2025年3月10日，星期一，第1199期

东方点评，美“政府效率部”负责人马斯克与美国务卿卢比奥在内阁会议上就裁员问题发生争执

【媒体报道】

近日，美国“政府效率部”（DOGE）负责人、亿万富翁马斯克与美国国务卿鲁比奥被爆在当地时间3月6日的内阁会议上就裁员问题发生争执。对此，美国总统特朗普回应称，两人之间“没有冲突”。

3月9日，中国国防部网站发布消息，3月上中旬，中国、伊朗、俄罗斯海军将举行“安全纽带-2025”联合演习。

【讨论纪要】

●随着“北溪-2”天然气管道重启一事的出现，让我们看到了某种迹象

在上一期回顾的结尾，我们讨论了一个新话题，那就是所谓“欧美公开争吵”的“火候”问题实质上是“谁来代言西方资本利益”的问题。

在我们看来，如果特朗普政府依旧打算，以总体上继续向俄罗斯妥协的方式阶段性缓和美俄关系，并以此为契机谋求特朗普尽快访华，同时，对以色列内塔尼亚胡政府在巴勒斯坦加沙地带，尤其是约旦河西岸，以及黎巴嫩南部地区的横行霸道继续听之任之，甚至表示进一步支持，将欧洲在中东的利益丢在脚下肆意践踏的，那么真正意义上的“欧美公开争吵”的火候也许就真的差不多了。

也就是说，如果仍然是“传统意义上的”美国资本利益代言西方资本利益，恐怕欧美之间吵不出什么结果。或者说，如果“传统意义上的”美国资本利益在总体上观察仍然是相对统一的，那么其力量足以主导美国国家利益，欧洲资本利益和欧洲国家利益（美国资本利益也受到后几者的制约）。这一点在发生在2011年的“埃及之乱”中表现得淋漓尽致。

当年，“美国利益决策层”基于“代言西方资本的美国资本的利益”、不惜损害“美国长远国家利益”策划了旨在“全面恶化中国外在安全、特别是经济、尤其是金融安全（注，仅站在中国角度去观察）”的“埃及之乱”。结果，经过“利比亚与叙利亚的利益交换”，原本“很难调和、但只要条件满足就可以有效调和的欧美资本利益之间的矛盾”在西方资本的调和下，得到有效调和，而原本“不可调和、在一定条件下只能有效缓和的欧美国家利益矛盾”在西方资本的调和下得到“有效缓和”。继而“欧美利益”在美国资本代言的西方资本的居中调和之下，经过“利比亚之乱与叙利亚之乱的利益交换”、再在“美国利益（注：主导者是美国资本利益，被迫跟从者是美国国家利益）”通过“定点清除美国驻利比亚大使从而向欧洲利益交了投名状、及美联储单方面QE3从而断了美国平台——也就是美元的退路”之后，代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益公开游离于美国与欧洲平台、也就是“欧美利益（欧美资本利益与欧美国家利益）”之间。

而一旦出现真正意义上的“公开争吵”，某种意义上说，“传统意义上的”美国资本利益将不复存在，至少分裂为两部分：已经“逃离”美国或准备“逃离”美国在欧洲“安营扎寨”的一部分，以及剩余的另一部分。那么前者和欧洲利益（欧洲资本利益和欧洲国家利益）相结合就可以与后者发生“公开争吵”。

从现阶段国际局势来观察，显然“欧美公开争吵”的“火候”还没到，但随着“北溪-2”天然气管道重启一事的出现让我们看到了某种迹象——第一，所谓“西方资本复杂转进”进程最终会何去何从；第二，到底谁现在代言西方资本利益。

●透过马斯克与卢比奥的公开争执来观察，马斯克的处境愈发像极了主父偃

“北溪-2”天然气管道重启一事的出现或意味目前仍代言西方资本利益的“传统意义上的”美国资本利益已经出现从“内部分裂”转化为“内部决裂”的迹象，这一点我们从特朗普阵营内部的一些最新动态中可以看出一些端倪。

