2025年2月28日，星期五，第1191期

特朗普政府挥舞关税大棒、炒作“海湖庄园协议”有哪些经济、政治目的？

【媒体报道】

2月28日，俄罗斯安全委员会新闻处发布声明称，俄罗斯联邦安全会议秘书绍伊古已抵达北京，“将与中国领导人举行会晤”。

【讨论纪要】

●特朗普政府挥舞关税大棒、炒作“海湖庄园协议”有哪些经济、政治目的？

特朗普在当选美国总统后一直在积极谋划访华并率先缓和中美关系，但由于中国坚持自己的立场和原则，特朗普政府想要首先缓和对华关系始终未能如愿。

在这一背景下，我们不妨先简单说说美国在加关税的问题上有对美元的现实意图：

第一，“海湖庄园协议”被媒体炒作为“广场协议”V2.0。在我们看来，这与此前特朗普政府挥舞“关税大棒”是合拍的。“海湖庄园协议”效应可能会在一个特殊阶段将美元拉低，但这个“特殊阶段”会非常短，甚至“短得如同没有发生一样”。“广场协议”曾让美元贬值，日元升值，这是汇率上的影响。“海湖庄园协议”和“关税大棒”特朗普也有此意；

第二，在“第一”的基础上，如此操作的真实意图在于为美国公开、大规模开启印钞机打开操作空间——美元一旦贬值，其他货币就会升值，进而制造一种“美国重振制造业”，吸引大量资金流向美国的预期；

第三，在“第二”的基础上，特朗普政府在很多政策的制定和执行上表现得非常现实。也就是说，是否前后矛盾特朗普并不在意，今天需要就执行，明天不需要就废除。这一特点从其第一任期时就是这样，尤其体现在“金融功能”上，仅仅在一个月内，特朗普可以“月初需要强美元，月末需要弱美元”；

第四，在“第三”的基础上，这一特点如果落在这次“关税大棒”和“海湖庄园协议”上，那就是，是否能够实现特朗普并不关心，他只关心利用预期操纵金融市场，比如，在短暂的压低美元后，借用所谓“美国重振制造业”吸引大量资金流向美国的这种预期再将美元推高，这需要“强美元”的支持，这就需要大规模、公开启动印钞机。

各方人士似乎纷纷开始解读“海湖庄园协议”，主要观点梳理起来大致有三点：其一，美元要贬值；其二，美国要“赖账”；其三，特朗普要“耍流氓”。桥水基因创始人达利欧悲观地表示，有生之年不可能看到美国制造业重振，而中国在世界制造业的重要行业上，如，电动车，AI和机器人方面都牢牢地掌控主动权。尤其是AI技术及应用，这是美国“最后的机会”。

此外，需要强调的是，在我们的观察中，特朗普政府挥舞“关税大棒”也好，通过炒作“海湖庄园协议”引导预期也罢，虽然是经济，尤其是问题，但却可以达到一个隐晦的政治目的——迫使那些害怕加关税的国家，如，墨西哥、加拿大，甚至欧洲国家乖乖听美国的话。以欧盟为例，特朗普政府对俄罗斯如此“一躬到底”，为了压住在乌克兰问题上与俄罗斯是“一个葫芦，一个瓢”关系的欧盟，“关税大棒”就是一个不错的恐吓手段。也就是说，在特朗普政府只有缓和对华、对欧、对俄三边关系中“大多数”的情况下才有可能赢得“内斗”的问题上，在对华关系缓和是“必选项”的前提下，在特朗普政府近乎用“投降”的姿态对俄罗斯玩“诈降”的情况下，特朗普政府准备通过“关税大棒”强行压住欧盟（当然，这不是特朗普政府对欧盟施压的唯一手段）。

所以，特朗普政府最急着要做的“重中之重”的事情就是，最好能够拿到同时缓和对华、对欧和对俄关系，再不济也要拿到缓和对华、对欧和对俄关系中的“大部分”，进而通过尽最大努力争取外部支撑空间，进而集中全部精力应对美国内部恶斗。

需要补充的是，当年广场协议之所以能功成功，其中一个主要原因就是日本虽然在经济上很强，但日本在军事上却是“侏儒”。日本的海上贸易路线被美国掌控，政治上是二战战败国，更是被“雅尔塔体系”严格约束。此外，当时美元的大量外汇留存不在日本，也不在中国手上，而在西德手上。西德以愿意配合美国“首个”日本为条件，换取美国不对其发动经济，尤其是金融攻击。结果就是美国与西德联手坑了日本，迫使日元大幅贬值。

今天的中国显然不是当年的日本，中国不仅制造业发达，而且军队非常强大，更是核大国、核强国以及联合国安理会常任理事国。何况今天中国捏着美元的大量外汇储备。

●特朗普政府被逼的首先和俄罗斯进行缓和，就算谈得再好，也是被动的主要原因所在

在继续展开讨论之前，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

2月27日，美国司法部公开了爱泼斯坦案的一批机密文件，此次公布的主要是已披露的信息，并没有涉及性交易案件新的爆炸性信息，这引发了外界的愤怒与失望，保守派政客以及司法部长帕姆·邦迪指责联邦调查局（FBI）特工隐瞒了部分文件。

