2025年2月20日，星期四，第1184期

即便美、欧、俄、印等国在阿富汗问题上“开第三桌儿麻将”，对华制衡效果也远逊十年前

【媒体报道】

2月19日，美媒援引消息称，印度政府预计将很快接受阿富汗塔利班高级代表访问印度。报道称，这是印度改善与阿富汗关系，同时制衡中国在阿富汗日益增长影响力的最新举措。

2月19日，俄罗斯总统普京在圣彼得堡表示，他已经听取了工作组有关俄美利雅得会谈的成果汇报，他积极评价本次会谈成果……普京还称，俄美对话不需要中间人……此外，俄方从未拒绝与欧洲或乌克兰的对话，是欧洲自行中断了与俄方的联系，而乌克兰当局则禁止同俄方谈判……普京表示，当下的俄美关系非常复杂，不是坐下来喝杯咖啡就能解决问题。普京表示，俄方准备就乌克兰问题重返谈判桌，有关乌克兰问题的谈判将在俄乌双方参与下进行，没有人将乌克兰排除在谈判进程之外；欧洲也无需对俄美会谈作出负面反应。

【讨论纪要】

●特朗普政府上任刚满1个月，就把局面搞到了阵营分崩，美、欧交恶，日、越低头的地步！

在展开今天的讨论之前，我们就上一期最后提到的中国周边地区的新变化做简单补充。大家先来看一则新闻报道：

2025年2月19日外交部发言人郭嘉昆主持例行记者会。

法媒记者：越南国会今天批准了一项80亿美元的铁路建设项目，将铁路从越南北部最大港口城市延伸至中越边境。这将促进两国互联互通和贸易往来。外交部对该项目有何评论？

郭嘉昆：去年以来，中越双方多次就推进两国铁路互联互通交换意见，一致同意将加快老街—河内—海防标轨铁路可研和同登—河内、芒街—下龙—海防标轨铁路规划编制工作，抓紧推进中国河口至越南老街标轨铁路连接线工作。具体情况请向主管部门了解。

英媒记者：中国声称对位于南沙群岛的柏礁拥有主权，该礁自20世纪80年代以来被越南占领。有关研究显示，越方正在该礁进行填海造地活动。中国控制柏礁的可能性是否越来越小？

郭嘉昆：南沙群岛是中国的固有领土，柏礁是南沙群岛的一部分。中方一贯反对有关国家在非法侵占的岛礁上开展建设活动。

众所周知，美国一贯以来，喜欢从实力的角度出发和别的国家打交道，但现在的美国在实力上可谓江河日下。其中既包括“绝对实力”，也包括“相对实力”。在我们看来，“绝对实力”更多指的是传统安全层面，比如，政治与安全；“相对实力”更多指的是非传统安全层面，比如，经济与金融。两者相比，我们更倾向于将“绝对实力”放在首位。如果说历史上将会有一天，美国人由衷感到后悔，那就是1999年5月8日。以美国为首的北约部队，使用“B-2”隐形轰炸机投下五枚联合直接攻击弹药，轰炸了中华人民共和国驻南斯拉夫联盟共和国大使馆。显然，一味强调发展经济是不够的，与之相辅相成的是大力提升军事实力与作战能力。

除了越南之外，在中国周边地区有新变化的另一个典型案例就是日本。

2月19日，据日本媒体报道，国际原子能机构开始实施检验东京电力福岛第一核电站核污染水排海的追加监测。作为参加国的中国21日将首次从核电站厂区内的储罐中，直接采集稀释前的核污染水样本。不仅如此，20日还将选取福岛县内卸货上岸的水产品，由参加国与日本的分析机构测定放射性物质的浓度，并比较结果。甚至中方还要求在排放稀释后的核污染水的竖井中进行取样。

在东方时事解读的观察与评估中，按中方要求，不仅要对日本福岛核污染水的“原水”，也就是未稀释过的或未经日本政府做过手脚的核污染水进行取样检测，更要对福岛核污染水涉及的整个系统或体系进行“全面体检”。关键在于，日本极右政权，也就是石破茂政府同意这样做。显然，日本极右势力扛不住了！而在这背后，是中国和美西方之间，相对实力与绝对实力的此消彼长。这种变化是如此明显，不仅越南当局看懂了，日本极右势力也看懂了。