与此同时，特朗普政府显然仍未能实现有效缓和对华关系。具体表现之一就是，特朗普访华行程仍无法确定。尽管美国总统特朗普近日再度表达了将尽快与中国国家最高领导人会晤的意愿。

我们注意到，近日，有关美国“政府效率部”（DOGE）负责人、亿万富翁马斯克与美国国务卿鲁比奥被爆在当地时间3月6日的内阁会议上就裁员问题发生争执的新闻报道。尽管美国总统特朗普回应称两人之间“没有冲突”，但在争论持续了一段时间后，特朗普终于出面为鲁比奥辩护，称他做得“很棒”。

从中国古代历史的角度来看，汉武帝为了扫平匈奴，首先要整顿内部，比如推行“消番”，强化中央集权。“消番”并非一件容易的事情，所以汉武帝需要一个胆大的人，一个敢冲敢打的人，这个人就是主父偃。我们认为，在特朗普政府内，马斯克恰好就扮演了主父偃的角色。汉武帝自然知道主父偃的为人，此人心胸狭隘，公器私用，汉武帝用他就用在一个“狠”字。

对特朗普来说，无论是出于继续维持西方世界霸权，尤其是金融霸权的全球统治地位也好，还是出于4年后确保不被清算，仍能大富大贵也罢。随着美国国内和国外局势的不断演化，一味地敢冲敢打是不够的，必须想办法“化敌为友”，这样才能从根本上缓和目前仍代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益内部矛盾，避免出现美国资本利益进一步从分裂走向决裂。这就需要做两件事，一件事，也是最重要的一件事，想办法“做大蛋糕”。目前特朗普政府正在全力推动俄美关系缓和进而推动中美关系缓和，为进一步“做大蛋糕”奠定基础；另一件事，就是安抚人心。当年，汉武帝面对因主父偃逼死了几个刘姓王爷而面对御史大夫公孙弘（背后是其他的刘姓王爷和藩镇势力）的弹劾时，最终还是以“齐王自杀，没有后代，封国被废除变成郡，归入朝廷，主父偃是这事的罪魁，陛下不杀主父偃，无法向天下人交代”为由诛杀了主父偃，以安人心。

值得一提的是，所谓进一步“做大蛋糕”的主要途径之一就是史无前例地大规模开启印钞机，这一点我们从“海湖庄园协议”中可以看到影子。特朗普政府显然在打造一“QE3”PLUS——通过讲故事、印钞等一系列手段，缓和人们对美国35万亿美元债务的担忧，并让他们相信美国可以再度伟大。

当然，“做大蛋糕”并不是只有“印钱”一途，如果特朗普可以为美国军工复合体搞到1万亿美元的订单，他们当然会支持特朗普。而现在，8000亿欧元的“重新武装欧洲计划”已经来了。

当然，说到军工复合体这个名词，除了美国军工复合体外，自然也有欧洲军工复合体，他们各有各的平台，现在的问题是，也就是蛋糕有了，怎么分。也就是说，是在“传统意义上”的美国军工复合体平台生产，还是在“传统意义上”的欧洲军工复合体平台生产，亦或是“新的美国军工复合体”，或者“新的欧洲军工复合体”。在东方时事解读的观察与评估中，其本质就是最终西方资本如何“复杂转进”的问题。或者说，如果最终“到底由谁生产”这件事敲定了，那么“欧美公开争吵”的火候也就基本到了。与此同时，西方资本最终“复杂转进”到哪个平台，西方资本利益到底由谁来代言，这些问题恐怕也就有了初步答案。

此外，在我们看来，当特朗普面对马斯克和卢比奥的公开争执，并最终选择支持卢比奥后，马斯克的处境似乎有些不妙。而从特朗普基于“特朗普阵营”准备或初步做出选择的角度来观察，站在西方资本利益的角度，恐怕其也到了准备或初步做出选择的时刻了。卢比奥显然更倾向于维护“传统意义上”的美国军工复合体的利益，而特朗普为其辩护并称其“做得很棒”。对马斯克而言，也许也到了准备或初步做出选择的时刻了，要么改弦更张，收敛锋芒；要么就只能准备逃亡。

