This Friday, H.R. McMaster and Bradley Bowman counter calls to reduce military assistance to Ukraine, arguing that the conflict is central to US security interests and challenging the “axis of aggressors”; Jendayi Frazer offers a blueprint for a strategic refresh of US-Africa relations to advance key US foreign policy goals; and Steven J. Davis joins other leading economists in filing an amicus brief challenging the economic arguments offered by the Trump administration in imposing tariffs under emergency authorities.
US Foreign Policy
In an opinion letter published at The Wall Street Journal, Senior Fellow H.R. McMaster and Bradley Bowman of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies respond to former Pentagon official Dan Caldwell’s argument that, in Ukraine, there are “limited US interests at stake.” McMaster and Bowman counter that “The Ukraine war is part of a broader and more dangerous competition with an axis of aggressors—China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea—that is underwriting Mr. Putin’s aggression.” They point out that helping Ukraine bolsters US readiness for future conflicts with that axis and that “US munitions provided to Ukraine make additional aggression less likely by degrading the Russian threat.” Bowman and McMaster conclude that more security assistance to Ukraine would help realize a doctrine of “peace through strength” by indicating to Vladimir Putin “that there is no alternative to a negotiated end to his war and to other axis members that strong leadership resides in Washington.” In an appearance on CBS News, McMaster also discussed the latest developments in the Russia-Ukraine war. Read more here. [Subscription required.]
In a new episode of Policy Stories, Distinguished Visiting Fellow Jendayi Frazer argues that for decades, US policy toward Africa has been episodic and reactive, treating the continent as a charity case rather than a geopolitical partner. That neglect has created space for China and Russia to entrench their influence, extract critical resources, and destabilize fragile governments. Yet Africa holds vast promise: abundant green energy potential, essential minerals, and the world’s fastest-growing workforce. As Beijing and Moscow pursue their multipolar vision, Frazer argues that the US must elevate its engagement with African nations by modernizing trade frameworks, reforming multilateral institutions, and investing in African-led peace and development. By supporting Africa’s agency, America can secure its own interests, ensuring democratic values, global stability, and economic growth in a region critical to the international order. You can learn more about Frazer’s vision for a reinvigorated US foreign policy in Africa by reading this interview she gave to The Catalyst journal from the George W. Bush Institute earlier this year. Watch here.
Answering Challenges to Advanced Economies
Hoover Senior Fellow and Research Director Steven J. Davis joined an amicus brief with dozens of other leading economists challenging the broad imposition of tariffs on foreign nations by the Trump administration. Davis joins leading economists from Harvard University, MIT, the American Enterprise Institute, and other leading universities and centers of policy research who contend that the executive branch’s recent and unilateral imposition of tariffs is based on poor economic reasoning. With the plaintiffs winning the initial case at the US Court of International Trade in New York in June, the matter is now under consideration at the US Federal Court of Appeals. “Trade policy actions motivated by unsound economic reasoning will not benefit most Americans,” said Davis. “Nor will they strengthen the United States on the global stage.” The economists’ brief focuses on economic, as opposed to Constitutional, issues with the Trump administration’s imposition of tariffs, and challenges the notion that the tariffs will diminish US trade deficits with other nations. Read more here.
At Defining Ideas, Research Fellow David R. Henderson analyzes five economic interventions proposed by Zohran Mamdani in the recent New York City mayoral primary. These are: (1) higher tax rates on high-income individuals and corporations; (2) tighter rent control combined with subsidies for government housing; (3) an increase in the minimum wage, in steps, to $30 an hour in 2028; (4) government-run grocery stores; and (5) government-subsidized day care combined with a huge boost in costs. Henderson, a longtime professor of economics, argues that these measures, "if implemented, would have mainly negative effects, some of them large." Looking at the likely impacts of tax hikes on higher-income New Yorkers in particular, Henderson challenges Mamdani’s argument that they would be unlikely to drive this group away from the city. As Henderson points out, even if tax rates were similar elsewhere, such residents might look to competing jurisdictions like New Jersey as a better value if “they thought they would get a better return on their taxes.” Read more here.
Security and Defense
In an essay for Strategika Issue 99, on “Today's Soldier and The Current Military Revolution,” Visiting Fellow Miles Maochun Yu analyzes the role of cutting-edge technologies in the US and Chinese militaries. Yu notes how, in the event of a conflict, “US troops will deploy handheld directed-energy weapons and electromagnetic pulse devices to counter China’s growing reliance on AI-driven drone swarms.” Yu also reports that “China is pushing toward a more autonomous model where AI-driven drones and robotic systems take on an increasingly direct combat role,” meaning “Chinese soldiers may act more as battlefield coordinators, directing robotic assets rather than engaging in traditional frontline combat.” Yu maintains that the “biggest difference between US and Chinese soldiers in a future war will be the level of autonomy given to AI in combat decision-making.” Yu suggests that technological changes will make future warfighters in both militaries “fundamentally different” from those of the past, even as divergent doctrines will create differences in how American and Chinese combatants field advanced technologies. Read more here.
Revitalizing History
Senior Fellow Stephen Kotkin sat down with podcaster Dwarkesh Patel to discuss his two published biographic volumes on Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin. The conversation touches on the nature of the Russian Revolution, the details of Stalin’s tyrannical reign, and the importance of well-framed counterfactuals in the study of history. Drawing on his extensive study of communist systems, Kotkin notes, “You can't be half-communist. You either have a communist monopoly or you don't.” Kotkin shows how this dynamic is especially relevant in China today, where the ruling Communist Party is struggling to achieve growth and innovation without undermining its own repressive grip on power. Watch or read here.
Related Commentary