这无疑是特朗普政府在集中全部精力应对美国内部恶斗的新动作，在具体讨论这一“新动作”之前我们再来看看特朗普在外交层面处于怎样一个状态，有哪些新动作。

2月26日，俄罗斯外长拉夫罗夫表示，俄罗斯不会考虑任何向乌克兰部署欧洲维和部队的方案，目前为止也没有国家向俄罗斯提起过此类方案。

对这一新闻报道，在此前我们的讨论与评估中，面对俄罗斯的强硬态度（俄罗斯抓住了特朗普政府无法首先做到缓和对华关系这个机会），特朗普政府大概率不得不进一步牺牲欧洲利益以向俄罗斯进一步妥协。

实际情况是，俄罗斯在乌克兰问题上的态度依然强硬——2月27日，俄罗斯外交部发言人扎哈罗娃表示，如果乌克兰加入北约，那么这将意味着冲突会剧烈且不可控地升级，将对全球安全造成严重后果。

在我们看来，所谓“乌克兰加入北约”有一种变相形式，那就是北约公开、成建制进入乌克兰。而按照欧洲方面的意思，这些北约军队将打着“欧洲维和部队”的旗号，在“美国的保护下”进入乌克兰。对此，俄罗斯至少在目前阶段，表态是“不可接受”！尽管特朗普对外“依旧嘴硬”称，“他相信俄罗斯总统普京会同意”，甚至通过媒体炮制俄罗斯接受北约军队进入乌克兰的假消息，但特朗普政府陷入骑虎难下的尴尬境地是不争的事实。要让步也只是特朗普政府让步。

2月26日，某美国知名媒体援引几名“知情人士”放出消息，称作为美方寻求关系缓和的一部分，美俄官员已将北极议题确定为可能的合作领域。不过，就连其中一名“知情人士”也坦言，鉴于近年来俄中关系日益密切，预计特朗普这种做法不太可能成功。美媒此前也有声音指出，俄美关系的本质只是“暂时性的”，俄中关系才是“战略性的”“永久性的”，面对身旁搬不走的“庞大邻居”中国，俄罗斯深知疏远中国只会带来“致命危险”。

在我们的观察与评估中，特朗普恐怕自己也很清楚，美俄关系如此难以处理，主要原因就是中国。或者说，这是本应最先缓和中美关系而不得产生的直接负面效果。而中国看特朗普政府可谓“看得透透”的。在中国看来，美国内斗如此严重，能搞好外交岂非咄咄怪事？美国的外交恐怕只有一个“主旋律”，那就是让步、让步，再让步。在俄罗斯眼中，美国没有搞定对华关系还想要求俄罗斯让步，那是痴人说梦。在中国眼中，美国连俄罗斯都搞不定还想要求中国让步，更是痴心妄想。这也是我们此前反复强调，特朗普政府被逼得首先和俄罗斯进行缓和，就算谈得再好，也是被动的主要原因所在。

●欧洲强烈要求派遣“维和部队”从欧洲利益角度出发是欧盟确保自身安全并在瓜分乌克兰的狂潮中分杯羹的必要保障

早在2月8日的时候，美国总统特朗普曾表示，他打算恢复美国与朝鲜的外交关系，以及他与金正恩的个人关系，此前他们之间建立过良好的个人关系。

特朗普这番言论的真实意图在于借朝鲜问题寻求和中国“搭讪”的理由。对此俄罗斯自然看在眼里，于是“计上心头”——2月28日，俄罗斯安全委员会新闻处发布声明称，俄罗斯联邦安全会议秘书绍伊古已抵达北京，“将与中国领导人举行会晤”。

在我们的观察与评估中，就在美方不断炒作“中美互动”，甚至通过炒作“恢复美国与朝鲜的外交关系，以及他与金正恩的个人关系”向全世界广而告之——中美关系缓和，美国仍然是“求之有门”的叫嚷声中，俄罗斯联邦安全会议秘书绍伊古悄然抵达中国。这是一种典型的“中俄战略协调”。显然，俄罗斯借此机会向方方面面，尤其是特朗普政府喊话：如果特朗普因无法缓和俄美关系而考虑不得不进一步对中国让步以试图缓和中美关系，那么此前美国和俄罗斯“达成交易”的条件就要改一改了。也就是说，俄方的要价随着美国急于缓和中美关系、进一步对中国妥协而“水涨船高”。

