Skip to main content
Summaries in The Middle Powers Monitor are AI-generated. We review for accuracy, but errors may occur. Corrections welcome at editor@middlepowers.fyi

​
Week of May 18, 2026

Big Promises, Thin Mandates The week’s central fact is not how bold the commitments are — it is how thin the ground beneath them is. Governments from Berlin to Canberra are promising to fill the gaps left by an unreliable America: more defence spending, new security architecture, sovereign trade policy, credible deterrence. The promises are real. So are the obstacles: low approval ratings, blocked legislatures, coalition partners writing demands, and courts deciding whether the machinery is even legal. The gap between what governments are pledging and what their political conditions allow them to deliver is widening. Germany makes the case most sharply. Friedrich Merz is proposing to reshape European architecture — associate membership for Ukraine, €90 billion in new financing, a burden-sharing overhaul — from an approval rating of 13-16%, the lowest recorded for any sitting German chancellor. His coalition’s combined support has fallen 11 points since February’s election, to 34%. The Alternative for Germany (AfD) stands at 29% nationally and 41% in Saxony-Anhalt, where an absolute AfD majority — unprecedented in the Federal Republic — is now possible ahead of September’s state election. The defence minister unveiled a 12-point procurement overhaul to govern €108 billion across more than 320 programmes; within days, a Düsseldorf court referred a key provision of the acceleration law to Karlsruhe. Germany is building the machine while a court decides whether the engine is valid. Keir Starmer governs at 17% while the Pentagon asks Britain to fill NATO’s northern gaps. Pedro Sánchez is ruling out early elections while Washington works his courts and his opposition simultaneously. Emmanuel Macron, twelve months from the end of his mandate, is placing former allies across the Constitutional Council, the Court of Auditors, and the public broadcaster — not ordinary patronage, but a president entrenching himself in institutions because he can no longer govern by mandate. Italy, which put EU sanctions on an Israeli minister onto the June 15 agenda cleanly and fast, shows what European foreign policy looks like when a government is not consumed by keeping itself alive. The contrast is the argument. The same gap runs through the security demands being made of NATO. Romania’s air force shot down a drone over Estonia — the first time a NATO jet has engaged a target over alliance territory — and Mark Rutte, NATO’s secretary-general, praised Bucharest for changing the relevant law in a day or two. Romania has had no functioning government since May 5, cannot sign its own defence contracts, and faces a peak inflation projection of around 11% in July. Sweden bought four frigates, choosing delivery speed and integrated air-defence capability over domestic jobs — a serious decision, immediately credible. Romania and Lithuania, where the first shelter alarm in any NATO capital since 2022 found the shelters locked and serving police officers running smuggling networks, show how unevenly the commitment falls. Poland hangs on a direct line to the American president, bypassing NATO command; the Czech Republic did not make the alliance’s list of major contributors on Ukraine. The Baltic states’ collective demand for permanent ground-based air defence — the most consequential security claim they have made together since 2022 — is real and necessary. The domestic coalitions needed to sustain it are, in several cases, not. The same architecture, built on the same thin ground, extends through Asia and the Middle East. Lai Ching-te, Taiwan’s president, anchored the most explicit sovereignty statement of his two years in office to 13.69% first-quarter GDP growth — but his legislature has blocked the eight-year procurement plan, the deadline for a key arms acceptance letter has passed, and Washington paused the arms package to preserve munitions for a strike on Iran never coordinated with Taipei. Japan is deepening the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (the Quad), signing energy pacts, and moving constitutional revision out of committee, while China cuts exports of the rare-earth inputs Japanese rearmament requires, calibrating the restrictions to hit defence shipbuilding directly. Japan’s defence document buries its two key retreats: no spending target, no nuclear latency. Pakistan won praise as Washington’s chief broker toward an Iran deal while deploying a fighter squadron and troops to Saudi Arabia — Iran’s principal Gulf adversary — and while a Balochistan Liberation Army bomber killed at least 24 soldiers on Eid morning. Saudi Arabia played public peacemaker while intercepting drones from Iraqi airspace and striking the militias behind them in the same week its crude exports fell to their lowest since 2002. The visible track and the hidden one are not separate policies; they are the same government, and the cost of maintaining both is rising. The Americas state the problem most plainly, because the numbers say what the leaders will not. Mark Carney, Canada’s prime minister, is riding external threats in the polls — 47% of Canadians say the country is headed in the right direction, the highest since 2017 — while negotiations on trade, pipelines, and labour have barely begun, and 14 Liberal MPs have warned in writing that pipeline concessions would fracture the government’s credibility. Claudia Sheinbaum, Mexico’s president, signed a trade deal with the European Union as the hemisphere’s clearest hedge against American tariffs the same week Moody’s cut Mexico’s sovereign rating, Pemex’s structural losses remained unaddressed, and formal trade talks opened with a freshly downgraded balance sheet. Lula leads his nearest rival by nine points in polling — a gap that was three points three weeks ago — not because his government approval has improved (at net-negative 38%, it has not), but because a scandal has damaged his opponent. Each leader is governing from a narrative the facts have not yet caught up with. The week’s pattern, from Berlin to Brasília, is not that governments are failing — it is that the commitments they are making require a political durability their current conditions do not guarantee. The architecture is going up. Whether the builders will still be standing when it needs to hold is the question no summit this summer will answer.