Indian Strategic Studies

21 December 2025

Small Wars in the New Strategic Era: Why the United States Must Prepare for a World of Limited Conflict

Joe Funderburke

The 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) signals a deliberate shift toward restraint, hemispheric prioritization, and selective engagement. Yet history shows that when major powers seek to avoid large wars, competitors often exploit gray-zone tactics, proxy campaigns, and limited conflicts to test boundaries. The United States must therefore prepare for an era in which small wars become more frequent, more ambiguous, and more strategically consequential for the balance of power and the credibility of American leadership.

The United States is entering a strategic realignment unlike any since the end of the Cold War. The 2025 National Security Strategy tightens the definition of vital interests, reorients national defense toward a revitalized industrial base and homeland protection, and places greater expectations on allies to shoulder regional burdens. By design, it moves the United States away from open-ended expeditionary campaigns and toward a more disciplined, selective posture abroad. The document explicitly frames this shift as a response to domestic demands for restraint, fiscal pressure, and the recognition that the United States cannot and should not police the international system alone.

Days later, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth reinforced this direction at the Reagan National Defense Forum, announcing the end of “undefined wars” and promising a new era of clarity in objectives, timelines, and exit strategies in the use of force. His remarks signaled to allies and adversaries alike that Washington intends to be more judicious about when and where it fights—and far more skeptical about long-duration stability operations.

Does the Road to Disarming Hamas Lead Through Qatar and Turkey?

John Haltiwanger

Despite the optimistic messaging of the Trump administration regarding its Gaza peace plan, moving the process to the next phase faces a slew of serious obstacles. The disarmament of Hamas, a key aspect of the 20-point plan, stands as perhaps the greatest challenge to overcome.

Armed resistance against Israel is a fundamental aspect of Hamas’s ideology, which is a large part of the reason the group has not agreed to disarm. Hamas recently signaled that it could be open to freezing or storing its arms, but Israel will not be satisfied with anything short of complete disarmament.

Spies must be fluent in code, says MI6 boss

Ann-Marie Corvin

In her first speech as head of Britain’s Security Intelligence Service, MI6, Blaise Metreweli is to push for the need to invest in technology to tackle threats to UK security.

In pre-released remarks, the agency’s first-ever female head is set to say: “Mastery of technology must infuse everything we do. Not just in our labs, but in the field, in our tradecraft, and even more importantly, in the mindset of every officer.”

“We must be as comfortable with lines of code as we are with human sources, as fluent in Python as we are in multiple languages.”

The new M16 chief is also set to warn of hostile state actors, Russia in particular, who are trying to destabilize the UK from abroad using cyberattacks, spreading false information, and employing criminals remotely.

“The export of chaos is a feature, not a bug, in the Russian approach to international engagement, and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus,” she will add.

Metreweli was appointed head of M16 – a role publicly known by the codename “C” – in June this year, becoming the first female head in the spy agency’s 116-year history.

She was previously head of the tech side of espionage – known as “Q” and depicted in the Bond movies as providing agents with exploding pens and Aston Martin cars equipped with ejector seats, machine guns, and rotating plates.

Ghost Busters: Options for Breaking Russia’s Shadow Fleet

Benjamin Jensen and Jose M. Macias III

Victory in Ukraine will prove elusive without finding ways to counter Russia’s use of illicit maritime trade to sustain its war economy. That is, Ukraine and its Western backers need to resurrect the idea of commerce raiding and broad-based economic war to bust the ghost fleet and impose costs on Putin’s war machine. In the twenty-first century, states can conduct commerce raiding without ever firing a shot, effectively using open-source intelligence to support diplomacy, lawfare, and sanctions designed to attack a rival state’s economy. By finding ways to aggregate open-source data, the United States can support broader international efforts to restrict Russian illicit maritime trade.

Ghost Ships: How Putin Finances His War

Since sanctions limited oil exports in late 2022, Russia has purchased an illicit fleet estimated to range from 155 tankers and 435 total vessels, when support ships are included, to as high as 591 ships. This shadow fleet—or ghost fleet, as it is colloquially known—transports an estimated 3.7 million barrels per day, representing 65 percent of Russia’s seaborne oil trade, and generates an estimated $87 to $100 billion in revenue per year. To put that in perspective, revenue from this illicit trade network has matched, if not exceeded, the total value of economic and military assistance provided to Ukraine since the start of the war.

