失敗，迫使西方領導人不得不承認新的現實。因此，政策和戰略必須從要求完全恢復領土轉向，轉而著重於一個更務實的、協商的解決方案，該方案必須接受俄羅斯在佔領地區的實際控制。這暗示了國際支持的「勝利條件」需要進行必要的重新評估。
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.U.S. Navy Orders Low-cost Missiles to Expand Fleet, Allied Long-Range Maritime Strike Capabilities (USNI)
The U.S. Navy is prioritizing the procurement of low-cost, long-range cruise missiles through programs like CHAOS and CAMS to significantly expand strike capabilities for both its own fleet and allied partners. This strategic shift provides affordable precision munitions capable of striking targets up to 1,000 nautical miles, addressing critical stockpiles depleted by recent conflicts. By developing these systems, the U.S. aims to overcome procurement delays faced by allies (such as Japan and Taiwan) who rely on older missile designs. Ultimately, this initiative strengthens allied deterrence and bolsters long-range maritime strike capabilities necessary for potential conflict with China.