Why Japan Is Now the Most Important US Ally in Asia

National Interest  |  Jagannath Panda

The United States Department of Defense's decision on June 16, 2026, to rename US Indo-Pacific Command to US Pacific Command signals a major strategic pivot that demotes India as Washington's premier regional partner. This command restructuring coincides with India's refusal to sign a joint statement reaffirming the 2016 South China Sea arbitration ruling against China.

As bilateral tensions between Washington and New Delhi mount, Japan has emerged as the primary anchor for American containment efforts against Chinese maritime expansion. Tokyo is actively backing the Trump administration's "Peace through Strength" doctrine, supported by a record-high defense budget exceeding $58 billion and expedited revisions to its national security documents. With Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi securing public support for a stronger deterrence posture, the archipelago's critical geography will remain central to securing commercial access in a Pacific region that drives 60 percent of global economic growth.

America’s Changing Policy on Afghanistan

The Diplomat  |  Muhammad Murad

The United States government has transitioned its Afghanistan policy from promoting human rights to conducting selective, case-by-case diplomatic contacts with the Taliban, handing the de facto regime a significant political victory. This shift prioritises discrete security issues, counterterrorism, and prisoner releases over broader governance reforms, effectively cementing the Taliban's domestic authority despite ongoing international sanctions.

Following the chaotic August 2021 military withdrawal, Washington suspended formal embassy operations in Kabul, transferring its diplomatic representation to the Afghanistan Affairs Unit in Doha. Under the current administration, the termination of all foreign assistance in mid-2025—following over $3.8 billion in aid disbursed since October 2021—and the closure of the Office of the Coordinator for Afghan Relocation Efforts have further isolated the population. While the State Department characterises these limited interactions as necessary hostage diplomacy—highlighted by a January 2025 prisoner swap—the Taliban leverages them to demonstrate governing legitimacy, prompting regional powers like Russia and India to normalize relations with Kabul.

Beijing’s Next Play for the South China Sea: How China Is Normalizing Its Control

Foreign Affairs | Lynn Kuok

Chinese coast guard personnel landed on Sandy Cay in April 2025, marking Beijing's first formal, on-the-ground sovereignty assertion over an unoccupied Spratly Islands feature in over a decade. This landing, alongside extensive dredging at Antelope Reef in the Paracel Islands, signals a strategic shift from maritime rights disputes to contesting and normalizing control over uninhabited land features.

These activities strain the nonbinding 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, which previously restricted claimants from occupying uninhabited features. By exploiting legal gray zones on land where sovereignty remains unresolved, China complicates the defensive calculus of neighboring coastal states like the Philippines, Vietnam, and Malaysia. Consequently, quieter tactics such as deploying research vessels and establishing nature reserves allow the power to consolidate administrative authority without triggering direct military escalation. This incremental consolidation threatens to undermine the rules-based regional order and weakens the United States' strategy of rallying regional partners through public exposure of coercive behavior.

What does deeper tech integration during US-led Rimpac mean for China?

South China Morning Post | Gabriel Dominguez

The US-led Rim of the Pacific (Rimpac) military exercises around Hawaii integrated advanced uncrewed systems, long-range missiles, and digital manufacturing networks to counter China's growing anti-access/area-denial capabilities in the Western Pacific. This massive 30-nation biennial drill demonstrated unprecedented tactical coordination by linking multinational land, air, surface, and undersea assets into a single target-tracking network.

These operational advancements respond directly to American defense assessments warning that Chinese long-range radars and precision missiles could strike allied forces before they can close distance. To enhance coalition cohesion, the drills expanded leadership roles, appointing a South Korean rear admiral to command the multinational maritime component alongside Canadian, Japanese, and Chilean deputies. Furthermore, Japan deployed its mobile Type 12 anti-ship missiles near key waterways, while autonomous vessels successfully replenished moving warships to test resilient methods of sustaining dispersed forces under active threat. Ultimately, these exercises demonstrated a level of interoperability and trust that stands in sharp contrast to Beijing's unilateral regional posture.

The Loneliest Island: Will America Truly Defend Taiwan?