东方时事解读认为，没有日本的有效参与，美国想要有效干扰中国收台都做不到。而在南海，越南则是唯一有可能给中国找麻烦的国家。恰恰就是这样两个国家，面对今天中国实力的快速攀升，美西方实力的快速下降，不得不联袂上演“识时务者为俊杰”的一幕。值得一提的是，这还是在特朗普政府大力推动“远交近攻，合纵连横”的背景下发生的。而结果就是，在特朗普政府上任刚满1个月，就把局面搞到阵营分崩，美、欧交恶，日、越低头的地步！

●现代版的“战国时代”似乎已经正式到来

当美国拉着俄罗斯，欧盟拉着中国，围绕乌克兰问题和中东问题支起“两桌麻将”后，现代版的“战国时代”似乎已经正式到来。相关各方都清楚，自己要么是被合纵者，要么是被连横者。而在大争之世，对于这些“中小诸侯国”而言，生存之道就在于“决不能一条道跑到黑”！比如，对外政策仍运行（也只能运行）在“最后一次战略投机”路线上的日本来说，传统安全层面继续紧跟美国，非传统安全层面加速倒向中国是其典型外交特征。

此外，就英、法两国记者向中国外交部提问有关中越关系的相关问题做一个简单补充。在我们看来，不排除英、法记者给中国外交部发言人“挖坑”的可能性，但从发言人的回应中不难看出，显然我们在将计就计。

对越南来说，柏礁是中国固有领土，中国是一定要收回的，越南今天所谓“开发”不过是为中国日后收回“作嫁衣裳”。越南可以反对，但刚刚敲定的连接越南北部和中国的铁路就别修了。中国很忙，还有中老、中泰，尤其是日后的中缅铁路（中缅铁路的开通，一看实力，二看时机）项目。

需要补充的是，柬埔寨洪森政府的反复主要包括两个层面：第一，洪森父子的政治野心，其要对柬埔寨王室取而代之；第二，“德崇-扶南”运河项目基本是中国出人、出资、出技术，股份中国占51%。洪森父子企图通过强行将中方占股比例从51%降低至49%获取资源用于实现其政治野心。显然，对于洪森政府的所作所为，中国是不能接受的。以后，柬埔寨方面再想让中国继续帮助修建运河项目，恐怕要求会比现在“更加严格”得多。对于越南当局来说，这就是一个警示——在中越铁路项目上耍花招恐怕不会有好果子吃。

●由于中国坚持立场、原则，中美关系并没有如特朗普政府预期的那样缓和

各方都看懂了，堂堂美帝真的战略收缩了，即便是为了在惨烈的“美国内斗”中不落下风，也要收缩。

在特朗普政府看来，如果内部矛盾（尤其是代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益内部）无法缓和，哪怕是临时缓和，外交层面的一切都没有意义。以乌克兰问题为例，特朗普政府不惜牺牲美欧关系（欧洲利益）与美国长远利益，也要将其首先服务于执行“攘外必先安内”政策。只是在具体的施行上讲求一些“技巧”，比如，一边通过俄罗斯施压欧盟；另一边又通过欧盟反制俄罗斯。

我们注意到2月19日，俄罗斯总统普京在他听取工作组有关俄美利雅得会谈成果汇报后的相关表态，其中有以下几点值得大家注意：

其一，普京还称，俄美对话不需要中间人；

其二，俄方从未拒绝与欧洲或乌克兰的对话，是欧洲自行中断了与俄方的联系，而乌克兰当局则禁止同俄方谈判。普京表示，当下的俄美关系非常复杂，不是坐下来喝杯咖啡就能解决问题；

其三，普京表示，俄方准备就乌克兰问题重返谈判桌，有关乌克兰问题的谈判将在俄乌双方参与下进行，没有人将乌克兰排除在谈判进程之外。

结合俄美利雅得会晤后国际局势的综合变化来观察，在东方时事解读看来，俄罗斯总统普京对方方面面，尤其向特朗普政府，传递了非常复杂且强烈的政治信号：

第一，普京口中的“中间人”，大概率指的是中国，或者欧盟；

第二，中国有句老话，只有架起锅子煮白米，没有架起锅子煮道理。乌克兰问题只是俄美关系中的一小部分，甚至可以说是表象。主要部分或者说本质，还包括、但不局限于：实质性解除对俄罗斯的经济制裁，尤其是金融制裁；俄罗斯“有效重返”叙利亚等；