How the New National Security Strategy Misses the Mark on Cybersecurity

Mark Montgomery

To combat China and Russia’s cyber capabilities, the Trump administration must stop eliminating cybersecurity professionals and invest in federal programs that protect domestic critical infrastructure.

While there will be heated disagreements on how President Donald Trump’s new National Security Strategy characterizes America’s relationship with both China and Europe, few will disagree with the clear sentiment to defend the homeland. More than any strategy document released since the September 11 attacks, this one emphasizes defending the homeland or, more specifically, “the continued survival and safety of the United States” as the top national security priority.

When Trump took office earlier this year, it must have been clear to him that the homeland has never been less secure, with challenges extending well beyond the border issues, which he tried to address in his first Presidency, to now include imminent missile and cyber threats to the homeland.

The President’s efforts to secure the border and defend against missile threats are well underway—he has reduced illegal immigrant crossings by 95 percent from March 2024, and signed a new “Golden Dome” executive order backed with $25

Are Main Battle Tanks Becoming Obsolete? Yes and No

Brandon J. Weichert

The advent of advanced anti-tank weapons has pushed tanks further away from the front lines—but it would be a mistake to write them off altogether.

Are main battle tanks (MBTs)—the largest, heaviest, and most powerful class of tank, including the M1 Abrams, the Leopard 2, and the T-14 Armata—becoming obsolete?

That was the question I asked my colleague, retired United States Army Lieutenant Colonel Daniel L. Davis on my podcast. Davis spent his career in armor and proudly participated in the last great tank battle of the twentieth century in Desert Storm. According to Davis, the Ukraine War has fundamentally altered the role of MBTs in modern warfare.

But, Davis asserted, the MBT is not obsolete.

Understanding the Tank’s Real Role in Modern Warfare

For Davis, the tank in attack has changed. Its primary role is now relegated to fire support roles. The Russians, in particular, have used MBTs in this fashion since the second year of the Ukraine War, when NATO-provided drones and anti-tank weapons utilized by the Ukrainians proved to be serious problems for Russian armor on the battlefield.

It’s Time To Reboot U.S. Cyber Power

Andrew Brown

Nearly every aspect of American life runs on code, from national security to finance to healthcare to education. Yet the country is falling behind in cyberspace. A former U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) chief warned that America is “increasingly behind” its adversaries, while the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency revealed that China-backed hackers have gained “persistent access” to U.S. critical infrastructure, enabling them to disrupt power grids, pipelines, and communications at will. To catch up, the United States needs a new military service dedicated to cyberspace.

Created in 2009, CYBERCOM was tasked with directing, synchronizing, and coordinating military operations in cyberspace. Eight years later, it became a unified combatant command (UCC), which means that it integrates forces from multiple services under one structure to achieve cyber missions. But cracks appeared almost immediately. Within a year, the Government Accountability Office found that many of CYBERCOM’s teams were understaffed and failing readiness standards. CYBERCOM was so focused on conducting missions that it neglected its talent pipeline.

Ukraine strikes Russian Kilo-class submarine docked in port

Stavros Atlamazoglou

The Ukrainian military and security services pulled out another impressive feat by destroying a Russian Kilo-class submarine on Monday.

Using underwater drones, the Ukrainian forces landed hits on the Russian attack submarine while it was in the Novorossiysk port.

In a video released by the Ukrainian security services, naval drones can be seen rushing up the docked submarine without any opposition. A large blast ensues after contact is made with the Russian vessel.

The Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) claimed that the Russian submarine suffered “critical damage” as a result of the attack and was “put out of action.” However, it might be some time before a proper post-attack assessment reveals the extent of the damage. SBU identified the Russian submarine as the Kilo-class Varshavyanka, which presumably costs $400 million.

The Ukrainian forces very likely targeted the Russian submarine because of its participation in Russia’s long-range fires campaign against Ukraine. The vessel was allegedly carrying Kalibr cruise missiles, which Moscow has used in conjunction with suicide drones and air-launched ballistic and cruise missiles to target Ukraine’s critical infrastructure and energy grid.