Foreign Affairs | Bonny Lin

China escalated its gray-zone coercion against Taiwan through "Justice Mission 2025," a massive military exercise that encircled the island and disrupted international air traffic. This operation, alongside a 22 percent increase in airspace intrusions and a June maritime quarantine rehearsal, threatens to permanently alter the cross-strait status quo before the 2028 Taiwanese presidential election.

Beijing's pressure campaigns, supported by military purges to accelerate readiness, aim to politically undermine President Lai Ching-te and weaken the Democratic Progressive Party in upcoming local and national elections. To counter these incremental tactics, scholar Eyck Freymann proposes a strategy of "structured ambiguity" where the United States imposes proportional political and economic costs for every Chinese revisionist action. However, implementing such deterrence remains highly challenging, especially as Washington's recent concessions on tariffs in the face of Beijing's rare-earth export threats highlight a reluctance to bear the severe economic costs of a potential escalation spiral.

Saudi Arabia's dilemma as it tries to stay out of US-Iran war

BBC  |  Frank Gardner

Saudi Arabia has carried out joint strikes with the US on Iranian proxy militias in Iraq following persistent hostile drone attacks on the Kingdom. This sudden operational shift threatens Riyadh's long-standing diplomatic effort to remain neutral in the wider conflict currently consuming Washington and Tehran, raising the stakes for Gulf security.

The escalation directly threatens Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman’s Vision 2030 economic diversification strategy, which relies heavily on attracting foreign investment and protecting vulnerable domestic infrastructure like high-tech data centres. Recent drone strikes on the Abqaiq oil facility and Houthi attacks on commercial Red Sea shipping lanes near the Bab El Mandeb strait have exposed the critical vulnerability of Saudi energy exports. Although Riyadh previously secured a fragile 2022 truce with the Houthis, this multi-front threat from Yemen and Iraq forces a difficult strategic choice between continued military deterrence and expensive diplomatic de-escalation.

Trump has four bad choices on Iran. Here’s the least horrible one

MSN  |  Bobby Ghosh

United States President-elect Donald Trump faces an immediate national security crisis concerning Iran's rapidly advancing nuclear enrichment program and its regional proxy network. The incoming administration must choose between launching direct military strikes, greenlighting a preemptive Israeli offensive, resuming maximum pressure sanctions, or negotiating a new diplomatic agreement.

Decades of mutual hostility and the collapse of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action have left Tehran closer than ever to weapons-grade uranium. While military options risk triggering a catastrophic regional war and sanctions alone have failed to halt enrichment, a transactional diplomatic settlement represents the least destructive path forward. This pragmatic framework would trade targeted sanctions relief for verifiable caps on nuclear development and a cessation of hostile proxy activities. Ultimately, pursuing a negotiated deal allows Washington to contain Iranian ambitions while avoiding another costly, protracted military entanglement in the Middle East.

Restoring America's Service Academies and War Colleges

Restore the Military

U.S. service academies and war colleges face a comprehensive restructuring under a proposed four-pillar reform agenda designed to refocus officer training exclusively on warfighting lethality. This policy initiative builds on Executive Order 14173 to eliminate race- and sex-based admissions considerations while prioritizing physical fitness, demonstrated leadership records, and cognitive aptitude.

Decades of institutional drift toward civilian academic norms have diluted the primary mission of producing officers capable of winning the nation's wars. To correct this, the proposal mandates a strict 75/25 curriculum split, dedicating three-quarters of academic credits directly to tactical, operational, and strategic military competencies, including military history and strategy. Non-essential social science electives will be permanently purged, and participation in the Rhodes Scholarship Program will cease to prevent ideological distraction. Ultimately, these statutory changes aim to restore colorblind, merit-based admissions and cultivate senior leaders who prioritize battlefield victory over civilian credentialism.

Trump can still win the Iran war

UnHerd  |  Edward Luttwak

President Donald Trump is facing mounting frustration five months into the war in Iran as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps maintains its grip on Tehran. A loosely worded memorandum of understanding negotiated in Pakistan inadvertently triggered the conflict by prompting unprecedented Iranian sovereignty claims over the entire Persian Gulf and demanding transit fees.