●国际社会对特朗普政府“好处占尽，坏事做绝”之讹诈嘴脸予以强烈警告

在继续展开讨论之前，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

3月10日，朝中社援引新闻公报称，美韩不顾朝方再三警告，执意进行大规模联合军演，是“把针锋相对的朝鲜半岛局势推向极限”的“极其危险的挑衅妄动”。公报还说，朝美政治军事对抗格局因美国针对朝鲜的战争玩火行为而更接近爆发临界点，其对抗模式也变得更加危险。

在此前我们讨论了韩国总统尹锡悦被释放的新闻报道，在我们看来，现在的尹锡悦已经彻底沦为特朗普政府手上的“提线木偶”，如果特朗普让其在朝鲜半岛上生事生乱，恐怕尹锡悦不敢说个不字。特朗普此举显然意在作为要挟国际社会同意其尽快访华的筹码。言外之意就是，如果国际社会配合，则特朗普可以拆掉尹锡悦这枚插在朝鲜半岛上的“雷管”，比如，让其平稳退休；否则，就别怪“翻脸不认人”！

对于特朗普政府的这套流氓嘴脸，国际社会自然不会惯着。特朗普想访华只有在满足中国提出的条件下成行，否则想都不要想。早在中美阿拉斯加拍桌子的时候，中国就已经明确宣誓，美国今天没有资格从实力的角度出发和中国讲话！显然，朝鲜的强硬回应就是国际社会对特朗普政府再玩讹诈，妄图迫使国际社会配合其访华的严厉警告！

值得一提的是，从2月11日护卫舰“衡阳号”穿过托雷斯海峡，到055大驱带着补给舰在珊瑚海集结，中国舰队花了整整一个月把澳大利亚海岸线“描了个边”后，网络上开始讨论一个话题，那就是我们的舰队如何“回家”。

在我们看来，我方舰队到达巽他海峡（法国航母来参与演习，结果被中方舰队，尤其是815A、055大驱的强烈电子战干扰，于是准备离开，走的路线就是巽他海峡。因为马六甲海峡非常繁忙，容易出事。显然，055编队走巽他海峡有点堵路的意思。传说PLA又发了通报，又要“打靶”！于是法国航母只能停在樟宜基地等待演习结束。此外，美国的“卡尔·文森”号航母遭遇中国大量“双尾蝎”和“攻击2”无人机的干扰，无法演习。朝鲜同志更是猛，一枚导弹打到了他们的演习区内。对于包括俄罗斯在内的所有西方国家而言，他们传统对中国的海空优势已经荡然无存）可以看作是上述国际社会对特朗普政府“好处占尽，坏事做绝”之讹诈嘴脸强烈警告的“再强调”——国际社会不吃你这一套！如果特朗普政府敢于在“水管的5米处”威胁中欧海上贸易路线，比如，在马六甲海峡，那么我们就在“水管的95米处”做文章，比如，绝对控制南海！具体手段，包括但不局限于：设置“海上绿灯系统”（包括：天空、海面，水下，甚至太空）、设立南海防空识别区与“以岛换岛”（其一，包括处置东经118度线，菲律宾领土范围西部界限之外的相关岛屿；其二，填岛（黄岩岛）；其三，终极方案，武力收台，进行）。

●以上讨论再次验证了我们早在1月22日作出的相关评估：不论是对外还是对内，特朗普想要玩“合纵连横”，前提都是处理好对华关系

国际社会对特朗普政府的警告不仅包括传统安全层面，也包括非传统安全层面。

我们注意到，3月8日，国务院关税税则委员会发布公告，自2025年3月20日起，对原产于加拿大的菜籽油、油渣饼、豌豆加征100%关税；对原产于加拿大的水产品、猪肉加征25%关税。此前加拿大政府宣布，自2024年10月1日起，对中国电动汽车加征100%关税；自2024年10月22日起，对中国钢铁和铝产品加征25%关税。