第三，引用时任中国外交部副部长，现任中国驻美大使谢锋的一句话说，好处占尽，坏事做绝，天下没有这样的道理！如果特朗普政府打算拉欧盟做“中间人”逼俄罗斯就范，那就休怪俄罗斯拉中国做“中间人”来平衡欧美！

此前，我们曾就佩斯科夫有关俄罗斯在明斯克协议上的经验教训是否吸取的问题进行过一番调侃。我们认为，俄罗斯再次着了“人总愿意相信自己愿意相信之事”的道儿，尽管普京总统针对美帝的无耻，基于“帝国主义者之间的游戏规则”指责对方，甚至反击对方，但俄罗斯仍未彻底放弃不切实际的政治幻想，更未实质性放弃阿富汗政策小九九。

即便将整个乌克兰划给俄罗斯，恐怕俄罗斯也无力消化——俄罗斯既无法完成乌克兰繁重的战后重建，也无法解决上千万人口的就业问题，这反而让乌克兰成为俄罗斯巨大的“包袱”。更何况这种俄罗斯和北约“一家一半”的乌克兰战后局势根本无法谈稳定，更对俄罗斯国家安全构成巨大威胁。毫不夸张地说，俄乌战争进行了三年，俄罗斯抬头一看，哪是什么“乌东”来了，只有“咕咚”来了！

有趣的是，特朗普原想先进行的是访华行程，如今看来只能先安排访俄行程。由于中国坚持立场、原则，结果中美关系并没有如特朗普政府预期的那样缓和，看到这一点的俄罗斯当然“顺杆儿往上爬”，摆出“北斗七星阵”就乌克兰问题，尤其是叙利亚问题对美国漫天要价！美国与俄罗斯，包括与欧盟打交道的成本也因此直线飙升。而这还仅仅是在乌克兰问题上。

●即便美、欧、俄、印等国在阿富汗问题上开第三桌儿“麻将”，对华制衡效果也远逊十年前

2月18日，我们注意到“外交部发言人办公室”发布的消息。

有国内媒体记者提问称，近期，个别国家建议解除联合国安理会涉“沙姆解放组织”制裁。中方如何看待该问题。

对此，外交部发言人郭嘉昆回应称，叙利亚应坚定反对任何形式的恐怖主义和极端势力。我们注意到，各方普遍认为当前情况下，解除联合国安理会1267委员会涉叙利亚相关组织及其骨干成员制裁的条件不具备，中方也持严重保留态度。我们敦促叙利亚新政权采取切实举措，积极回应包括中方在内的国际社会的反恐关切。

在我们看来，除非叙利亚临时政府改弦更张，在反恐问题上遵守联合国宪章要求，否则中国是不会对其予以正式承认的，而对于联合国安理会常任理事国，而且是“上三常”之一的中国，叙利亚临时政府是无法绕过的。这样一来，叙利亚临时政府就无法参加有关叙利亚问题的多边讨论，即便其在西方的默许下参加，中国也不会参加（如果阿盟代表叙利亚，中国则可以参加）。这意味着叙利亚临时政府未来必须在美、俄、欧以及中东国家之间“选边站”。

2月19日，就在美国拉着俄罗斯，欧盟拉着中国，围绕乌克兰问题和中东问题摆开两桌“麻将”的同时，我们注意到，有关印度准备接受阿富汗“大使”的新闻报道。

也许印度方面是看懂了，中、美、欧、俄这四方，围绕乌克兰问题和中东问题摆下两桌“麻将”看上去是不够的。至少美、欧、俄或有意在中国周边地区再摆一桌“麻将”，目的在于制衡在围绕乌克兰问题，中东问题这两桌“麻将”中任意驰骋的中国。这个点他们显然选在了巴基斯坦。值得大家注意的是，就在近日，美国国会议员乔·威尔逊呼吁巴基斯坦总统扎尔达里、总理谢赫巴兹·谢里夫和陆军参谋长阿西姆·穆尼尔将军释放前总理伊姆兰·汗，称他的自由将有助于加强美巴关系。