特朗普政府目前在对华、对欧、对俄关系问题上现状是，其一，仅与俄罗斯之间达成了某种“阶段性协议”，且这一“协议”的成败受到其它方面，尤其是中美关系后续发展的强烈影响，尤其在“已经说好的条件”变为“待定”（比如，上文提到的俄罗斯要价的“水涨船高”）方面表现得尤为明显；其二，特朗普政府最急需的缓和中美关系尚未开始；其三，特朗普对欧洲还在施压，欧美关系一时间“彼此骂骂咧咧”。尽管欧美之间在乌克兰问题上，在应对俄罗斯的过程中有所协调，但同样因乌克兰问题美国的打压而矛盾日渐尖锐，只是还未达到“公开争吵”的地步。这是此前我们讨论过的，特朗普政府在“内忧外困”层面陷入“两个恶性循环”之“外交恶性循环”的最新发展。

说到美欧关系，顺便提一句的是，法国总统马克龙的美国之行并不算愉快。在整个接待的过程中，美方可谓十分蛮带。特朗普不仅只让他的一个女秘书出门迎接，而且还给马克龙一把“小椅子”坐在他的右侧，与坐在左侧的副总统万斯一起形同“哼哈二将”。这让我们想起了2020年9月4日，当时的塞尔维亚总统武契奇与科索沃领导人霍蒂签署了双边《经济合作协议》时，塞尔维亚总统武契奇坐在一把小椅子上面对特朗普，特朗普则坐在他的大办公桌后面，像极了老板在约谈员工的一幕。

对于在强硬的无以复加的俄罗斯面前，特朗普政府一定会通过进一步损害欧洲利益的方式对俄罗斯妥协，马克龙恐怕心知肚明。既然欧盟无法阻止美国和俄罗斯一起瓜分乌克兰，那就只能加入瓜分乌克兰的行列。也就是说，欧洲强烈要求派遣“维和部队”从欧洲利益角度出发是欧盟确保自身安全并在瓜分乌克兰的狂潮中分杯羹的必要保障。当然，这一点特朗普可以拿来作为变相威胁俄罗斯最好接受特朗普提出的“乌克兰和平方案”（美乌“矿产协议”从属其中）的手段。

●国际社会公开对特朗普政府“下指导棋”，明白无误的告诉特朗普政府，什么可以谈，什么不能谈！

此前我们着重讨论了特朗普政府处理对俄关系和对欧关系的最新进展，可谓“惨不忍睹”。接下来我们不妨再简单聊聊特朗普政府处理中美关系缓和有哪些新动作，以及国际社会是如何应对的。在详细展开讨论之前，我们来看一则新闻报道。

2月28日，据朝鲜权威媒体报道，朝鲜人民军在当地时间26日，于朝鲜西部海域进行了战略巡航导弹发射训练。朝鲜劳动党总书记、国务委员长金正恩观摩了发射训练。

报道说，朝方发射两枚战略巡航导弹，分别用时7961秒和7973秒在飞行1587公里后精确击中目标。此次发射训练旨在提醒对手看清朝鲜人民军在任何空间的反击能力和不同核运用手段的准备状态，显示其核遏制力的可信度，确保战略巡航导弹部队熟练执行突然火力打击任务。

金正恩表示，持续试验朝鲜核遏制力组成部分的可信度和运行情况并显示其威力，就是负责任地行使战争遏制力。更加坚决做好核武装力量的临战态势、为其使用做好万全准备，并以核盾牌永久维护国家主权与安全，是朝鲜核武装力量的使命和本分。

就在朝鲜人民军26日进行战略巡航导弹发射训练的前一天，美国国务院东亚及太平洋事务局副助理国务卿凯文·金在访问韩国时表示，美国认为需要俄罗斯和中国参加朝鲜无核化的谈判——提请大家注意，美国人口中提及的是“朝鲜无核化”而非“朝鲜半岛无核化”。

大家知道，特朗普的第一任期开始于2017年1月20日。在美朝互动确定2019年“特金会”的过程中的2018年9月6日，朝鲜领导人金正恩首次提出去核化时间安排，计划在美国总统特朗普第一个任期结束前完成。对此，特朗普发布“推特”对此表示欢迎，“朝鲜金正恩表态‘坚定信任特朗普总统’。感谢金正恩委员长。我们将一起完成它！”

值得注意的是，公布访朝结果的郑义溶（现任韩国外长，时任韩国国家安保室长）表示，其访朝捎去了特朗普给金正恩的口信，其与博尔顿通电话将介绍访朝结果并转达金正恩的口信。郑义溶称，金正恩对韩国官员称他对特朗普的信任保持“不变”，希望在特朗普的第一个任期内实现朝鲜半岛无核化，结束美朝之间的长期敌对状态。特朗普第一个任期将在2021年初结束。此外，朝鲜最高领导人金正恩于2019年1月1日发表新年贺词中再次重申要坚定不移地实现朝鲜半岛无核化。

通过上面的历史回顾，大家不难看出，特朗普在第一任期时是支持“朝鲜半岛无核化”的，这也是2019年“金特会”的重要基础。而今天，在特朗普的第二任期，特朗普政府的官员却只提“朝鲜无核化”，显然，这是美国政府在朝鲜问题上“开倒车”。