中国追求“河渡人”的局面，但并不意味着处于战略被动状态。相反，这是一种类似以逸待劳，静中有动，稳操胜券的做法。用一句话形容就是：敌不动我不动，敌欲动我先动。

在我们看来，特朗普对美国第一贸易伙伴墨西哥，第二大贸易伙伴加拿大增加关税，除了要求两国在类似毒品、移民等问题上配合美国外，还在于迫使这些国家加入所谓“加关税反华联盟”。国际社会在洞察了特朗普政府的险恶用心后，中国对加拿大加重关税（100%加关税，非常罕见，性质上几乎等同于将其赶出中国市场）的意思就在于提前警告加拿大和墨西哥当局，不得跟随美国对中国打贸易战，这当然也变相加大了加拿大和墨西哥对美国之间讨价还价的“门槛儿”。

和中国“呲牙”后，由于方方面面都看到了中美关系非但没有缓和，反而出现恶化的迹象，于是，特朗普惊恐地发现，难以打交道的不仅有加拿大和墨西哥，更有欧盟、俄罗斯、沙特、土耳其、以色列，甚至伊朗。在进行本次回顾最后一节讨论前，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

3月9日，中国国防部网站发布消息，3月上中旬，中国、伊朗、俄罗斯海军将举行“安全纽带-2025”联合演习。

在我们的观察与评估中，中、伊、俄三国海军举行“安全纽带-2025”的地点非常有趣，在伊朗恰巴哈尔港附近区域组织实施。熟悉印度洋地区地图的朋友们不难发现，恰巴哈尔港位于阿曼海的“喇叭口处”，紧邻巴基斯坦瓜达尔港，且是伊朗最靠近马六甲海峡的港口，指向性非常明显。

不难看出的是，在特朗普对中国“呲牙”，导致方方面面都看到了中美关系非但没有缓和，反而出现恶化的迹象后，目前对外政策基本运行在“投降主义”路线上的伊朗当局也对其进行了微调。有趣的是，在美国总统特朗普日前在接受美国媒体采访时，敦促伊朗就核问题与美国谈判，否则可能面临军事行动后，伊朗最高领袖哈梅内伊也终于硬气了一把，对此回应称，一些国家想要将其意愿强加给伊朗，伊朗绝对不会接受。

这样一来，特朗普想要推动所谓“伊朗和以色列新关系”进而进一步缓和俄美关系的企图就被晾在了当街。俄罗斯更是趁机拱火（非常期待看到中美直接交手）并趁机拉高乌克兰问题，连同中东问题上的要价，比如，以《伊斯坦布尔协议》为基础的俄乌停火方案特朗普是否考虑一下，俄罗斯有效重返叙利亚，特朗普不要拖拖拉拉！此外，更有通过空袭黎巴嫩给特朗普再出难题的以色列内塔尼亚胡政府，以及一心想要坐上瓜分乌克兰“餐桌”的欧盟，更不要提以沙特为首的海湾阿拉伯国家，以及其他主要中东国家，如，埃及，土耳其等。本应该在对华、对欧、对俄三边关系中玩出个“与大多数缓和”的特朗普政府，如今却玩出个“猪八戒照镜子，里外不是人”，更是将自己玩成了孤家寡人。

以上讨论再次验证了我们早在1月22日作出的相关评估：不论是对外还是对内，特朗普想要玩“合纵连横”，前提都是处理好对华关系。事实证明，一旦中美关系交恶，不仅特朗普政府对外和各方打交道的成本会直线上升，对内恐怕也是如此，否则，怎么就在这个档口儿出现了“马部长”和国务卿卢比奥公开争执的一幕呢？而问题的严重性在于，特朗普阵营内部的矛盾一定会被“特朗普们”的敌人敏锐捕捉并加以利用，而对于“特朗普们”的“朋友们”，或特朗普的“朋友们”来说，如此把外交，尤其是对华关系弄成如此烂摊子的特朗普政府还如何能够为自己更好地谋取利益？也许这个时候，“化敌为友”进程就悄然“逆向运行”——变为“化友为敌”（首先体现在特朗普阵营内部发生明显分裂）。也许用不了多久，特朗普政府恐怕必然会走到黯然下台的那一步，如果此时的特朗普拒绝下台，那么如果再有一颗子弹飞来，还会那么巧合的只打中特朗普的耳垂儿吗？

声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

Monday, March 10, 2025, Issue No. 1199

Eastern Review: Musk, Head of U.S. "Department of Government Efficiency," Clashes with Secretary of State Rubio Over Layoffs in Cabinet Meeting

[Media Coverage]

Recently, it was revealed that Elon Musk, billionaire head of the U.S. "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE), and Secretary of State Marco Rubio clashed over layoffs during a cabinet meeting on March 6. In response, U.S. President Donald Trump stated that there was "no conflict" between the two.