US, Israel Team Up to Create ‘World’s First’ NDAA-Compliant Fiber-Optic FPV Drone

Ethan M. Encarnacion

A fiber-optic, first-person view (FPV) drone touted as the first in the world to be fully compliant with the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is soon hitting military arsenals.

US firm Neros Technologies, in collaboration with Israeli-based Kela Technologies, unveiled the Archer Fiber drone, a platform built to operate even in intense electronic warfare (EW) environments.

NDAA compliance means it avoids critical components sourced from China, removing a major hurdle for adoption by US and allied forces.

The design departs from typical fiber-optic drones, which often rely on commercial Chinese FPV cameras and electronics.An Archer drone variant demonstration flight. Video: Neros Technologies

“Archer Fiber marks a decisive leap forward in secure FPV capability,” said Søren Monroe-Anderson, Chief Executive Officer of Neros Technologies.

Why Energy Dominance Is Now a National Security Imperative

Larry Behrens

While it may have escaped widespread notice, President Donald Trump’s newly released National Security Strategy signals a long-overdue return to seriousness in American defense thinking. For years, Washington has issued strategies heavy on green buzzwords and light on reality.

The message from this White House is different. It confronts a dangerous world with a simple, clarifying message at its core: what strengthens America’s security and prosperity, and what doesn’t.

Two themes stand out for anyone concerned about energy and national defense.

First, the strategy is blunt about the need for the United States to develop and control its own resource pipeline, especially energy. Second, it marks a clean break from the notion that “climate change” and “net zero” should be guiding principles for our national security.

The Achilles’ Heel of Force Design 2030

James Deitch

Why Logistics Must Lead the Marine Corps’ Maritime Strategy

As the United States shifts its defense posture toward the Asia-Pacific, the Marine Corps faces a crucial decision. Force Design 2030 seeks to bring about a significant transformation, aiming to keep the Corps relevant amid great power competition, especially against peer rivals like China.[i] However, beneath the surface of innovative ideas, stand-in forces, distributed operations, and advanced platforms, there is a constant and often overlooked weakness: logistics.

The Strategic Context: Why Logistics Matters More Than Ever

The Indo-Pacific region features vast distances, limited infrastructure, and restrictions on basing due to political reasons.[ii] The era of unrestricted access to secure ports and airfields has come to an end. The Marine Corps now must operate ahead of fixed bases, often at the edge of contested areas, where the ability to sustain forces is just as vital as projecting power.

The Pernicious Myth That America Doesn’t Win Wars

Mike Nelson

False narratives have a way of becoming taken as fact in popular understanding. After years of repetition, these statements calcify into articles of faith, not only going unchallenged, but having any counterarguments met with incredulity, as though the person making the alternative case must be uninformed or unaware of the established consensus. Once accepting these narratives, one is free to form a world view and make decisions based upon them – denying the reality that, if the underlying assumption is wrong, then so are the decisions that flow from it.

One of these which has taken hold among many since the humiliating end to the war in Afghanistan, is that the American military doesn’t win wars, or that it hasn’t since the end of World War II. This critique of the armed forces, foreign policy, or use of force has become an ironclad truth among many using it as a starting point to advocate for their own preferred change. Advocates of Secretary Hegseth’s vision for the military have echoed it – “the military had grown weak and woke, so we need to change the culture, ignore or at least diminish adherence to legal restraints, and remake the composition of the military.” Restrainers, isolationists, and America Firsters have joined the chorus – “America has given up blood and treasure on stupid wars in which we were failures.”

America’s Drone Delusion

Justin Bronk

After nearly four years of fighting, few aspects of Russia’s war in Ukraine have gained as much attention among Western militaries as the rapid expansion of drone warfare. Since 2023, both sides have deployed millions of cheap quadcopter-type drones across the battlefield. In some parts of the front, these small drones now account for up to 70 percent of battlefield casualties. Meanwhile, Russia is using thousands of Geran-2 and Geran-3 propeller-powered one-way attack drones in almost nightly long-range strikes on Ukrainian cities, and Ukraine has been using a wide array of its own one-way attack drones for regular strikes on Russian bases, factories, and energy infrastructure.