To counter these maritime disruptions, the United States enforced a total embargo on oil exports from Kharg Island and Jask, collapsing the rial and restricting military imports from China. This economic strangulation has severely degraded funding for regional proxies, including Hezbollah and the Houthi militia, who now threaten the Bab-El-Mandeb strait and global energy prices. While Washington currently targets infrastructure, the regime's true vulnerability lies in its leadership. Leveraging Israeli targeting capabilities to eliminate top commanders offers a direct path to ending the conflict without deploying American ground forces to the Gulf.

Technology and Military Disruption: Inbound from the Space Frontier

Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies | Jess Sponable and Priyanka Mishra.

Proliferated Low Earth Orbit (pLEO) constellations and commercial space technologies are rapidly disrupting traditional military paradigms, forcing a shift away from legacy orbital architectures. This technological evolution compels the United States Space Force to transition from high-value, exquisite satellites to resilient, distributed networks to maintain space superiority. This architectural shift responds directly to the rapid proliferation of Chinese and Russian kinetic and non-kinetic counterspace weapons designed to degrade American orbital assets.

By integrating commercial remote sensing, tactical communications, and rapid launch capabilities, the joint force aims to establish a dynamic, self-healing orbital infrastructure. Consequently, these advancements redefine deterrence in the space domain, requiring updated operational doctrines, enhanced cyber defenses, and flexible procurement strategies to outpace adversary developments. Ultimately, securing these critical orbital frontiers ensures uninterrupted precision navigation, early missile warning, and secure tactical communications for global multi-domain operations, safeguarding allied power projection capabilities.

When Lethality Isn’t Enough: The Army and the Missing Element of Combat Power

Modern War Institute | Jonathan Buckland

The United States Army faces a critical strategic fragility as its modernization initiatives prioritize weapon system lethality over operational availability, leaving advanced platforms vulnerable to disruption in peer conflicts. A 2025 Government Accountability Office report revealed that none of the service's major ground combat vehicles met operational availability objectives due to declining mission-capable rates.

This systemic vulnerability stems from a growing reliance on complex civilian contractor support, proprietary software diagnostics, and just-in-time supply chains that cannot survive contested environments. Historical precedents from World War II demonstrate that highly reliable, standardized platforms like the M4 Sherman consistently outperform over-engineered systems like the German Tiger tank in prolonged combat. Modern platforms like the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle and the Javelin antiarmor system risk single points of failure due to exquisite maintenance requirements. To mitigate these risks, the service requires a high-low capability mix, integrating disposable systems like the M72 LAW to ensure resilient, distributed combat power.

Trump Backs New Iran Talks but It’s Unclear What He Hopes to Achieve This Time

The New York Times  |  Michael Crowley

President Trump announced on July 27, 2026, that a new round of diplomacy with Iran could yield a breakthrough, warning that the United States would resume paused airstrikes if negotiations fail. This diplomatic push aims to restore free navigation to the Strait of Hormuz following two weeks of renewed American military attacks.

Tehran quickly denied claims of requesting these discussions, signaling a refusal to offer concessions or engage directly with American officials as regional tensions remain high. With the November midterm elections approaching, former United States officials suggest the Iranian government perceives Washington's leverage as rapidly waning, even as some top Republican lawmakers urge a swift resolution to the conflict. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to visit the White House on Tuesday to advocate for continuing the war, presenting a direct counterwind to these diplomatic efforts.

Why Iran Is in No Rush to Return to Talks With United States

The New York Times  |  Yeganeh Torbati

Iranian officials are refusing to hold direct negotiations with United States negotiators following a recent escalation in military hostilities, betting they can withstand economic and military pressure better than President Trump. This diplomatic impasse persists despite a temporary reprieve in airstrikes, as Tehran seeks formal recognition of its control over the strategic Strait of Hormuz waterway.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps has solidified its domestic political and military control during the two-week conflict, framing the halt in US attacks as a strategic victory. However, this prolonged state of limbo between peace and full-scale war poses severe systemic challenges for the Islamic Republic. A continuous United States naval blockade and wartime destruction are projected to severely degrade the Iranian economy, even as military leaders maintain a highly defiant posture. With no formal cease-fire established, the risk of renewed kinetic conflict remains high, leaving the region vulnerable to sudden escalation.