On March 9, China's Ministry of National Defense announced that the navies of China, Iran, and Russia would conduct the "Security Bond-2025" joint exercise in early to mid-March.

【Discussion Summary】

● The restart of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline has revealed certain signs.

At the end of our previous review, we discussed a new topic: the essence of the so-called "public quarrel between the U.S. and Europe" is actually a question of "who will represent Western capital interests."

In our view, if the Trump administration still intends to temporarily ease U.S.-Russia relations by continuing to compromise with Russia overall, using this as an opportunity to push for Trump's visit to China, while turning a blind eye to the Israeli Netanyahu government's aggression in the Palestinian Gaza Strip, particularly the West Bank and southern Lebanon, and even expressing further support, thereby trampling on European interests in the Middle East, then the timing for a "genuine public quarrel between the U.S. and Europe" may indeed be ripe.

In other words, if the "traditional" U.S. capital interests continue to represent Western capital interests, it is unlikely that the U.S. and Europe will achieve any meaningful outcome from their quarrels. Alternatively, if the "traditional" U.S. capital interests remain relatively unified overall, their strength would be sufficient to dominate U.S. national interests, European capital interests, and European national interests (with U.S. capital interests also constrained by the latter). This was vividly demonstrated during the "Egyptian chaos" of 2011.

At that time, the "U.S. decision-making layer," based on the interests of U.S. capital representing Western capital and willing to harm "U.S. long-term national interests," orchestrated the "Egyptian chaos" aimed at "completely deteriorating China's external security, especially economic and financial security (from China's perspective)." As a result, through the "exchange of interests in Libya and Syria," the originally "difficult to reconcile but reconcilable under certain conditions" conflict between European and U.S. capital interests was effectively mediated by Western capital. Meanwhile, the "irreconcilable under certain conditions" conflict between European and U.S. national interests was "effectively eased" under Western capital's mediation. Subsequently, "European and U.S. interests," mediated by U.S. capital representing Western capital, underwent an "exchange of interests in the Libyan and Syrian chaos." The "U.S. interests" (led by U.S. capital interests and reluctantly followed by U.S. national interests) then "handed over a letter of surrender to European interests" by "targeting the U.S. ambassador to Libya for elimination" and "cutting off the U.S. platform—the dollar—through the Federal Reserve's unilateral QE3." This led to U.S. capital interests, representing Western capital, publicly drifting between the U.S. and European platforms, i.e., "European and U.S. interests (European and U.S. capital interests and European and U.S. national interests)."

Once a "genuine public quarrel" emerges, in a sense, the "traditional" U.S. capital interests will cease to exist, at least splitting into two parts: one part that has "escaped" the U.S. or is preparing to "escape" and "settle" in Europe, and the remaining part. The former, combined with European interests (European capital interests and European national interests), can then engage in a "public quarrel" with the latter.

From the current international situation, it is clear that the "timing" for a "public quarrel between the U.S. and Europe" has not yet arrived. However, the restart of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline has revealed certain signs—first, where the so-called "complex transition of Western capital" will ultimately lead; and second, who currently represents Western capital interests.

● Observing the public clash between Musk and Rubio, Musk's situation increasingly resembles that of Zhufu Yan.

The restart of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline may indicate that the "traditional" U.S. capital interests, which still represent Western capital interests, are showing signs of transitioning from "internal division" to "internal rupture." This can be seen in some of the latest developments within the Trump camp.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has clearly still failed to effectively ease relations with China. One manifestation of this is that Trump's visit to China remains uncertain, despite President Trump recently reiterating his desire to meet with China's top leader as soon as possible.