Watching these developments, many Western defense strategists have made urgent calls to shift military priorities. In June, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order to accelerate drone production. Since then, the U.S. Department of Defense has made several policy changes to facilitate the rapid integration of low-cost drones into the U.S. arsenal, and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has called for the United States to establish “drone dominance.” In the private sector, meanwhile, software and AI companies that have bet heavily on developing uncrewed military technologies, such as Anduril, Palantir, and Shield AI, are racing to win lucrative new defense contracts. It is certainly the case that small uncrewed aircraft systems have fundamentally changed the way that infantry combat is fought, and that the U.S. Army and other parts of the force are behind on these capabilities—and, more concerning, on counter-UAS technologies—compared to Russian or Chinese forces.

US’ new hypersonic missile can hit targets 2,175-mile away in just 20 minutes

Kapil Kajal

LRHW at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station during Operation Thunderbolt Strike.Spc. Chandler Coats, U.S. Army

US Army officials have disclosed new details about America’s long-range hypersonic weapon program during a recent visit by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to Redstone Arsenal in Alabama, offering a clearer picture of the reach and intended role of the Army’s first operational hypersonic strike system.

During the visit, Hegseth announced that Redstone Arsenal will become the new headquarters for the US Space Command.

As part of the tour, senior Army leaders briefed Hegseth and accompanying media on the service’s missile portfolio, including the Long Range Hypersonic Weapon, also known as Dark Eagle, The War Zone reported.

New Issue Out

Stephen Kotkin

Not long ago in the sweep of history, countries that had once been buried behind the Iron Curtain, and even some Soviet republics, were transformed into members of the solidly democratic club. Some of those that weren’t, such as Ukraine, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan, experienced mass revolts against rigged elections and corrupt misrule amid widespread public yearning to join the West. Free trade was again celebrated as an instrument of peace; Kant’s “democratic peace theory” enjoyed a revival.

Western democracy promotion, inept as it could be, struck fear into authoritarian corridors of power. Ever-shriller authoritarian denunciations of supposed Western conspiracies to foment “color revolutions” seemed to confirm a direction toward democracy. In the early 2010s, spontaneous uprisings rocked the heavily autocratic Middle East and North Africa. Hopes for political loosening persisted in the stubborn holdouts of China, Iran, and Russia. Large-scale demonstrations had broken out in Iran in 2009 and, in 2011–12, similar protests accompanied Vladimir Putin’s announcement that he would return to the Russian presidency after a brief stint as prime minister. Many clung to what they considered signs that Xi Jinping, who rose to become China’s top leader in 2012, would be a reformer.

The only number that really matters

Brian-Albrecht

In 1972, the King of Bhutan announced that “gross national happiness is more important than gross domestic product.” It was a charming sound bite that captured imaginations worldwide. Finally, someone was brave enough to say it: Happiness matters more than money.

At the time, Bhutan was poor. More than 50 years later, Bhutan still ranks near the bottom of countries globally in per capita gross domestic product (GDP), a metric that captures the dollar value, per person, of the goods and services that a country produces.

In Bhutan today, life expectancy is 73 years — higher than the 51 years in 1972, but still only right at the world average. Meanwhile, politicians are concerned about “unprecedented” levels of people leaving the country, mostly for economic opportunities elsewhere. While Bhutan’s own Gross National Happiness surveys show rising happiness since data collection started in 2010, internationally comparable surveys show a fall in self-reported happiness in the country.

South Korea took the opposite approach. In 1961, General Park Chung-hee seized power in a country with a GDP per capita of around $93, well below even Bhutan at the time. His goal was modernization: build industries, end dependence on US aid, and export goods to the global market competitively. To track progress, his government launched five-year economic development plans with specific targets measured by economic growth.

What Is America Still Doing in Syria?

Andrew Latham

An M1A1 Abrams tank operated by Soldiers with the 2nd Battalion, 70th Armored Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, fires over a barricade at the Douthit Gunnery Complex on Fort Riley, Kansas, Oct. 20, 2022. The tank crew was conducting gunnery qualification. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Jared Simmons)

Key Points and Summary – Recent U.S. troop and contractor deaths in Syria highlight a mission that no longer matches America’s core strategic interests.