有道是，理想很美满，现实很骨感。美、欧、俄，包括印度有意寻找制衡中国的战略支点，并将其选在南亚，但岂不知南亚之于中国，在今天何尝不是“曾经沧海难为水，除却巫山不是云”？道理很简单：乌克兰问题涉及美、欧、俄三方的核心利益，而中东则是美国全球战略的重中之重，是欧盟外交的焦点问题，是俄罗斯一心想要有效重返的叙利亚问题。这两个点对于三方而言，可谓时不我待。相比之下，中国的南亚政策早已减重。所以，南亚问题的权重在中国的战略优先选项中与乌克兰问题和中东问题是不同的。也就是说，应对南亚问题，中国未必第一时间就去应手。或者说，何时应手，如何应手，在中国如今因南海战场建设基本完成与持续踏实践行群众路线之“两眼活棋”的背景下，处理起来收放自如。即便美、欧、俄、印等国在阿富汗问题上“开第三桌儿麻将”，对华制衡效果也远逊十年前。

举个例子，即便在南亚方向，在对印军备出售的问题上，尤其在俄罗斯翘首以盼，急需资金搭建“SU-57”改造升级、全面扩展生产线的问题上，就遭到了特朗普政府全面向印度提供“F-35”战机及生产线的迎头狙击（特朗普此举也有平衡国内矛盾之意）。这或是普京口中“美俄关系非常复杂，不是喝杯咖啡就能解决问题”的又一个主要原因。

通过这个例子大家不难看到，就算美、欧、俄，包括印度有意在制衡中国的问题上，着眼台湾问题，着手南亚问题，打造第三桌“麻将”，但凭今天中国的绝对实力与相对实力很容易发动犀利的反击，比如，在条件允许的情况下介入乌克兰问题和中东问题，更何况在南亚问题上美国和俄罗斯之间还在明争暗斗。借用毛主席的一句话提醒有关方面，中国人民是惹不起的，惹翻了是不好办的！以中东问题为例，惹烦了，中国就将“歼-35”战机摆上“货架”！

●这种“拜登们”和“特朗普们”谁说了也不算的局面对美国内部而言当然很麻烦，但对国际社会而言倒是喜闻乐见

最后就特朗普称不会让马斯克参与政府太空事务决策这一最新消息简单说两句。

友情提醒马斯克，特朗普开始搞平衡了，你要小心了！不排除特朗普已经和他的“敌人们”正在做交易，甚至已经部分达成交易的可能性。美国航天中就是旧有的军工复合体的利益，这也许就是谈条件。马斯克就是吹太空泡泡的，特朗普你是几个意思？这一点，“拜登们”一定会大做文章！

某种意义上说，感到时间上最紧张的是“特朗普们”，甚至用美国形容都不准确。此外，特朗普阵营有可能因此分裂的，如果在“拜登们”没有平定之前特朗普阵营就分崩离析，后果对特朗普或特朗普们而言绝对是灾难性的。唯一办法就是把“蛋糕”拼命做大，即便是不好吃的，也要做大！

从目前的情况来看，特朗普政府在对内和对外两方面很难统一起来。同时让中，欧，俄同时满意不可能，只能让多数满意。但由于中国的存在，即便让多数满意恐怕也很难做到。在我们看来，4年的时间是不够的，特朗普搞不好就是左脚出白宫，右脚进班房，这就需要特朗普学习台湾民进党，也就是要把国民党搞臭，高度才，一家独大，这样才能保证特朗普和特朗普们在4年之后的绝对安全。当然，这种“拜登们”和“特朗普们”谁说了也不算的局面对美国内部而言当然很麻烦，但对国际社会而言倒是喜闻乐见。

声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

Thursday, February 20, 2025, Issue No. 1184

Even if the US, Europe, Russia, and India "start a third table of mahjong" on the Afghan issue, the effect of counterbalancing China is far less than it was a decade ago.

[Media Coverage]

On February 19, US media cited sources saying that the Indian government is expected to soon accept a visit from senior Taliban representatives to India. The report stated that this is India's latest move to improve relations with Afghanistan and counterbalance China's growing influence in the country.