We have noted recent news reports about the clash between Elon Musk, head of the U.S. "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE), and Secretary of State Marco Rubio over layoffs during a cabinet meeting on March 6. Although President Trump stated that there was "no conflict" between the two, after the argument persisted for some time, Trump finally stepped in to defend Rubio, saying he had done a "great job."

From the perspective of ancient Chinese history, Emperor Wu of Han needed to consolidate internal affairs, such as implementing the "abolition of feudal states" to strengthen centralization, before he could pacify the Xiongnu. The "abolition of feudal states" was no easy task, so Emperor Wu needed a bold and daring person, and that person was Zhufu Yan. In our view, within the Trump administration, Musk plays the role of Zhufu Yan. Emperor Wu naturally knew Zhufu Yan's character—narrow-minded and self-serving—but he used him precisely for his "ruthlessness."

For Trump, whether to continue maintaining the global dominance of the Western world, especially financial hegemony, or to ensure he remains wealthy and untouchable four years later, as the domestic and international situation evolves, simply being bold and daring is not enough. He must find a way to "turn enemies into friends" to fundamentally ease the internal contradictions within the U.S. capital interests that still represent Western capital, preventing further division or rupture. This requires two things: first, and most importantly, finding a way to "expand the economic pie." The Trump administration is currently pushing for the easing of U.S.-Russia relations to pave the way for the easing of U.S.-China relations, laying the foundation for further "expanding the economic pie." Second, he must appease public sentiment. In the past, when Emperor Wu faced impeachment from Imperial Censor Gongsun Hong (backed by other Liu clan princes and feudal lords) over Zhufu Yan's role in the deaths of several Liu clan princes, he ultimately executed Zhufu Yan, citing that "the King of Qi committed suicide, leaving no heir, and his fiefdom was abolished and turned into a prefecture, incorporated into the court. Zhufu Yan was the culprit, and if Your Majesty does not execute him, it will be impossible to explain to the world," thereby appeasing public sentiment.

It is worth noting that one of the main ways to further "expand the economic pie" is through an unprecedented large-scale printing of money, a shadow of which we can see in the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement." The Trump administration is clearly crafting a "QE3 PLUS"—using storytelling, money printing, and other means to ease concerns about the U.S.'s $35 trillion debt and convince people that America can be great again.

Of course, "expanding the economic pie" is not limited to "printing money." If Trump can secure $1 trillion in orders for the U.S. military-industrial complex, they will certainly support him. Now, the €800 billion "Rearm Europe Plan" has arrived.

Naturally, when discussing the military-industrial complex, besides the U.S. military-industrial complex, there is also the European military-industrial complex, each with its own platform. The question now is, with the "economic pie" in place, how to divide it. In other words, whether production will occur on the "traditional" U.S. military-industrial complex platform, the "traditional" European military-industrial complex platform, or a "new U.S. military-industrial complex" or "new European military-industrial complex." In the observations and assessments of "Eastern Strategic Analysis," the essence of this is ultimately how Western capital will "complexly transition." In other words, once it is determined "who will produce," the timing for a "public quarrel between the U.S. and Europe" will be almost ripe. Meanwhile, the question of where Western capital will ultimately "complexly transition" to and who will represent Western capital interests will likely have preliminary answers.

Additionally, in our view, when Trump faced the public clash between Musk and Rubio and ultimately chose to support Rubio, Musk's situation seems precarious. From the perspective of the Trump camp preparing or making initial choices, it seems that Western capital interests are also at a point where they must prepare or make initial choices. Rubio clearly leans more toward protecting the interests of the "traditional" U.S. military-industrial complex, and Trump defended him, saying he had done a "great job." For Musk, it may also be time to prepare or make initial choices: either change course and tone down his boldness or prepare to flee.

● The international community strongly warns the Trump administration against its "take all the benefits, do all the bad deeds" extortion tactics.

Before continuing the discussion, let us look at another news report.