-The regional balance of power is now driven by Turkey, Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, whose competing ambitions collectively prevent any single hegemon from dominating the Levant.

British Royal Air Force Regiment troop cycles M500 Shotgun at the Winston P. Wilson (WPW) and 27th Armed Forces Skill at Arms Meet (AFSAM) at Robinson Maneuver Training Center, Ark, 2018. The annual events, hosted by the National Guard Marksmanship Training Center (NGMTC), offer Servicemembers from the National Guard and international community an opportunity to test marksmanship skills in a battle-focused environment.

An ally under suspicion

Tasha Kheiriddin

In an unprecedented move last week, Denmark labeled its ally the United States as a potential security risk. A report by the Danish Defense Intelligence Service argued Washington is using its economic and military power to “assert its will,” creating new security risks for Europe and for Greenland, Denmark’s semi-autonomous territory.

NATO allies have been at odds before: Turkey and Greece clashed over Cyprus when Turkey invaded the island in 1974, Canada and Spain during a 1995 dispute over fishing rights. But the Danish report stands apart: It is one of the strongest warnings about the US to come from another member state.

How we got here. Concerns over Greenland’s sovereignty have escalated since US President Donald Trump took office. He has repeatedly insisted the island is critical for national security. Economic factors are at play too: Greenland is rich in rare earth minerals needed to manufacture much of today’s technology, from advanced batteries to military jets. The island’s position in the Arctic puts it in the middle of an international competition with Russia and China over shipping and deep sea mining. Trump has even refused to rule out taking Greenland by force, a stance that has strained relations between Copenhagen and Washington.

The European Crisis: Origin and Future

George Friedman

The release of the 2025 U.S. National Security Strategy has brought into focus a fundamental tension that has been simmering since before President Donald Trump took office: the understanding between the United States and Europe that the geopolitical system that emerged from World War II was to be permanent. The National Security Strategy essentially says that this geopolitical relationship is obsolete, resulting in a sense that the U.S. has betrayed Europe. Thus is Europe’s crisis. In assuming that U.S. security guarantees were an enduring feature of global geopolitics, the Continent, as a whole, has made little effort to guarantee its own security.

U.S. guarantees were a direct byproduct of World War II. After 1945, the Soviet Union occupied and installed communist regimes in Eastern Europe. U.S. and British allies occupied Western Europe and formed a variety of democratic systems. The division left Western Europe extremely vulnerable to Soviet military action.

What Britain Failed to Fully Understand After Training 60,000 Ukrainian Troops and Learning Invaluable Lessons from Them

Continuing to provide defensive support to Ukraine is beneficial for the United Kingdom from several angles. Most notably, it is British military personnel who are learning from the Armed Forces of Ukraine, rather than the other way around. At the same time, the need to manufacture weapons for Ukraine is helping to stimulate the recovery of the UK's industrial base.

Such complementary conclusions are outlined in a recent publication by the authoritative British think tank RUSI. A careful reading of the report, however, makes the implicit "but" in this arrangement particularly revealing.

Under Operation Interflex, British instructors have trained a total of 60,000 Ukrainian soldiers over the past three years. This figure is significant in terms of strengthening Ukraine's defensive capabilities. Yet it is equally important to examine what specific knowledge British military personnel themselves have absorbed through the principle of "learning by teaching others."

20 December 2025

How Kaveri Engine's 39-Year Failure Exposes Deep Institutional Voids in DRDO and HAL, Paralyzing India’s AMCA and TEDBF Programmes

RonitBisht

In a scathing The Print column published on 10 December 2025, Admiral Arun Prakash (Retd), the former Chief of Naval Staff and a distinguished strategic thinker, has delivered a stark indictment of India’s aviation establishment.

His assessment is grim: despite ambitious rhetoric surrounding the fifth-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) and the Twin-Engine Deck-Based Fighter (TEDBF), both programmes remain effectively grounded.

The cause is not a lack of funding or desire, but a 39-year-old failure that continues to haunt the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO): the inability to produce a functional indigenous jet engine.

