2025年3月14日，星期五，第1203期

东方点评，中、俄、伊三国副外长聚首北京讨论伊核问题

【媒体报道】

中方将于3月14日举行伊朗核问题中俄伊北京会晤。外交部副部长马朝旭将主持会议，俄罗斯副外长里亚布科夫、伊朗副外长加里布阿巴迪来京出席，三方将就伊朗核问题及其他共同关心的问题交换意见。

【讨论纪要】

●一种“并不常见”的讨论伊核问题的“新模式”

在今天的回顾正式展开前，我们先来看一则非常有趣的新闻报道。

中国外交部发言人宣布：中方将于3月14日举行伊朗核问题中俄伊北京会晤。外交部副部长马朝旭将主持会议，俄罗斯副外长里亚布科夫、伊朗副外长加里布阿巴迪来京出席，三方将就伊朗核问题及其他共同关心的问题交换意见。

在我们的观察与评估中，中、俄、伊三方在北京就伊核问题进行讨论是此前刚刚结束的三国“和平纽带-2025”联合海上军事演习的延续。应该说，中、俄、伊三方聚在一起，尤其是在北京，一起讨论伊核问题，并不常见。

所谓“并不常见”，言外之意就是，显然这种讨论伊核问题的模式，某种意义上，是一种“新模式”。与之相对的是传统意义上的伊核问题六方会谈机制（中、美、俄、法、英、德）以及伊朗单独与西方就伊核问题沟通的相关机制。值得一提的是，这个“新模式”显然是由国际社会主导的，而将“国际社会主导”上升到最高层次就是“上合”。有趣的是，北京是中国的首都，而中国是上合组织的核心成员和缔造国之一。显然，伊朗，尤其是俄罗斯，有意拿“伊核问题上合机制” 叫板西方。

伊朗本就是中东地区主要国家之一，也是俄罗斯在中东地区施加影响力的主要“抓手”。在叙利亚阿萨德政权被颠覆后，俄罗斯和伊朗一直都在谋求实质性返回叙利亚。在叙利亚局势发生巨变的第一时间，东方时事解读就明确指出，且在此后多次反复强调，俄罗斯和伊朗唯一能够有效重返叙利亚的途径只有“回归上合”。也就是在中俄联手稳定中亚的基础上，以伊朗为战略支点，将与美帝博弈的“前线”一把推到中东，具体说就是有“中东十字路口”之称的叙利亚。

显然，这次伊朗，尤其是俄罗斯与中国一道，在北京讨论伊核问题，就是把这种可能性摔在特朗普政府的面前。

●尽管俄罗斯仍对西方抱有不切实际的政治幻想，但想要轻易让俄罗斯决策层签下“明斯克协议”V2.0版显然并非易事

在继续展开讨论之前，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

3月13日，俄罗斯总统普京表示，同意美国关于在乌克兰停止军事行动的提议，但停火必须是走向长期和平，走向危机根源的消除。

普京强调称，停火（与乌克兰）这一构想本身是正确的，我们当然是支持的，但有一些问题我们需要讨论，那么，这30天（停火）将用来做什么呢？用来在乌克兰继续强制征兵？用来向那里输送武器吗？用于动员的新部队训练吗？抑或上述情况均不会发生？那么，问题来了：怎么做呢，监督、核查问题将如何去解决？我们如何能够以及通过何种方式确保上述情况不会发生？如何建立监督？

从俄罗斯总统普京就停火一事的具体表态，尤其是提出若干“细节”有待推敲来看，俄方对于停火只给出了“愿意考虑”的态度，而并未接受。值得一提的是，特朗普政府似乎有意拷贝“明斯克协议”，以默认俄罗斯重新夺回库尔斯克地区为代价，换取俄罗斯释放被围困的乌军（北约）重兵集团。如果俄罗斯决策层最终同意，在我们看来，其本质就是“明斯克协议”V2.0版。