在东方时事解读的观察与评估中，特朗普政府在原本计划率先缓和对华关系未能实现的情况下，不得不先和俄罗斯缓和关系谈乌克兰问题。特朗普政府盘算是，既然如此，那就在基本搞定俄美关系后，寻机（类似当年美国前总统尼克松以访华成功为基础开启访苏之旅）访华。

特朗普知道，和中国，台湾问题不能谈，中国也不会与之谈。但中国有兴趣谈的西太问题（美国实质性让出西太）美国不愿谈。于是，特朗普政府“灵机一动”，企图借在朝鲜问题与中国“搭讪”。对中国来说，特朗普急于访华自然是心知肚明，但是，美国人显然态度不端，妄图以“碰瓷”的方式伺机与中国“搭讪”，如此流氓嘴脸，谁和你谈？于是也就有了朝鲜同志“放炮仗”以及相关表态，结合上面的讨论，东方时事解读想要着重强调的是：

第一，朝鲜最高领导人着重强调了“临战测试”——更加坚决做好核武装力量的临战态势、为其使用做好万全准备；

第二，坚决捍卫朝鲜国家利益——以核盾牌永久维护国家主权与安全，是朝鲜核武装力量的使命和本分；

第三，美国人在朝鲜问题上“开倒车”，国际社会不接受！所谓“朝鲜无核化”更是美国人在痴人说梦！朝鲜问题中的“无核化”只能是“朝鲜半岛无核化”， 除了已经“涉核”的韩国外，包括驻韩美军也要把部署的核武撤走！

第四，国际社会通过朝鲜的“言”，尤其是“行”，明确对特朗普政府发出信号，如果美国人打算以此为借口开启中美接触，免谈！中国不是信奉帝国主义和大国沙文主义的俄罗斯，在朝鲜问题上绝不会和美国在“主要当事国”——朝鲜，不知情的情况下谈任何有损朝鲜国家核心利益的事情，比如，什么狗屁的“朝鲜无核化”！即便中美之间谈“朝鲜半岛无核化”也要“单独谈”，也就是与特朗普政府一心想要缓和中美关系这件事无关！如果特朗普政府自觉地在朝鲜问题上“开倒车”而没脸谈“朝鲜半岛无核化”，那就谈西太话题，也就是美国打算如何，怎样，什么时候实质性让出西太，比如，澳大利亚美国人打算如何出卖？当然，如果美国人不愿谈西太问题，谈南海问题也可以，比如，菲律宾的小马科斯政权，美国人打算如何出卖？

第五，国际社会对方方面面，尤其是美国内部也明确发出信号：

其一，某种意义上说，中国舰队前出澳大利亚、新西兰所在的南太平洋地区，沉重冲击“西太安全框架”的稳定，就是公开对特朗普政府“下指导棋”，明白无误地告诉特朗普政府，什么可以谈，什么不能谈！

其二，中美关系是否缓和，甚至以什么样的方式接触，何时接触，主导权在国际社会而不在特朗普政府。甚至可以说，特朗普政府全力推动“攘外必先安内”政策能否顺利执行，能不能执行，国际社会说了算！

其三，提醒美国内部方方面面需要注意的是，在特朗普政府再度在“萝莉岛”名单公布问题上做文章的背后，恐怕特朗普已经在等着你们中那些因此感到恐惧的人的给他打电话呢！尽管这次的公布没有实质性内容，但文件公布带来的压力是现实的。你们要么选择继续沉默，要么选择投降任其宰割，要么就奋起一搏！总之，一句话：特朗普政府“做蛋糕”这件事儿至少现在看，没戏！你们该干什么就干什么！否则，只有夜长梦多，迟则生变！

●美国只能从尘埃里和中国谈，或许中国才有兴趣继续陪美国玩“河渡人”

中国舰队前出澳大利亚、新西兰所在的南太平洋地区靠近法属波利尼西亚，我们在这里呼吁并提请法国方面注意，别忘了，美国人和澳大利亚人在这里没少干坏事！法国更应寻机报AUKUS抢了法国潜艇军售大单的一箭之仇！

此外，正告特朗普政府，自从时任美国国会众议长南希·佩洛西窜访中国台湾地区后，台湾地区就不再是美国手上的一张牌了，因为武力收复台湾早已处于“或今晚”就行动的状态，也就是随时准备武力收台（之所以没有这样做，原因就在于战略对我们太有利了，以至于我们已经开始谈论美国版“土木堡之变”了）。

需要补充一点的是，在我们的观察与评估中，在特朗普政府是否准备“提着大礼”缓和中美关系的问题上，澳大利亚和日本，美国现在还舍不得出卖，韩国无所谓出卖不出卖，最可能被特朗普出卖的是菲律宾的小马科斯政府。

一旦在南海上演当年西班牙向美国让渡加勒比海主导权的一幕（1898年5月的美西加勒比海战，美国舰队全歼西班牙舰队，自此，美国开始放弃“孤立主义”并放眼全球。当然，这里强调的是主导权的让渡，而具体的方式则未必在中美之间于南海地区同样爆发一场海战），那么距离美国实质性让出西太还有多远呢？

声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

Friday, Feb 28, 2025, Issue No. 1191

What are the economic and political objectives of the Trump administration in wielding the tariff stick and hyping the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement"?