The Kaveri Stagnation: Four Decades of Missed DeadlinesThe heart of the crisis lies with the GTX-35VS Kaveri programme. Initiated by the DRDO's Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) in 1986—and formally sanctioned in 1989—the project was intended to power India’s Light Combat Aircraft (Tejas). Instead, it has become a case study in institutional inertia.

What Trump’s New National Security Strategy Means for India

Akhilesh Pillalamarri

The National Security Strategy (NSS) of the second Trump administration, released on December 4, signals a significant shift in American foreign policy thinking and prominently reflects the distinct foreign policy views of President Donald J. Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance.

The overall tenor of the NSS reflects a geopolitical vision characterized by realism and traditional great power politics and is marked by hostility toward liberal internationalism and global institutions. The document, whose spirit will inform American grand strategy for the rest of the Trump term, highlights its belief in the primacy of nations, sovereignty, and the balance of power, stating that “the outsized influence of larger, richer, and stronger nations is a timeless truth of international relations.”

Overall, Trump’s NSS aligns with the foreign policy vision of India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and is favorable toward India and its role in the world. However, it envisions a less direct role for the U.S. in the Asian security sphere, which could be a challenge for India vis-à-vis its dynamic with China. Furthermore, the Trump administration’s single-minded pursuit of American national interests has often adversely affected Indian national interests on issues such as trade, manufacturing, and the Indian purchase of oil from Russia.

US Weapons Left Behind in Afghanistan Are Fueling Militancy in Pakistan

Umair Jamal

A recent report by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), a U.S. government watchdog, has revealed that billions of dollars’ worth of weapons and military equipment that the Americans abandoned in Afghanistan in 2021 are now the main strength behind the Taliban’s security forces.

Set up in 2008, SIGAR is an independent U.S. agency that monitors how American taxpayer money was spent in Afghanistan.

The latest report was released last week. The 137-page-document reviewed the United States’ 20-year mission to rebuild Afghanistan and train its armed forces. According to SIGAR, the U.S. poured roughly $145 billion into Afghanistan’s reconstruction between 2002 and 2021. Much of this money was meant to create a stable, modern security force and support a peaceful democratic government. The report concluded that these massive efforts failed to deliver lasting peace or true democracy in Afghanistan.

Mapping China's Borderlands: Dashboard

The Mapping China’s Strategic Space: Borderlands research project investigates how China invests in, engages with, and deepens its presence within its land and maritime border neighbors in an attempt to reshape its immediate periphery. This research effort constitutes the second phase of NBR’s Mapping China’s Strategic Space project. The first phase defined strategic space as a realm vital to the pursuit of China’s national economic and security objectives and to the enduring survival of the Chinese state. Beijing aspires to freely wield its influence and assert its leadership over this realm. This dashboard was compiled in collaboration between NBR and AidData to identify thirteen indicators across 28 countries sharing maritime or land borders (or close proximity to) the People’s Republic China.

The borderland areas surrounding China’s national territory are a critical component of its strategic space. Whereas China’s geopolitical horizons stretch globally, its capacity to exercise control and effectively exert its transformative power over the full extent of its desired strategic space is still uncertain. By contrast, the country’s contiguous regions, situated in its immediate reach, present opportunities for making use of power and wealth asymmetries—testing out methods that may become trademarks of a future globally dominant China, and laying the ground for an entirely reconfigured Asia. In addition, shaping a cooperative neighborhood appears as the necessary preliminary step toward ensuring that Beijing’s global ambitions can eventually come to pass.

Why China Can’t Win the AI-Led Industrial Revolution

DI GUO and CHENGGANG XU

History has consistently shown that industrial revolutions require free institutions and robust demand to support ongoing entrepreneurship and the commercialization of new, productivity-enhancing products and services. With its system of totalitarian party-state rule, China checks none of these boxes.

STANFORD – AI is widely recognized as the core technology in an emerging industrial revolution that will probably transform every facet of the global economy. UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD) estimates – conservatively – that the global AI market will reach $5 trillion by 2033, thanks to average annual growth of about 31%. The International Monetary Fund predicts that the technology could boost global GDP by 4% over the next decade, with the United States gaining as much as 5.4%. AI’s impact on science, innovation, the military, and geopolitics is already significant, reinforcing the sense that the race for AI dominance is also a race for global dominance.