Armed forces: UK future capability and requirements

House of Lords Library

The United Kingdom’s Strategic Defence Review 2025 mandates an immediate transition to warfighting readiness to counter escalating geopolitical threats from Russia and China. This policy shift requires the British armed forces to rapidly integrate conventional combat platforms with autonomous systems, artificial intelligence, and digital networks to deter and successfully win high-intensity conflicts.

This modernization drive responds directly to systemic vulnerabilities in force readiness, recruitment, and ammunition stockpiles caused by years of hollowing out. To implement these reforms, the 2026 defence investment plan targets major funding toward cyber defence, advanced missile systems, munitions, and domestic industrial capacity. However, European allies must assume greater responsibility for collective security as the United States shifts its primary international focus away from the region. While parliamentarians support this strategic direction, experts question whether current funding and implementation timelines are sufficient to meet NATO commitments and counter hybrid warfare tactics amid a volatile global security landscape.

NATO’s digital arsenal: How Europe can avoid a new dependence on America

European Council on Foreign Relations  |  Arthur de Liedekerke

European member states of NATO face a critical strategic vulnerability due to their overwhelming reliance on United States commercial technology giants for digital defense infrastructure. The war in Ukraine has demonstrated that modern warfare relies heavily on cloud computing, satellite communications, and artificial intelligence, which are currently dominated by American firms like Microsoft and SpaceX.

This asymmetric dependence threatens European strategic autonomy and leaves the continent highly vulnerable to shifts in Washington's political priorities or unilateral corporate decisions. To mitigate these risks, European nations are seeking to collaboratively invest in sovereign defense-tech capabilities, establish unified procurement standards, and leverage joint initiatives like the Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic. Fostering a robust domestic defense-technology industrial base will allow European allies to contribute more equitably to NATO’s collective digital defense, secure critical supply chains, and safeguard their long-term technological sovereignty against external disruptions.

Russia Sustaining War Machine Despite Western Sanctions

The Jamestown Foundation  |  Taras Kuzio

Russia's military-industrial complex has expanded its domestic production capabilities since the 2022 invasion of Ukraine by systematically exploiting critical gaps in Western sanctions regimes. Despite the recent implementation of the 21st European Union sanctions package, Russian defense firms continue to secure vital dual-use technologies, machinery, and chemical precursors from international markets.

This persistent acquisition relies on complex parallel import networks operating through non-aligned intermediary states like Türkiye, Georgia, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan. Ukrainian intelligence databases maintained by the HUR have identified over 1,600 Western-manufactured components inside Russian precision weapons, including Iskander and Kalibr cruise missiles. Thousands of foreign suppliers, particularly Chinese and Hong Kong-based entities, facilitate this trade by routing microchips and machine tools to Russian state enterprises. Consequently, these unhindered supply chains allow Moscow to sustain its high-intensity precision-strike campaigns, presenting a long-term security threat to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Central Bank and Finance Ministry Warn Putin of War’s Impact on Economy

The Jamestown Foundation  |  John C. K. Daly

Russian President Vladimir Putin received warnings from the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank of the Russian Federation in June 2026 that escalating military expenditures are destabilising the national budget. Defense spending is projected to consume approximately one-third of the entire 2026 budget, driving the January–April deficit to $79.3 billion and exceeding the total deficit for 2025.

This fiscal strain stems from a structural shift toward a highly militarised economy where regional industries and weapons manufacturing contracts have become the primary drivers of domestic liquidity. Concurrently, Ukrainian drone strikes on domestic energy infrastructure have damaged refineries, triggering fuel shortages and compounding inflationary pressures. To offset these losses, the state has intensified the unilateral seizure of private enterprises, nationalising fifty strategic companies worth $10.4 billion in early 2025 alone, while coercing major oligarchs like Vladimir Potanin into making voluntary budget contributions to sustain the war effort.