[Media Coverage]

On February 28, the press service of the Russian Security Council announced that Secretary of the Russian Security Council Shoigu had arrived in Beijing "to hold meetings with Chinese leaders."

【Discussion Summary】

●What are the economic and political objectives of the Trump administration in wielding the tariff stick and hyping the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement"?

After being elected President of the United States, Trump has been actively planning a visit to China and taking the lead in easing Sino-US relations. However, due to China's adherence to its own stance and principles, the Trump administration's desire to ease relations with China first has never materialized.

Against this backdrop, let's briefly discuss the real intentions of the US in imposing tariffs on the dollar:

Firstly, the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement" has been hyped by the media as "Plaza Accord 2.0." In our view, this is in line with the Trump administration's previous wielding of the "tariff stick." The effect of the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement" may temporarily weaken the dollar during a specific phase, but this "specific phase" will be very short, even "as if it never happened." The "Plaza Accord" once caused the dollar to depreciate and the yen to appreciate, which was the impact on exchange rates. Trump had similar intentions with the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement" and the "tariff stick."

Secondly, based on the first point, the true intention of such manipulation is to create room for the US to publicly and massively activate its printing presses. Once the dollar depreciates, other currencies will appreciate, thereby creating the expectation that the US will "revive its manufacturing industry" and attract a large influx of capital to the country.

Thirdly, based on the second point, the Trump administration has demonstrated a very pragmatic approach in formulating and implementing many policies. That is, Trump does not care about inconsistencies; he implements policies when needed today and abolishes them when not needed tomorrow. This characteristic was evident during his first term, especially in terms of "financial functions." Within just one month, Trump could "need a strong dollar at the beginning of the month and a weak dollar at the end of the month."

Fourthly, based on the third point, if this characteristic is applied to the "tariff stick" and the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement," it means that Trump is not concerned about whether they can be achieved. He only cares about manipulating financial markets through expectations. For example, after briefly weakening the dollar, he can use the expectation of the so-called "US manufacturing revival" to attract a large influx of capital to the country, which would then push the dollar higher. This requires the support of a "strong dollar," necessitating the large-scale and public activation of printing presses.

Various individuals seem to have started interpreting the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement," with three main viewpoints: firstly, the dollar will depreciate; secondly, the US will "default"; and thirdly, Trump will "act like a bully." Bridgewater Associates founder Dalio pessimistically stated that he would not live to see the revival of US manufacturing, while China firmly controls the initiative in important industries of the global manufacturing sector, such as electric vehicles, AI, and robotics. Especially in AI technology and applications, this is the "last chance" for the US.

Furthermore, it should be emphasized that in our observation, whether the Trump administration wields the "tariff stick" or guides expectations by hyping the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement," although they are economic issues, they can serve a hidden political purpose—forcing countries that fear tariffs, such as Mexico, Canada, and even European countries, to obey the US. Taking the EU as an example, the Trump administration's "complete submission" to Russia can be used as a means of intimidation against the EU, which has a "one pot, one ladle" relationship with Russia on the issue of Ukraine. The "tariff stick" is a decent means of intimidation. That is to say, in the context where the Trump administration can only win the "internal struggle" by easing the majority of its relations with China, Europe, and Russia, and given that easing relations with China is a "must," and the Trump administration is playing a "fake surrender" with Russia, it plans to use the "tariff stick" to forcibly suppress the EU (of course, this is not the only means of pressuring the EU employed by the Trump administration).

Therefore, the top priority for the Trump administration is to ideally achieve simultaneous easing of relations with China, Europe, and Russia, or at least to achieve easing in "most" of these relationships, thereby striving to gain external support and focusing all its energy on dealing with internal conflicts in the US.

It should be added that one of the main reasons why the Plaza Accord was successful was that although Japan was economically strong, it was a "dwarf" militarily. Japan's maritime trade routes were controlled by the US, and politically, it was a defeated country in World War II, strictly constrained by the "Yalta system." Moreover, at that time, a large amount of foreign exchange in dollars was not held by Japan or China, but by West Germany. West Germany was willing to cooperate with the US in "targeting" Japan first in exchange for the US not launching economic, especially financial, attacks against it. The result was that the US and West Germany jointly "trapped" Japan, forcing the yen to depreciate significantly.

Today's China is obviously not the Japan of the past. China not only has a developed manufacturing industry but also a very strong military, and it is a nuclear power, a major nuclear state, and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. Moreover, China holds a large amount of foreign exchange reserves in dollars.

● The Trump administration was forced to seek detente with Russia first, and even if the talks went well, it was mainly due to external pressure.

Before continuing our discussion, let's take a look at another news report.

