甚至在2022年2月俄罗斯全面入侵乌克兰之前，俄罗斯就与其他国家存在许多持续和潜在的争端，其动机是各种领土、政治和经济问题。此外，随着莫斯科寻求扩大其国际作用，它使用公开和秘密手段，增加了俄罗斯对国内冲突的参与。俄罗斯在叙利亚和利比亚的活动增加了美国可能在各种全球热点地区与俄罗斯发生军事冲突的可能性。因此，本报告的作者试图确定俄罗斯与美国陆军欧洲责任区内及其附近国家的可能爆发点，这些爆发点可能会使美国陷入困境，并给美国陆军带来明显的军事挑战
美国国防部越来越关注与俄罗斯和中国的竞争，以及大国战争的可能性。为了让人们思考这场战争之后会发生什么，兰德公司的研究人员生成了四个假设的近期大国战争场景，并评估了战后战略环境在每个场景中会如何变化。这些场景为规划者和决策者提供了关于未来具有不同特征的大国战争的合理叙事，帮助他们审视假设，思考战时选择如何影响战后美国的目标
拜登总统在劳动节演讲中表示，美国“拥有世界上最高的药品价格，这是没有理由的。”对于新品牌药品，该声明的第一部分得到了兰德公司最近的一份报告（Mulcahy等人，2021年）的支持，该报告发现，美国的平均价格是32个经合组织国家和英国的2.3倍。在这项研究中，我们考虑了该声明的第二部分，并确定了提出一些“原因”的经济因素
Research Brief Photo by Senior Airman Trevor Gordnier/U.S. Air Force The expansion of Chinese military activities and capabilities in the Indo-Pacific region has led the United States to increase its own military activities in the region. This brief describes how the United States can select and shape its military activities to deter Chinese aggression against U.S. allies and partners while also limiting the risks of escalatory Chinese reactions. Grounded in 14 case studies of reactions by the People's Republic of China (PRC) to U.S. military activities and other events in the Indo-Pacific, this brief offers U.S. military planners a framework to identify the perceptions that are likely to cause an aggressive or escalatory response. The authors then discuss which potential U.S. military activities in the Indo-Pacific region could affect the perceptions—and thus the risk of an escalatory response. The research team created a typology of potential short-term responses—from least intense to most intense—in the political, economic, and military spheres. The team also considered potential longer-term responses in each sphere. This typology summarizes the menu of response options that the could select, depending on the perceptions, the U.S. activity characteristics, and the broader context in which the U.S. activities are undertaken. The authors outline the implications regarding general types of U.S. activities that could escalate tensions to various degrees, specific examples of U.S. activities that could do the same, and broader lessons for U.S. policymakers. This brief concludes with recommendations for U.S. military planners. Photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Heather McGee/U.S. Navy Foundation for Understanding and Anticipating Responses The research team based its framework on an extensive analysis of documents, Chinese-language literature, English-language examinations of behavior, and 14 case studies—listed in Figure 1—of recent reactions to U.S. military activities and other events. This analysis, and the framework that arose from it, can help U.S. military planners anticipate China's likely responses to new or expanded U.S. military activities in the Indo-Pacific region. The framework provides a step-by-step guide for assessing likely responses to U.S. military activities. As noted, the framework consists of three main components: key perceptions that trigger Chinese responses to U.S. military activities key characteristics of U.S. military activities that influence China's behavior a typology of potential Chinese responses, organized by intensity level. Figure 1. Case Studies of Recent Reactions U.S. hypersonic weapon programs (ongoing since 2000) U.S. naval capabilities and the Malacca Dilemma (ongoing since 2000) China-Philippines Scarborough Shoal Standoff (ongoing since 2012) Japanese nationalization of the Senkaku Islands (2012–2016) Expansion of the U.S.-Vietnam defense and security ties (2013–2016) U.S. bomber overflights of the (2016 and 2020) deployment to South Korea (ongoing since 2016) Chinese reactions to the Duterte administration (2016–2018) The reinvigoration of the Quad (ongoing since 2017) U.S. support for Taiwan under the Trump Administration (2018–2020) Strengthening of U.S.-India ties (ongoing since 2018) Hong Kong and the Vanguard bank disputes (2019) Hong Kong and the China-India border clash (2020) U.S. in the Taiwan Strait (2020)