China and America Must Get Serious About AI Risk

JAKE SULLIVAN

CAMBRIDGE – In November 2024, US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping made their first substantive joint statement about the national-security risks posed by AI. Specifically, they noted that both the United States and China believe in “the need to maintain human control over the decision to use nuclear weapons.”

That may sound like diplomatic low-hanging fruit, since it would be hard to find a reasonable person willing to argue that we should hand control over nuclear weapons to AI. But with the Chinese government, there is no such thing as low-hanging fruit, especially on weighty security matters. The Chinese are inherently skeptical of US risk-reduction proposals, and Russia had opposed similar language in multilateral bodies. Because bilateral talks with the US on AI and nuclear security would open daylight between Russia and China, progress on this front was not a foregone conclusion.

China Bets on Unmanned Stealth Bombers

Olli Pekka Suorsa

This image, shared on Chinese social media platform Weibo, shows the aircraft dubbed “GJ-X” by PLA watchers.Credit: Sina Weibo

China recently unveiled two large unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), which have been unofficially designated as the “WZ-X” and “GJ-X” by China military watchers. The UAVs’ intended roles could include strategic reconnaissance and strike, offering Beijing unprecedented options in the coming decade.

China has accelerated development and testing of a growing number of advanced tailless flying wing-type UAVs, such as the Hongdu GJ-11 and its naval version, the GJ-21, as well as CASC CH-7. This trend is instructive of Chinese industry’s advances in autonomy and aeronautical design. More than that, it offers critical insights into the People’s Liberation Army Air Force’s (PLAAF) vision of its future airpower strategy.

China has worked on a next-generation manned bomber, known as the H-20, to replace the venerable H-6 fleet for a long time. Despite occasional rumors surfacing about the type’s imminent release over the years, no official or leaked (real) images of the actual design have emerged to date. Most recently, a video showing an alleged first flight of the H-20 made the rounds in social media but was quickly proven fake.

China Just Moved a Naval Task Force into the Second Island Chain

Brandon J. Weichert

Australia is understandably concerned about Chinese adventurism in the Indo-Pacific’s Second Island Chain—but there is little that it can do to stop it.

China has reached the stage of its economic and industrial development where it is pouring gobs of cash into a massive military modernization program. As a result of this push, it now has the world’s largest navy in numbers of ships, though not yet in overall tonnage. Beijing has been advancing in the naval domain at a breakneck pace.

Recently, China lashed out at their Japanese neighbors after the government of the new Japanese prime minister insinuated that her country would militarily defend Taiwan against any potential Chinese attack. This began a very nasty war of words and historical recriminations of epic proportions between the two Asian states. Threats were bandied about. Beijing circulated maps of Japan with missile targets on them.

China’s AI Use for Cyber Espionage Shifts Cyber Focus From Detection To Trust

Gil Baram

The question facing security and technology leaders is no longer whether adversaries will deploy AI agents against their environment. Now, those leaders must ask whether their trust architecture, access models and identity systems are ready for a world where breakout time—the time taken for an attacker to move from initial access to lateral movement through a digital system—has vanished, and machine-speed attackers are the default assumption.

Anthropic’s 13 November report marked a significant turning point in cybersecurity. Their investigation into the GTG-1002 campaign—assessed with high confidence as a Chinese state-sponsored operation—confirmed that AI-driven espionage is no longer hypothetical or in development. It is active and already targeting large technology firms, financial institutions, chemical manufacturers and government agencies worldwide. Anthropic describes it as the first documented case of a large-scale cyberattack carried out with minimal human involvement. The finding is important, but it should not come as a surprise.

China’s plan to quarantine Taiwan while avoiding war

Peter Olive

Concerns regarding a potential quarantine or embargo of Taiwan by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) have been growing since 2024.

While an amphibious invasion remains the most dangerous scenario, most analysts agree it poses a range of challenges for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), despite rapid expansion and increasingly complex mission rehearsals.