On February 27th, the US Department of Justice released a batch of confidential documents related to the Epstein case. The information disclosed this time was mainly already known, and did not contain any new explosive information about the sex trafficking case. This sparked outrage and disappointment among the public, with conservative politicians and Attorney General Pam Bondi accusing FBI agents of withholding some documents.

This is undoubtedly a new move by the Trump administration to focus all its energy on dealing with internal strife in the US. Before discussing this "new move" in detail, let's take a look at the state of Trump's foreign policy and any new developments.

On February 26th, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov stated that Russia would not consider any proposal to deploy European peacekeeping troops to Ukraine, and no country had raised such a proposal to Russia so far.

Regarding this news report, in our previous discussions and assessments, faced with Russia's tough stance (Russia has seized the opportunity that the Trump administration cannot first achieve detente with China), the Trump administration is likely to further sacrifice European interests to make further concessions to Russia.

The reality is that Russia's attitude towards the Ukraine issue remains tough - on February 27th, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zakharova stated that if Ukraine joins NATO, it will mean a dramatic and uncontrollable escalation of the conflict, with serious consequences for global security.

In our view, the so-called "Ukraine joining NATO" has a disguised form, which is NATO entering Ukraine openly and in an organized manner. According to Europe's intention, these NATO troops will enter Ukraine under the banner of "European peacekeeping forces" and "under US protection". Regarding this, Russia's position is "unacceptable" at least at this stage! Although Trump still "talks tough" and claims that "he believes Russian President Putin will agree", and even fabricates fake news through the media that Russia has accepted NATO troops entering Ukraine, it is an indisputable fact that the Trump administration is in a dilemma. If concessions are to be made, it will only be the Trump administration making them.

On February 26th, a well-known US media outlet cited several "informed sources" who revealed that as part of the US's efforts to seek detente, US and Russian officials have identified the Arctic issue as a possible area of cooperation. However, even one of the "informed sources" admitted that given the increasingly close relationship between Russia and China in recent years, it is unlikely that Trump's approach will be successful. There have also been voices in the US media pointing out that the essence of US-Russia relations is only "temporary", while Russia-China relations are "strategic" and "permanent". Facing China, its "huge neighbor" that cannot be moved away, Russia knows that alienating China will only bring "fatal danger".

In our observation and assessment, Trump himself is probably aware that US-Russia relations are so difficult to handle, mainly because of China. Or rather, this is a direct negative consequence of the fact that the US should have first sought detente with China but failed to do so. And China sees the Trump administration "very clearly". In China's view, with such serious internal strife in the US, how can it possibly conduct good diplomacy? US diplomacy seems to have only one "main theme", which is to make concessions, concessions, and more concessions. In Russia's eyes, if the US cannot manage its relationship with China and expects Russia to make concessions, that is wishful thinking. In China's eyes, if the US cannot even handle Russia and expects China to make concessions, that is even more wishful thinking. This is also why we have repeatedly emphasized that the Trump administration was forced to seek detente with Russia first, and even if the talks go well, it is mainly due to external pressure.

● Europe's strong demand to dispatch "peacekeeping troops" is a necessary guarantee for the EU to ensure its own security and get a share of the pie in the frenzy to divide Ukraine.

As early as February 8th, US President Trump stated that he intended to restore diplomatic relations between the US and North Korea, as well as his personal relationship with Kim Jong Un, with whom he had previously established a good personal relationship.

The true intention behind Trump's remarks is to use the North Korea issue as a reason to "strike up a conversation" with China. Russia naturally sees this and has "a plan in mind" - on February 28th, the Russian Security Council's press service issued a statement saying that Russian Security Council Secretary Shoigu had arrived in Beijing "to hold meetings with Chinese leaders".

In our observation and assessment, while the US has been constantly hyping up "US-China interactions" and even promoting to the world through hype that "restoring diplomatic relations between the US and North Korea, as well as his personal relationship with Kim Jong Un" means that the US still has "a door to knock on" for seeking detente, Russian Security Council Secretary Shoigu quietly arrived in China. This is a typical example of "Sino-Russian strategic coordination". Obviously, Russia is taking this opportunity to send a message to all parties, especially the Trump administration: if Trump considers having to further make concessions to China in an attempt to seek detente between the US and China because he cannot achieve detente with Russia, then the conditions for the previous "deal" between the US and Russia will have to be changed. That is to say, Russia's asking price will "rise" as the US becomes more eager to seek detente with China and further compromise with it.

The current situation of the Trump administration's relations with China, Europe, and Russia is as follows: firstly, it has only reached a certain "stage agreement" with Russia, and the success of this "agreement" is strongly influenced by other aspects, especially the subsequent development of US-China relations, especially in terms of "agreed conditions" becoming "pending" (for example, the "rising" asking price of Russia mentioned above) is particularly evident; secondly, the detente between the US and China that the Trump administration urgently needs has not yet begun; thirdly, Trump is still exerting pressure on Europe, and US-Europe relations are currently "bickering with each other". Although there has been some coordination between Europe and the US on the Ukraine issue and in dealing with Russia, their contradictions have become increasingly sharp due to US pressure on Ukraine, although they have not yet reached the point of "public quarrels". This is the latest development in the "vicious cycle of diplomacy" that we discussed earlier, in which the Trump administration is caught in "two vicious cycles" of "internal and external troubles".

