Whether assessing the prospects of the war in Ukraine or predicting the trajectory of relations between the United States and Russia, U.S. policy discussions have generally revealed a cautious, realistic tone: The war is unlikely to end quickly, and the rupture in the international order is widening.

The U.S.-Israel strike on Iran lacks a clear legal basis or credible justification and represents a high-risk gamble by the Trump administration. Despite early military success, the operation faces uncertain prospects, including limited chances of regime change and the risk of prolonged conflict.

The death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in U.S.-Israeli strikes has created leadership uncertainty in Tehran, weakened Iran’s regional network of allies, and accelerated shifts in Middle Eastern power dynamics. For China, the conflict threatens energy supplies and Belt and Road investments while potentially expanding Beijing’s diplomatic role if it maintains neutrality and engagement with all sides.

Reaffirming legal limits is not an act of idealism. It is one of prudence. Strategic stability is not self-sustaining. It must be actively maintained. And in the nuclear age, maintenance begins not only with capability but with responsibility.

Critics of the attack on Iran by the United States and Israel point out that US President Donald Trump has no plan for what comes next. And they are not wrong: when Trump boasts that he can resolve wars in a single day, he merely exposes the limits of his attention span. But the real problem is not the shortness of Trump’s time horizon; it’s the narrowness of his threat perception.

Where is China-U.S. AI Relationship Headed? The birth of artificial intelligence has brought China and the United States to a historic inflection point. They may find it difficult to become partners in the AI field, yet they share a responsibility to ensure that they do not become joint contributors to systemic, or even existential, risk.

The old international order is being dismantled, even as a new one gradually comes into view. The interplay of major-powers, regional cooperation and global practices will continue to reshape that order as the parties attempt to stop the bleeding.

The resumption of diplomatic dialogue between the Philippines and China in Cebu on January 29, ahead of the ASEAN-China Senior Officials Meeting on the Code of Conduct negotiations, is a welcome development. Avoiding conflict and preventing the deterioration of bilateral relations are imperative for the Philippines and China. Cooperation and productive ties can persist amid differences. The practice of other South China Sea coastal states is illustrative. Several points are worth considering.

The world has entered a period of wrecking-ball politics. Leaders have risen to prominence by promising sweeping demolition rather than careful reform. They seek to tear down rules and institutions at home and abroad, which they falsely claim hinder both their efforts to build stronger, more prosperous countries as well as to prevent “civilizational decline.”

The United States’ National Security Strategy reveals an administration grappling with the rise of China’s influence and the need to adapt to a world where America’s agenda can no longer be assumed by default in defense and trade.