On the same day, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in Saint Petersburg that he had been briefed by the working group on the outcomes of the Russia-US talks in Riyadh and gave a positive assessment of the results... Putin also said that there is no need for intermediaries in Russia-US dialogue... Furthermore, Russia has never refused dialogue with Europe or Ukraine; it was Europe that unilaterally cut off contact with Russia, and the Ukrainian authorities that prohibited negotiations with Russia... Putin noted that current Russia-US relations are very complex and cannot be resolved over a cup of coffee. Putin stated that Russia is ready to return to the negotiating table on the Ukraine issue, and that negotiations on Ukraine will be conducted with the participation of both Russia and Ukraine, with no one excluding Ukraine from the negotiation process; Europe also does not need to react negatively to the Russia-US talks.

【Discussion Summary】

●Just one month into the Trump administration, the situation has deteriorated to the point where camps are divided, the US and Europe are at odds, and Japan and Vietnam are bowing down!

Before diving into today's discussion, let's provide a brief update on the new developments in China's neighboring regions that we mentioned at the end of the last session. Here is a news report:

On February 19, 2025, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Guo Jiakun hosted a regular press conference.

French Media Reporter: The Vietnamese National Assembly today approved an $8 billion railway construction project that will extend the railway from Vietnam's largest northern port city to the Sino-Vietnamese border. This will promote connectivity and trade between the two countries. What is the Foreign Ministry's comment on this project?

Guo Jiakun: Since last year, China and Vietnam have exchanged views multiple times on advancing railway connectivity between the two countries and have agreed to accelerate the feasibility study of the Lao Cai-Hanoi-Haiphong standard-gauge railway and the planning of the Dong Deng-Hanoi and Mong Cai-Ha Long-Haiphong standard-gauge railways, and to promptly push forward the connection line of the Hekou-Lao Cai standard-gauge railway in China. For specific details, please consult the competent authorities. British Media Reporter: China claims sovereignty over Bai Reef in the Nansha Islands, which has been occupied by Vietnam since the 1980s. Studies have shown that Vietnam is carrying out land reclamation activities on the reef. Is the possibility of China taking control of Bai Reef becoming increasingly slim?

Guo Jiakun: The Nansha Islands are China's inherent territory, and Bai Reef is part of the Nansha Islands. China has always opposed construction activities carried out by relevant countries on illegally occupied islands and reefs.

As we all know, the United States has always preferred to deal with other countries from a position of strength, but now the US is declining in both "absolute strength" and "relative strength." In our view, "absolute strength" refers more to traditional security aspects, such as politics and security, while "relative strength" refers more to non-traditional security aspects, such as economy and finance. Between the two, we tend to prioritize "absolute strength." If there is a day in history that Americans will genuinely regret, it is May 8, 1999. NATO forces, led by the United States, used B-2 stealth bombers to drop five Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) on the Embassy of the People's Republic of China in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Obviously, it is not enough to only emphasize economic development; it must be complemented by vigorously enhancing military strength and combat capabilities.

In addition to Vietnam, another typical example of new changes in China's neighboring regions is Japan.

On February 19, according to Japanese media reports, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) began implementing additional monitoring for the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station into the sea. As a participating country, China will, on the 21st, for the first time, directly collect samples of undiluted contaminated water from storage tanks within the nuclear power plant site. Moreover, on the 20th, seafood unloaded in Fukushima Prefecture will be selected, and the concentration of radioactive substances will be measured by analysis institutions from participating countries and Japan, with the results compared. China has even requested sampling from the shaft where diluted contaminated water will be discharged.

In the observation and assessment of East Asia Timely Review, not only must samples of the "raw water" of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant, that is, water that has not been diluted or tampered with by the Japanese government, be collected and tested as requested by China, but also a "comprehensive examination" of the entire system or framework related to the contaminated water at the Fukushima nuclear power plant must be conducted. The key point is that the Japanese far-right regime, namely the Kishida administration, has agreed to this. Clearly, the Japanese far-right forces cannot hold on any longer! Behind this lies the shifting balance of relative and absolute strength between China and the Western countries. This change is so evident that not only has the Vietnamese authorities understood it, but the Japanese far-right forces have also understood it.