How has Iran’s economy survived despite US war pressure

Al Jazeera | Maziar Motamedi

Iran’s diversified domestic economy of 92 million people continues to resist collapse despite five months of direct war with the United States and a severe naval blockade. Decades of state-enforced economic isolation have forced the country to rely on domestic manufacturing, Water-intensive agriculture, and informal trade networks to maintain basic functions.

This resilience has come at a devastating cost to local households, who absorb severe currency depreciation and a 90 percent inflation rate. While the state has leaned on self-sufficiency, systemic corruption and the theft of $11 billion by state-appointed oil trustees have severely undermined public trust. Although the conflict has now spread to the Caspian Sea, the government relies on economic ties with China and Russia to provide temporary breathing space. Ultimately, sustained economic recovery remains impossible without targeted diplomatic efforts to reduce geopolitical risks and restore vital international trade relations.

Reform or Decline: The United Nations at a Crossroads

Peace Research Institute Frankfurt  |  Xinyu Yuan, Sascha Hach, Lucas Kori Leonhard, Myriel Julie Mathez, Frederik Schissler, Johanna Speyer, Felix Bethke, Stefan Kroll

The United Nations Security Council is experiencing severe operational paralysis as intense great-power rivalry and frequent vetoes by major powers undermine its authority during conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza. This gridlock is compounded by substantial funding cuts and alternative political forums established by the Trump administration, directly jeopardising the global body's peace preservation mission.

To contextualise these existential challenges, a new PRIF Working Paper traces the long-term evolution of the institution's core policy instruments across the critical domains of peacemaking, peacekeeping, and peacebuilding. The study systematically surveys major academic and policy debates surrounding structural reform, illustrating how deep-seated geopolitical divisions have transformed the council into a mere echo chamber of international crises. Ultimately, these compounding financial constraints and diplomatic blockages force a critical reassessment of the organization's future trajectory, highlighting the severe escalation risks and unresolved tensions that threaten its capacity to maintain international peace and security.

What should replace the American-led world order?

The Guardian  |  Aslı Bâli, Samuel Moyn

The decline of the American-led world order presents a critical opportunity to establish a global security framework based on mutual restraint rather than unilateral hegemony. This transition requires states to commit to a narrow, four-part antiwar agenda designed to limit conflict in an inevitably plural and rivalrous world.

Historically, the post-1945 rules-based international order suffered from systemic hypocrisy and uneven enforcement, which ultimately eroded its legitimacy across the Global South. To prevent multipolarity from devolving into regional domination, states must strengthen limits on self-defence under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and reject territorial acquisition by force. Additionally, great and middle powers must halt proxy warfare and restrict arms sales that abet aggression, leveraging frameworks like the Arms Trade Treaty to regulate the $2.9tn global military market. Ultimately, this self-interested restraint offers a more stable foundation for international security than a fading hierarchy, especially in light of costly conflicts in Ukraine and Iran.

Cognitive Warfare Below the Threshold: AI, Decision Speed, and the Future of Competition

Small Wars Journal | Yi Se Gwon

Iranian and Russian state actors are actively leveraging generative artificial intelligence to execute rapid, large-scale cognitive warfare campaigns below the threshold of kinetic conflict. These operations deploy highly realistic deepfakes and fabricated imagery to erode allied political will and disrupt democratic decision-making before traditional defense mechanisms can verify or debunk the threat.

This rapid democratization of digital manipulation tools bypasses conventional military response timelines, which remain bound to slower, legacy bureaucratic verification processes. To counter this, the Praxis AI Doctrine's Cognitive Warfare Operationalization Model offers a structured framework to integrate domain sensing, echelon scalability, and mission task execution. Furthermore, initiatives like Ukraine's March 2026 data-sharing initiative establish a collaborative training foundation, enabling allied special operations and interagency practitioners to build cognitive resilience and human-machine decision frameworks before the next major crisis. Ultimately, achieving cognitive literacy is now as critical for irregular warfare units as maintaining physical combat readiness.

How Will AI Affect Cyber Operations?