Speaking of US-Europe relations, it's worth mentioning that French President Macron's trip to the US was not a pleasant one. Throughout the reception, the US side was quite rude. Trump not only sent only one of his female secretaries to greet Macron, but also gave Macron a "small chair" to sit on his right, alongside Vice President Pence on his left, making them look like "a pair of lackeys". This reminds us of September 4, 2020, when then-Serbian President Vucic and Kosovo leader Hoti signed a bilateral "Economic Cooperation Agreement", and Serbian President Vucic sat in a small chair facing Trump, who sat behind his big desk, resembling a boss interviewing an employee.

Macron is probably well aware that the Trump administration will compromise with Russia by further harming European interests in the face of an extremely tough Russia. Since the EU cannot prevent the US and Russia from dividing Ukraine together, it can only join in the division of Ukraine. That is to say, Europe's strong demand to dispatch "peacekeeping troops" is a necessary guarantee for the EU to ensure its own security and get a share of the pie in the frenzy to divide Ukraine. Of course, Trump can use this as a means of implicitly threatening Russia to accept the "peace plan for Ukraine" proposed by Trump (with the "mineral agreement" between the US and Ukraine being part of it).

● The international community is publicly "giving directions" to the Trump administration, clearly telling them what can be negotiated and what cannot!

Previously, we discussed the latest developments in the Trump administration's handling of relations with Russia and Europe, which can be described as "disastrous." Next, let's briefly talk about any new moves the Trump administration has made towards easing tensions in Sino-US relations and how the international community has responded. Before delving into the discussion, let's look at a news report.

On February 28th, according to authoritative North Korean media, the Korean People's Army conducted a strategic cruise missile launch training exercise in the western waters of North Korea on the 26th. Kim Jong-un, General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea and State Affairs Commission Chairman, observed the launch training.

The report stated that North Korea launched two strategic cruise missiles, which accurately hit their targets after flying 1,587 kilometers in 7,961 and 7,973 seconds, respectively. The purpose of this launch training was to remind opponents of the counterattack capabilities of the Korean People's Army in any space and the readiness of different nuclear application methods, demonstrating the credibility of its nuclear deterrence and ensuring that the strategic cruise missile force is proficient in executing sudden firepower strike missions.

Kim Jong-un said that continuously testing the credibility and operational status of North Korea's nuclear deterrence capabilities and demonstrating their power is a responsible exercise of war deterrence. It is the mission and duty of North Korea's nuclear armed forces to more resolutely prepare for the readiness of nuclear armed forces, make full preparations for their use, and permanently safeguard national sovereignty and security with a nuclear shield.

Just a day before the Korean People's Army conducted the strategic cruise missile launch training on the 26th, Kevin King, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs at the US Department of State, stated during a visit to South Korea that the United States believes that Russia and China need to participate in negotiations on the denuclearization of North Korea – please note that the United States mentioned "denuclearization of North Korea" rather than "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula."

As we know, Trump's first term began on January 20, 2017. During the process of US-North Korea interactions leading up to the "Trump-Kim Summit" in 2019, on September 6, 2018, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un proposed a timeline for denuclearization for the first time, planning to complete it before the end of US President Trump's first term. In response, Trump welcomed this on Twitter, saying, "North Korea's Kim Jong-un states 'unwavering faith in President Trump.' Thank you to Chairman Kim. We will get it done together!"

It is worth noting that Chung Eui-yong (currently South Korea's Foreign Minister, then-Chief of the National Security Office) announced the results of his visit to North Korea, stating that he delivered a verbal message from Trump to Kim Jong-un and would discuss the results of his visit and convey Kim Jong-un's message in a phone call with John Bolton. Chung Eui-yong said that Kim Jong-un told South Korean officials that his trust in Trump remains "unchanged" and he hopes to achieve the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and end the long-standing hostility between the US and North Korea during Trump's first term. Trump's first term will end in early 2021. In addition, North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un reiterated his unwavering commitment to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in his New Year's address on January 1, 2019.

From the historical review above, it is not difficult to see that Trump supported "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula" during his first term, which was also an important foundation for the 2019 "Trump-Kim Summit." Today, in Trump's second term, officials in the Trump administration only mention "denuclearization of North Korea." Clearly, this is the US government "backing down" on the North Korea issue.

In the observation and assessment of "Eastern Affairs Interpretation," the Trump administration, having failed to achieve its initial plan to ease relations with China, had no choice but to first ease relations with Russia to discuss the Ukraine issue. The Trump administration's calculation is that, since that is the case, they will seek an opportunity (similar to when former US President Nixon used his successful visit to China as a basis to open up a visit to the Soviet Union) to visit China after basically resolving US-Russia relations.