East Asia Timely Review believes that without the effective participation of Japan, the United States would not be able to effectively interfere with China's reunification with Taiwan. In the South China Sea, Vietnam is the only country that could potentially cause trouble for China. It just so happens that these two countries, faced with the rapid rise of China's strength today and the rapid decline of Western strength, have jointly staged a scene of "being wise and discerning." It is worth mentioning that this has occurred against the backdrop of the Trump administration vigorously promoting a strategy of "distant alliance and near attack, united front and diplomatic maneuvering." And the result is that just one month into the Trump administration, the situation has deteriorated to the point where camps are divided, the US and Europe are at odds, and Japan and Vietnam are bowing down!

●It seems that a modern-day "Warring States Era" has officially arrived.

As the United States aligns with Russia, and the European Union aligns with China, setting up "two tables of mahjong" around the issues of Ukraine and the Middle East, it seems that a modern-day "Warring States Era" has officially arrived. All parties involved are aware that they are either being united or being allied. In this era of great contention, for these "small and medium-sized vassal states," the key to survival lies in "never sticking to one path!" For example, Japan, whose foreign policy still operates (and can only operate) on the "last strategic speculation" route, typically follows the United States in traditional security matters while accelerating its shift towards China in non-traditional security aspects.

Furthermore, regarding the questions asked by British and French journalists to the Chinese Foreign Ministry about Sino-Vietnamese relations, a brief supplement is provided. In our view, it is not ruled out that the British and French journalists were trying to "trap" the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, but it is evident from the spokesperson's response that we played along.

For Vietnam, Bai Reef is China's inherent territory, and China is determined to recover it. Vietnam's so-called "development" today is merely preparing the ground for China's future recovery. Vietnam can object, but then the railway connecting northern Vietnam and China, which has just been finalized, should not be built. China is busy, with projects such as the China-Laos, China-Thailand, and especially the future China-Myanmar railway (the opening of the China-Myanmar railway depends on both strength and timing).

It should be added that the repeated actions of the Hun Sen government in Cambodia involve two aspects: First, the political ambitions of Hun Sen and his son to replace the Cambodian royalty; Second, the "Dechou-Funan" canal project is basically carried out by China with people, funding, and technology, with China holding a 51% stake. Hun Sen and his son attempted to reduce China's share from 51% to 49% to obtain resources for their political ambitions. Obviously, China cannot accept what the Hun Sen government has done. In the future, if Cambodia wants China to continue helping with the canal project, the requirements will likely be much "stricter." For the Vietnamese authorities, this is a warning – playing tricks on the Sino-Vietnamese railway project will not end well.

●Due to China's adherence to its stance and principles, Sino-US relations have not eased as the Trump administration expected.

All parties have understood that the mighty US is indeed undergoing strategic contraction, even if it is to avoid falling behind in the fierce "internal struggle" within the US. In the view of the Trump administration, if internal conflicts (especially within US capital interests representing Western capital interests) cannot be eased, even temporarily, everything at the diplomatic level loses its significance. Taking the Ukraine issue as an example, the Trump administration sacrificed US-Europe relations (European interests) and US long-term interests to prioritize implementing the policy of "settling internal affairs before resisting external aggression." However, in specific implementation, some "skills" are employed, such as pressuring the EU through Russia on one hand, and countering Russia through the EU on the other.

We noticed that on February 19th, after Russian President Vladimir Putin received a report from the working group on the outcomes of the Russia-US talks in Riyadh, he made several statements worth noting:

Firstly, Putin said that there is no need for intermediaries in Russia-US dialogue;

Secondly, Russia has never refused dialogue with Europe or Ukraine; it was Europe that unilaterally cut off contact with Russia, and the Ukrainian authorities prohibited negotiations with Russia. Putin stated that the current Russia-US relationship is very complex and cannot be resolved over a cup of coffee;

Thirdly, Putin said that Russia is ready to return to the negotiating table on the Ukraine issue, and negotiations on the Ukraine issue will be conducted with the participation of both Russia and Ukraine, and no one is excluding Ukraine from the negotiation process.