RAND Corporation | Michael Sulmeyer

Artificial intelligence, particularly agentic systems capable of autonomous goal pursuit, is poised to significantly expand the strategic potential of cyber operations. By alleviating the persistent constraints on expert-level human capacity, these emerging technologies will enable state actors to execute highly sophisticated cyberattacks at an unprecedented global scale and operational speed.

Historically, cyber weapons have functioned primarily as tactical instruments because attackers struggled to predict operational effects, navigate complex classification structures, and maintain the specialized workforce required for sustained campaigns. While traditional digital operations rarely achieved broad strategic outcomes, the integration of autonomous software agents fundamentally alters this dynamic. These systems can dynamically adapt to defensive countermeasures in real time, bypassing human-in-the-loop bottlenecks. Consequently, the rapid proliferation of these advanced offensive capabilities will likely intensify interstate competition in the digital domain, lowering the entry barrier for highly disruptive strategic campaigns targeting critical national infrastructure.

Pentagon Admits US Drone Production Remains Far Behind Ukraine

Kyiv Post

The United States Pentagon has acknowledged that domestic military drone production remains significantly behind Ukraine's wartime output, with Washington planning to order fewer than 200,000 systems by February under its $1.1 billion Drone Dominance program. In contrast, Ukrainian manufacturers are projected to build between 6 and 7 million first-person-view (FPV) attack drones this year, according to figures shared with Reuters.

This massive production disparity stems from years of rapid, combat-tested iteration along the front lines, where Ukrainian builders continuously adapted cheap commercial technologies to bypass Russian electronic warfare. To replicate this agility, the Defense Innovation Unit is attempting to build a secure, domestic supply chain that completely eliminates prohibited Chinese-made components like motors and batteries. As part of this effort, six Ukrainian drone manufacturers are establishing joint ventures with American firms ahead of the Gauntlet II trials in Colorado to transfer battlefield-tested designs directly into United States factories.

Science as a Substitute for Geography: The Army’s High-Altitude Advantage—Altitude as a Strategic Asymmetry in Great-Power Competition

Military Review  |  Karl E. Friedl, Pierre A. Fabries, Beth A. Beidleman

The US Army is leveraging scientific research at its Pikes Peak High Altitude Research Laboratory to engineer physiological countermeasures against hypobaric hypoxia, securing a strategic advantage in high-altitude great-power competition. By developing predictive monitoring systems and testing rapid-acting pharmacological interventions, the military aims to preserve combat readiness during rapid expeditionary deployments without requiring long acclimatization periods.

This scientific approach directly addresses the severe physiological limitations exposed during historical mountain conflicts like the 1962 Sino-Indian War. While the Indian Army relies on a conservative, time-based tiered acclimatization doctrine to protect rotated forces along the Line of Actual Control, the People's Liberation Army utilizes permanent Tibetan plateau residency, genetic adaptations, and extensive oxygen-supply infrastructure. Consequently, the American strategy bypasses these geographic and garrison constraints through targeted medical innovations, including a 2026 study on hypoxia-inducible factor proteins designed to compress acclimatization timelines and optimize warfighter performance in extreme environments.

Brian Kennedy: Removing Iran's Uranium Would Require Thousands Of U.S. Troops

RealClearPolitics  |  Brian Kennedy

An American military intervention to physically secure and remove Iran's enriched uranium stockpiles would necessitate the deployment of thousands of U.S. ground troops on the territory of the Islamic Republic. This assessment highlights the operational limitations of relying solely on stand-off air and missile strikes to permanently neutralize the Iranian nuclear weapons program.

Securing deeply buried and heavily fortified facilities like Fordow and Natanz demands physical control of the sites to prevent the dispersal or hidden relocation of fissile material. Historically, the United States has faced severe logistical and tactical challenges when attempting to dismantle hostile weapons of mass destruction infrastructure under active combat conditions. A large-scale ground operation of this nature would inevitably trigger a wider regional conflict, drawing in regional proxies and necessitating robust defensive postures across the Middle East. Consequently, policymakers must weigh the immense human and financial costs of a ground invasion against the strategic risk of a nuclear-armed Tehran.