尽管如此，但从普京有关“核心就是永久停火，且解决战争导致的根源”的说法来看，尽管俄罗斯仍对西方抱有不切实际的政治幻想，但想要轻易让俄罗斯决策层签下“明斯克协议”V2.0版显然并非易事。俄方的意思至少可以理解为，尽管俄罗斯仍然愿意和美国“交易”，但在满足俄方条件之前，俄乌战争之“进行时”的状态恐怕不会有本质改变。而俄方的表态之所以较为“委婉”，则完全因为目前西方仍在炒作俄方“要打不谈”的舆论氛围，所以，类似“谈不好就继续打”这样的意思，俄方至少现在不会公开明确表示。从俄方的具体行动来看，恐怕某种意义上比公开明确表示还要严重：

第一，俄罗斯与中国和伊朗举行“和平纽带-2025”联合海上军事演习；

第二，拉着伊朗在北京和上合组织的核心成员和原始缔约国之一的中国大谈特谈“伊核协议”；

第三，明确暗示美国，如果美国不愿帮助俄罗斯有效重返叙利亚，俄罗斯还有其他选择！

需要补充的是，目前阶段，因为美国内部恶斗日益激烈，特朗普政府为了稳固地位，对国内那些信奉“极端犹太复国主义”的，和内塔尼亚胡有着千丝万缕联系的传统军工复合体（“关键少数”）的依赖性越来越大。反映在美以关系上就表现为特朗普政府对内塔尼亚胡小集团可谓“言听计从”。但在内塔尼亚胡小集团看来，他们可不会对这样的特朗普政府感恩戴德，反而只将其看作是自己巩固政权，实现所谓“大以色列梦”的千载难逢的好机会。换言之，在实现所谓“大以色列梦”之前，内塔尼亚胡小集团没有理由帮助特朗普政府进一步稳固政权。

从这一点看，中东局势，短期内显然无解。如果真的这样走下去，特朗普政府的中东政策必然会走到成为“孤家寡人”的那一天。俄罗斯指望这样的美国有效重返叙利亚显然并不现实。所以，具体反映在乌克兰问题上，俄罗斯当然不会轻易去签署什么协议，俄罗斯此时此刻的心态和以色列类似，在切实拿到特朗普协助有效重返叙利亚之前，同样没有理由帮助特朗普政府进一步稳固政权。

●这才是俄罗斯“有效重返叙利亚”的正确打开方式

中东地区长期处于战乱之中，根本谈不上和平和发展。以沙特为例，沙特也只能做一个“卖油翁”。而他们从西方（欧美）花大价钱购置的武器只能用于“内部争斗”——中东国家之间互相打来打去可以，但只要涉及以色列，这些武器就会立刻变为“烧火棍”（以色列这么多年能够在中东横行霸道的主要原因之一）。

当年胡塞武装和沙特交恶，时常发生武装冲突，而每每沙特军队占据上风，即将消灭胡塞武装之际，美国人总会及时干预，要求沙特“得饶人处且饶人”。天下人都知道，胡塞武装和当年的基地组织类似，都是美国人一手扶植的，这就是养寇自重。值得一提的是，胡塞武装一度也是“美帝手上一块砖”，类似当年伊拉克的萨达姆政权。萨达姆时期的伊拉克是少数逊尼派掌权统治什叶派穆斯林的国家（一场两伊战争让美国军工复合体赚得盆满钵满）。

类似情况还有阿萨德时期的叙利亚，是少数什叶派掌权统治的逊尼派穆斯林国的国家。只有这样，这些身为统治者的少数派才容易被美国所控制，如果他们想要继续维持统治就必须接受美国的“帮助”。

所以，如果俄方能够将和中国实质性联手稳定中亚，在有效“重启”上合的基础上，依托伊朗为战略支点，将与西方博弈的“前线”一把推到中东地区彻底贯彻施行，而非将其作为和特朗普政府讨价还价的筹码，则不仅可以获得来自国际社会的全面战略策应，更可以获得一众中东国家的理解和支持。这才是俄罗斯“有效重返叙利亚”的正确打开方式。

●中国虽然致力于“河渡人”，但绝不会为“河渡人”放弃任何原则立场

在进一步展开讨论前，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

中国国务院台办发言人陈斌华13日表示，赖清德今天召开所谓“国安高层会议”并在会后讲话中，再度宣扬两岸“互不隶属”的分裂谬论，妄称“台湾是一个主权独立的民主国家”，极力渲染“大陆威胁”，将大陆界定为“境外敌对势力”，并抛出所谓“因应五方面威胁”的“17项策略”“台独”立场之顽固、挑衅对抗之猖狂，再度证明其是不折不扣的“两岸和平破坏者”“台海危机制造者”。