Observing the comprehensive changes in the international situation after the Russia-US meeting in Riyadh, from the perspective of East Asia Current Affairs Interpretation, Russian President Vladimir Putin has conveyed very complex and strong political signals to all parties, especially the Trump administration:

Firstly, the "intermediaries" mentioned by Putin most likely refer to China or the EU;

Secondly, there is an old Chinese saying that one can cook rice by setting up a pot, but not reason. The Ukraine issue is only a small part of Russia-US relations, or even a superficial aspect. The main part or essence also includes, but is not limited to, substantially lifting economic sanctions against Russia, especially financial sanctions, and Russia's "effective return" to Syria;

Thirdly, to quote a saying by Xie Feng, former Deputy Director of the Chinese Foreign Ministry and current Chinese Ambassador to the US, "There is no such thing as taking all the benefits and doing all the bad things! If the Trump administration intends to use the EU as an 'intermediary' to pressure Russia into submission, then don't blame Russia for bringing in China as an 'intermediary' to balance Europe and the US!"

Previously, we joked about Peskov's question regarding whether Russia had learned from its lessons in the Minsk Agreement. We believe that Russia has once again fallen into the trap of "people always believe what they want to believe." Despite President Putin's accusations and counterattacks against the US's shamelessness based on the "rules of the game among imperialists," Russia has not completely abandoned unrealistic political fantasies and has not substantially abandoned its Afghanistan policy tricks.

Even if the entire Ukraine were given to Russia, it would probably be unable to digest it – Russia cannot complete the arduous post-war reconstruction of Ukraine, nor solve the employment problem for millions of people. This would instead make Ukraine a huge "burden" for Russia. Moreover, this post-war situation in Ukraine, where Russia and NATO each control half, cannot be considered stable, and it poses a significant threat to Russia's national security. It is no exaggeration to say that after three years of the Russia-Ukraine war, when Russia looks up, instead of seeing "eastern Ukraine," it only sees a "big gulp"!

Interestingly, Trump originally planned to visit China first, but now it seems that a visit to Russia must be arranged first. Due to China's adherence to its stance and principles, Sino-US relations have not eased as the Trump administration expected. Seeing this, Russia naturally "climbed up the pole" and demanded exorbitant prices from the US on the Ukraine issue, especially the Syria issue, using a "Big Dipper formation"! As a result, the cost of the US dealing with Russia, including the EU, has soared. And this is just regarding the Ukraine issue.

●Even if the US, Europe, Russia, and India play a "mahjong" game on the Afghanistan issue, the effect of counterbalancing China is far less than it was a decade ago

On February 18th, we noticed the news released by the "Office of the Spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs."

A domestic media reporter asked about China's position on the recent suggestion by some countries to lift UN Security Council sanctions related to "Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham."

In response, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Guo Jiakun stated that Syria should firmly oppose any form of terrorism and extremism. We have noticed that all parties generally believe that under the current circumstances, the conditions for lifting the sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council's 1267 Committee on relevant Syrian organizations and their key members are not met, and China also has serious reservations. We urge the new Syrian regime to take practical measures to actively address the international community's concerns about counterterrorism, including those of China.

In our view, unless the Syrian Interim Government changes its course and complies with the requirements of the UN Charter on counterterrorism issues, China will not formally recognize it. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council and one of the "top three," China is unavoidable for the Syrian Interim Government. As a result, the Syrian Interim Government cannot participate in multilateral discussions on the Syrian issue. Even if it participates with the tacit approval of the West, China will not attend (if the Arab League represents Syria, China can participate). This means that the Syrian Interim Government will have to "choose sides" among the US, Russia, Europe, and Middle Eastern countries in the future.

On February 19th, just as the US and Russia, and the EU and China, were engaged in two "mahjong" games over the Ukraine issue and the Middle East issue, we noticed news reports that India was preparing to accept an "ambassador" from Afghanistan.

Perhaps India has understood that the four parties—China, the US, Europe, and Russia—playing two "mahjong" games on the Ukraine issue and the Middle East issue are not enough. At least the US, Europe, and Russia may intend to set up another "mahjong" game around China's periphery to counterbalance China, which is freely maneuvering in the two "mahjong" games on the Ukraine and Middle East issues. They have apparently chosen Pakistan as this point. It is worth noting that recently, US Congressman Joe Wilson called on Pakistani President Zardari, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and Army Chief of Staff General Asim Munir to release former Prime Minister Imran Khan, saying that his freedom would help strengthen US-Pakistan relations.