On March 10, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) cited a press communiqué stating that the U.S. and South Korea, despite repeated warnings from North Korea, insisted on conducting large-scale joint military exercises, which are "extremely dangerous provocations pushing the tense situation on the Korean Peninsula to the limit." The communiqué also stated that the political and military confrontation between North Korea and the U.S. is nearing a critical point due to the U.S.'s warmongering actions against North Korea, and the confrontation model has become more dangerous.

Previously, we discussed the news of South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol's release. In our view, Yoon has now completely become a "puppet" in the hands of the Trump administration. If Trump orders him to stir up trouble on the Korean Peninsula, Yoon would likely not dare to say no. Trump's move is clearly intended as leverage to pressure the international community into agreeing to his visit to China. The implied message is that if the international community cooperates, Trump can defuse the "detonator" planted on the Korean Peninsula, such as allowing Yoon to retire peacefully; otherwise, don't blame him for "turning hostile"!

The international community naturally will not tolerate the Trump administration's rogue tactics. Trump's visit to China will only happen if China's conditions are met; otherwise, he can forget about it. As early as the Alaska meeting, China made it clear that the U.S. is not in a position to speak to China from a position of strength! Clearly, North Korea's strong response is the international community's stern warning to the Trump administration against playing extortion games and attempting to force the international community to cooperate with his visit.

It is worth noting that from February 11, when the frigate "Hengyang" passed through the Torres Strait, to the 055 destroyer and supply ship assembling in the Coral Sea, the Chinese fleet spent an entire month "outlining" the Australian coastline, sparking online discussions about how our fleet would "return home."

In our view, the Chinese fleet's arrival at the Sunda Strait (the French aircraft carrier came to participate in the exercise but was strongly interfered with by the Chinese fleet, especially the 815A and 055 destroyers' electronic warfare, and thus prepared to leave, taking the route through the Sunda Strait. Since the Strait of Malacca is very busy and prone to incidents, the 055 fleet's move through the Sunda Strait seems to block the way. Rumors suggest the PLA issued another notice about "target practice"! Thus, the French aircraft carrier had to wait at the Changi base for the exercise to end. Additionally, the U.S. aircraft carrier "Carl Vinson" was interfered with by a large number of Chinese "Twin-Tailed Scorpion" and "Attack-2" drones, preventing it from participating in the exercise. North Korea was even more aggressive, launching a missile into their exercise zone. For all Western countries, including Russia, their traditional air and sea superiority over China has completely vanished) can be seen as a "re-emphasis" of the international community's strong warning to the Trump administration against its "take all the benefits, do all the bad deeds" extortion tactics—the international community will not tolerate this! If the Trump administration dares to threaten the China-Europe maritime trade route at the "5-meter mark of the water pipe," such as in the Strait of Malacca, then we will make moves at the "95-meter mark of the water pipe," such as absolute control over the South China Sea! Specific measures include, but are not limited to: establishing a "maritime green light system" (covering air, sea, underwater, and even space), setting up a South China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone, and "exchanging islands for islands" (first, including the islands outside the western boundary of the Philippine territorial range at 118 degrees east longitude; second, island reclamation (Scarborough Shoal); third, the ultimate plan, the use of force to take Taiwan).

● The above discussion once again confirms our assessment from January 22: whether dealing with foreign or domestic affairs, Trump's ability to play "alliances and rivalries" depends on his ability to manage relations with China.

The international community's warnings to the Trump administration encompass not only traditional security but also non-traditional security dimensions.

We have noted that on March 8, the State Council Tariff Commission issued an announcement stating that starting March 20, 2025, a 100% tariff would be imposed on rapeseed oil, oilseed cake, and peas originating from Canada, and a 25% tariff would be imposed on aquatic products and pork from Canada. Previously, the Canadian government announced that starting October 1, 2024, a 100% tariff would be imposed on Chinese electric vehicles, and starting October 22, 2024, a 25% tariff would be imposed on Chinese steel and aluminum products.

China seeks a "crossing the river while helping others" scenario, but this does not mean it is in a strategically passive position. On the contrary, this is a method of waiting at ease, remaining calm yet active, and holding a winning hand. In other words: if the enemy does not move, I do not move; if the enemy intends to move, I act first.