These include the logistical hurdles associated with the most ambitious amphibious invasion ever attempted in history, the risk of becoming bogged down on arrival and of triggering an outside intervention and escalation.

Given these challenges, focus has shifted to how the PRC might instead seek to cut off Taiwan’s maritime supplies of energy, food, medicines and other key commodities. The purpose would not be territorial conquest but rather to pressure Taiwan’s society, potentially forcing its government to negotiate on the future of cross-Strait relations on terms favorable to Beijing.

Trump leaves complacent Europe most vulnerable since 1939

Antony Beevor

President Donald Trump’s National Security Strategy is 33 pages long. Considering the fatuous self-praise it contains, heaped upon the president himself, it was released in an unusually low-key way. Much of it is a so-called ‘Trump corollary’ to the Monroe Doctrine of 1823. It also contains an echo of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Although Roosevelt claimed that the United States would be a ‘good neighbour’ to Latin America, he rather gave the game away when he privately admitted that Anastasio Somoza, the dictator of Nicaragua, was ‘a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch’. This is a very Trumpian way of thinking, but it is also a fantasy.

Trump thinks he can get dictators in his pocket and yet he seems to have no idea when they are playing him. He has utterly misjudged Vladimir Putin, who clearly despises him. Putin kept his negotiators, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, waiting for three hours, then showed quite clearly that he had no intention of compromising on any of the 28 points that he himself appears to have dictated to the White House as a basis for discussion.

Filling America’s Shoes

AMITAV ACHARYA, ADEKEYE ADEBAJO, KATHRYN HOCHSTETLER, TANA JOHNSON, SUERIE MOON, CARLA NORRLÖF, and YU JIE

With the United States cutting aid, scrapping international agreements, and waging war on rules-based systems and arrangements that it built, questions about the future of the global order have gained new urgency. Though America may be replaceable in some areas, others may become a new Wild West.

PS Quarterly regularly features short responses from experts on topics of global concern, and this time we examine the implications of US President Donald Trump’s foreign policy. Although America’s role as the custodian of the international rules-based order was never as straightforward as its proponents believe, it at least represented an ideal against which to set expectations and measure successes and failures in global governance. But since Trump’s return, that ideal – like so many others – has been cast aside, lending new urgency to long-simmering questions.

Trump and the End of American Hegemony

JOSEPH E. STIGLITZ

In 2025, Donald Trump's erratic, unlawful policies upended the postwar era of globalization and set in motion a process that will culminate in America's loss of global primacy. Not only are the sources of US economic strength being destroyed, but all other countries are de-risking from America as fast as they can.

NEW YORK – It has become almost routine to end each year with talk of the “polycrisis,” and to acknowledge the difficulty of anticipating a future that seems pregnant with the risk of new wars, pandemics, financial crises, and climate-driven devastation. Yet 2025 added a uniquely toxic ingredient to this mix: the return to the White House of Donald Trump, whose erratic, unlawful policies have already upended the postwar era of globalization. Faced with so much chaos and uncertainty, can we say anything with confidence about where the US and global economies are heading?

Israel Unbound

VALI NASR

While the United States and its allies finally led a push to end the Gaza war in 2025, it is not clear how regional stability will be restored, or what shape a new regional order will assume. For the foreseeable future, the Middle East will be bracing for a prolonged conflict as Israel pursues military supremacy.

WASHINGTON, DC – Since Hamas’s attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, the Middle East has faced its most severe and consequential crisis in decades. Hamas’s egregious action demonstrated that it still posed a serious threat to Israel’s security, and the Israeli government’s reaction triggered a series of conflicts that has rattled the region.

Is Crypto an Opportunity or a Threat?

JEAN TIROLE

Innovation should enhance economic fundamentals, not erode them. With enthusiasm for crypto remaining strong, speculative unbacked tokens and lightly regulated stablecoins must be contained before they threaten financial stability and become part of the shadow banking sector.

TOULOUSE – The fascination with cryptocurrencies shows no sign of fading. With the passage of the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act in July 2025, US lawmakers added to the sense that crypto is here to stay. But look beyond the hype and an uncomfortable issue remains unresolved: Are cryptocurrencies a genuine innovation capable of serving the common good, or a speculative threat to financial and social stability?

Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)