The saying goes, "The ideal is beautiful, but reality is harsh." The US, Europe, Russia, and even India intend to find a strategic fulcrum to counterbalance China and have chosen South Asia. However, they do not realize that for China today, South Asia is like "once one has tasted the vast sea, other waters seem insipid; having seen Wu Mountain's clouds, other clouds pale in comparison." The reason is simple: the Ukraine issue involves the core interests of the US, Europe, and Russia, while the Middle East is a top priority of the US global strategy, a focal point of EU diplomacy, and an issue where Russia desperately wants to effectively return to Syria. These two points are urgent for the three parties. In contrast, China's South Asia policy has already been streamlined. Therefore, the weight of the South Asia issue in China's strategic priorities differs from that of the Ukraine and Middle East issues. That is to say, when dealing with the South Asia issue, China may not respond immediately. Or, to put it another way, China has the flexibility to decide when and how to respond, given the "two active moves" of basically completing the construction of the South China Sea battlefield and continuously practicing the mass line. Even if the US, Europe, Russia, and India play a "third mahjong game" on the Afghanistan issue, the effect of counterbalancing China is far less than it was a decade ago.

For example, even in the South Asia direction, on the issue of arms sales to India, especially when Russia is eagerly anticipating funds to build and upgrade the "SU-57" production line, it encountered head-on competition from the Trump administration, which provided India with a comprehensive offer of "F-35" fighter jets and production lines (Trump's move also aimed to balance domestic contradictions). This may be another major reason why Putin said, "US-Russia relations are very complex, and they cannot be resolved over a cup of coffee."

From this example, it is not difficult to see that even if the US, Europe, Russia, and India intend to counterbalance China by focusing on the Taiwan issue and taking action in South Asia to create a third "mahjong" game, with China's absolute and relative strength today, it is easy to launch a sharp counterattack. For instance, China could intervene in the Ukraine and Middle East issues when conditions permit, let alone the fact that the US and Russia are still competing openly and covertly in South Asia. To quote Chairman Mao, I remind the relevant parties that the Chinese people cannot be provoked, and it is not advisable to provoke them! Taking the Middle East issue as an example, if provoked, China will put the "J-35" fighter jet on the "shelf"!

●This situation where neither "Bidens" nor "Trumps" have the final say is certainly troublesome for the US internally, but it is a welcome sight for the international community

Finally, let's briefly discuss the latest news that Trump stated he would not allow Musk to participate in government decision-making on space affairs.

A friendly reminder to Musk: Trump is starting to play the balancing game, so be careful! It cannot be ruled out that Trump is already negotiating with his "enemies" or has even partially reached a deal. The US aerospace industry is dominated by the old military-industrial complex's interests, which may be the subject of negotiation. Musk is just blowing bubbles in space, so what does Trump mean by this? The "Bidens" will certainly make a big deal out of this!

In a sense, it is the "Trumps" who feel the most time-pressed, and it is not even accurate to describe it as an American issue.Furthermore, the Trump camp may split apart as a result. If the Trump camp falls apart before the "Bidens" are subdued, the consequences for Trump or the Trumps will be absolutely catastrophic. The only way out is to desperately make the "cake" bigger, even if it's not tasty!

Judging from the current situation, it is difficult for the Trump administration to unify its internal and external policies. It is impossible to satisfy China, Europe, and Russia simultaneously; only a majority can be satisfied. However, due to China's presence, it may even be difficult to satisfy the majority. In our view, four years is not enough, and Trump may end up leaving the White House with one foot and entering a jail cell with the other. Therefore, Trump needs to learn from Taiwan's DPP, which is to discredit the Kuomintang, achieve a high degree of dominance, and ensure the absolute safety of Trump and the Trumps after four years. Of course, this situation where neither the "Bidens" nor the "Trumps" have the final say is certainly troublesome for the US internally, but it is a welcome sight for the international community.

Disclaimer: In case of any discrepancies in the specific content, please refer to the 'Eastern Current Affairs Interpretation Audio' for the most accurate information.

原文作者公众号：

广州市贯日翻译服务有限公司为东方时评-衍射传媒/衍射咨询提供翻译支持

翻译请联系http://www.en-ch.com/chcontact.htm

手机微信13924166640

广州市越秀区环市东路世界贸易中心大厦南塔24楼 020-86266990