Trump knows that the Taiwan issue cannot be negotiated with China, and China will not negotiate it. However, China is interested in discussing the Western Pacific issue (where the US substantially withdraws from the Western Pacific), which the US is unwilling to talk about. Therefore, the Trump administration "had a brainwave" and attempted to use the North Korea issue to "strike up a conversation" with China. China is well aware of Trump's eagerness to visit, but the Americans obviously have an improper attitude, attempting to "hit on" China opportunistically. With such a rogue demeanor, who would want to talk to them? Hence, there was the "firecracker" and related statements from our North Korean comrades.

Based on the above discussion, "Eastern Affairs Interpretation" wants to emphasize the following points:

First, the supreme leader of North Korea emphasized "pre-war testing" – more resolutely preparing the nuclear armed forces for a war situation and making full preparations for their use.

Second, resolutely defending North Korea's national interests – it is the mission and duty of North Korea's nuclear armed forces to permanently safeguard national sovereignty and security with a nuclear shield.

Third, the Americans are "backing down" on the North Korea issue, which is unacceptable to the international community! The so-called "denuclearization of North Korea" is just a pipe dream for the Americans! The "denuclearization" in the North Korea issue can only be "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula." In addition to South Korea, which is already "nuclear-involved," even the US nuclear weapons deployed with the US military in South Korea must be withdrawn!

Fourth, the international community has sent a clear signal to the Trump administration through North Korea's "words" and especially its "actions" that if the Americans intend to use this as an excuse to initiate contact with China, it's a non-starter! China is not Russia, which believes in imperialism and great power chauvinism. On the North Korea issue, China will never negotiate anything that harms North Korea's core national interests with the US without the knowledge of the "main party involved" – North Korea. For example, what nonsense like "denuclearization of North Korea"! Even if China and the US discuss "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula," it must be "discussed separately," meaning it has nothing to do with the Trump administration's desire to ease Sino-US relations! If the Trump administration feels embarrassed to talk about "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula" due to their "backing down" on the issue, then let's talk about the Western Pacific topic – how, what, and when the US plans to substantially withdraw from the Western Pacific. For example, what does the US plan to do with Australia? Of course, if the US is unwilling to discuss the Western Pacific issue, we can talk about the South China Sea issue. For example, what does the US plan to do with the Marcos Jr. regime in the Philippines?

Fifth, the international community has also sent clear signals to all parties, especially those within the US:

Firstly, in a sense, the Chinese fleet's foray into the South Pacific region, where Australia and New Zealand are located, has heavily impacted the stability of the "Western Pacific security framework," publicly "giving directions" to the Trump administration and clearly telling them what can be negotiated and what cannot!

Secondly, whether Sino-US relations will ease, and even the manner and timing of any engagement, is determined by the international community, not the Trump administration. It can even be said that whether the Trump administration's full promotion of the "stabilizing the internal situation before resisting external forces" policy can be smoothly implemented, or even implemented at all, is up to the international community!

Thirdly, it reminds all parties within the US that behind the Trump administration's once again making an issue out of the "Lolita Island" list publication, Trump is probably waiting for those of you who are afraid to call him! Although this publication contains no substantive content, the pressure brought by the document's release is real. You can choose to remain silent, surrender and be at their mercy, or fight back! In short, one sentence: Trump's "making a cake" endeavor seems to have no chance of success for now! You should just do what you need to do! Otherwise, only more troubles will arise, and delays will lead to changes!

●The US can only talk to China from the dust, and perhaps only then will China be interested in continuing to play the "ferryman" game with the US.

The Chinese fleet has ventured into the South Pacific region where Australia and New Zealand are located, nearing French Polynesia. We call upon and remind France to bear in mind that the Americans and Australians have not been innocent in this region! France should seize the opportunity to avenge the AUKUS's snatching of the large submarine sale order from France!

Furthermore, we solemnly warn the Trump administration that ever since Nancy Pelosi, the then Speaker of the US House of Representatives, made an unprovoked visit to Taiwan, China, Taiwan has ceased to be a bargaining chip in the hands of the US. The option of armed reunification of Taiwan has been on the table "perhaps tonight," meaning it is ready at any moment (the reason it hasn't happened yet is that the strategic situation is so favorable to us that we have even started discussing an American version of the "Tumu Fort Incident").

It's worth adding that in our observation and assessment, regarding whether the Trump administration is prepared to "bring gifts" to ease Sino-US relations, the US is not yet willing to sacrifice Australia and Japan. South Korea is irrelevant in terms of being sacrificed or not, while the Marcos Jr. administration in the Philippines is most likely to be betrayed by Trump.

Once a scenario similar to Spain ceding dominance of the Caribbean to the US in 1898 (the Spanish-American War in the Caribbean in May 1898, where the US fleet annihilated the Spanish fleet, marking the US's abandonment of "isolationism" and its global ambitions. Of course, what is emphasized here is the transfer of dominance, and the specific method does not necessarily involve a naval battle between China and the US in the South China Sea) unfolds in the South China Sea, how far off is the US from substantially ceding the Western Pacific?

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