In our view, Trump's imposition of tariffs on Mexico, the U.S.'s largest trading partner, and Canada, its second-largest trading partner, is not only to demand their cooperation on issues like drugs and immigration but also to pressure these countries into joining a so-called "tariff alliance against China." After discerning the Trump administration's sinister intentions, China's imposition of heavy tariffs on Canada (a 100% tariff, which is very rare and almost equivalent to expelling Canada from the Chinese market) serves as a preemptive warning to Canada and Mexico not to follow the U.S. in waging a trade war against China. This, of course, also indirectly raises the "threshold" for Canada and Mexico to negotiate with the U.S.

After "baring its teeth" at China, as all parties saw that U.S.-China relations not only did not ease but instead worsened, Trump was horrified to find that not only Canada and Mexico were difficult to deal with, but also the EU, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel, and even Iran. Before concluding this review, let us look at one final news report.

On March 9, China's Ministry of National Defense announced that the navies of China, Iran, and Russia would conduct the "Security Bond-2025" joint exercise in early to mid-March.

In our observations and assessments, the location of the "Security Bond-2025" exercise by the Chinese, Iranian, and Russian navies is very interesting—organized and implemented near Iran's Chabahar Port. Friends familiar with the map of the Indian Ocean region will easily notice that Chabahar Port is located at the "mouth of the horn" of the Gulf of Oman, adjacent to Pakistan's Gwadar Port and is Iran's closest port to the Strait of Malacca, with a very clear directional significance.

It is evident that after Trump "bared his teeth" at China, leading all parties to see that U.S.-China relations not only did not ease but instead worsened, the Iranian authorities, whose foreign policy has been largely operating on a "capitulationist" line, also made slight adjustments. Interestingly, after U.S. President Trump recently urged Iran to negotiate with the U.S. on the nuclear issue during a U.S. media interview, otherwise facing military action, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei finally toughened up, responding that some countries want to impose their will on Iran, and Iran will absolutely not accept it.

Thus, Trump's attempt to promote so-called "new relations between Iran and Israel" to further ease U.S.-Russia relations was left hanging on the street. Russia took the opportunity to stoke the fire (eagerly anticipating a direct U.S.-China confrontation) and simultaneously raised the stakes on the Ukraine issue, along with demands on the Middle East issue, such as whether Trump would consider a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire plan based on the "Istanbul Agreement," Russia's effective return to Syria, and Trump not dragging his feet! Additionally, there is the Israeli Netanyahu government, which is causing further trouble for Trump by launching airstrikes on Lebanon, as well as the EU, eager to sit at the table to carve up Ukraine, not to mention the Gulf Arab states led by Saudi Arabia and other major Middle Eastern countries like Egypt and Turkey. The Trump administration, which should have played a "easing with the majority" in its relations with China, Europe, and Russia, has instead ended up "like a pig looking in the mirror, neither inside nor out," isolating itself as a loner.

The above discussion once again confirms our assessment from January 22: whether dealing with foreign or domestic affairs, Trump's ability to play "alliances and rivalries" depends on his ability to manage relations with China. Facts have proven that once U.S.-China relations deteriorate, not only will the Trump administration's costs of dealing with various parties externally skyrocket, but the same will likely happen domestically. Otherwise, why would there be a public clash between "Minister Ma" and Secretary of State Rubio at this juncture? The severity of the issue lies in the fact that the contradictions within the Trump camp will inevitably be keenly captured and exploited by the "enemies of the Trump faction," while for the "friends of the Trump faction" or Trump's "friends," how can a Trump administration that has turned foreign affairs, especially relations with China, into such a mess better serve their interests? Perhaps at this point, the "turning enemies into friends" process quietly "reverses"—turning "friends into enemies" (first manifested in the significant internal divisions within the Trump camp). Perhaps it won't be long before the Trump administration inevitably reaches the point of a humiliating exit. If Trump refuses to step down at this point, then if another bullet were to fly, would it coincidentally only graze Trump's earlobe again?

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