不难看出，“台独”当局摆出这样一副“鱼死网破”的姿态，必然是特朗普政府怂恿。特朗普政府无非想通过要向中国政府传递“实在不行，台湾问题美国放任不管”的政治信号讹诈中国，暗示，如果中国拒不配合，随时可能发生“台独”重大事变。

对此，中国的回应非常明确，那就是：中国虽然致力于“河渡人”，但绝不会为“河渡人”放弃任何原则立场：

第一，台湾问题不与美国谈。无论是特朗普政府此前炒作的“放弃台湾”论也好，还是“作价将台湾贱卖给中国”论也罢，中国是一律不予理睬。台湾就是中国的一个省，台湾问题是纯粹的中国内政问题，这没什么好谈的；

第二，中国可以默认特朗普政府去搞“红巨星效应”，但必须满足中国提出的条件；

第三，所谓“条件”，或者谈“落地执行”层面的“太平洋足够大，容得下中美两国”，或者谈“南海问题”（观察点在菲律宾前总统杜特尔特被捕事件后续发展）。在我们的观察与评估中，今天特朗普政府怂恿“台独”跳得越高，作为“一枚硬币的两面”，后续走投无路之际做出的让步就会越大。因为其核心目的就是要强行换取一张访华的“机票”。

第四，需要提醒大家的是，无论目前国际社会的战略处境优势有多大，但特朗普政府选择“孤注一掷、战略冒险”与选择或主动或被动接受“河渡人”的比率仍然是50%对50%。也就是说，国际社会务必以做最坏准备为基础争取最好的结果。甚至某种意义上说，在特朗普政府为代表的美国当局空前处于内焦外困之际，现在，其选择“孤注一掷、战略冒险”的苗头已经出现。

●特朗普的第二总统任期，可以毫不夸张地说，他是带着“复仇之心”回来的，且为达目的不惜付出一切代价

通过前几个小节的讨论，大家不难发现，特朗普政府无论在乌克兰方向，中东方向，还是西太方向，都在做“明知不可为而为之”的事情。为什么会这样呢？恐怕唯一的解释就是：美国的死活在特朗普和“特朗普们”的眼中，与其无关！用凯恩斯的名言：“我死之后管他洪水滔天”来形容，再恰当不过了。

在我们看来，特朗普和“特朗普们”真正关心的也许只有两件事：第一，不遗余力地在这4年任期内实现专制统治，像当年纳粹德国的元首，阿道夫·希特勒那样，以此确保4年后不会再次遭受残酷的政治清算；第二，不遗余力地赚钱，以此确保4年后继续享受荣华富贵。

而要想实现这两点的诀窍就是：其一，对内不断实现“化敌为友”；其二，在“其一”的基础上，不断阻止“化友为敌”；其三，在“其二”的基础上，“做大蛋糕”；其四，在“其三”的基础上，公开、史无前例的“开启印钞机”；其五，在“其四”的基础上，务必处理好中美关系。

值得一提的是，在我们的观察与评估中，特朗普以及“特朗普们”在实现上述极度自私自利的目标的整个过程中，传统意义的那个以统一形态存在的美利坚合众国可能被彻底摧毁。从这个角度去观察特朗普的第二总统任期，可以毫不夸张地说，他是带着“复仇之心”回来的，且为达目的不惜付出一切代价。甚至必要时刻，牺牲现在特朗普政府一味迎合的内塔尼亚胡小集团也不在话下。恰恰因此，美国内部恶斗的后续走向带有极大的不确定性。

●在“到底是谁想暗杀，事后又由谁来背锅”的问题上，特朗普不妨仔细琢磨琢磨！

在本次回顾的最后，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

3月14日，美国五角大楼前顾问、退役上校道格拉斯·麦格雷戈表示，基辅可能会暗杀美国总统特朗普。

在“到底是谁想暗杀，事后又由谁来背锅”的问题上，特朗普不妨仔细琢磨琢磨！在我们看来，“背锅侠A”似乎已经准备好了，那就是乌克兰泽连斯基政府。“背锅侠B”似乎也准备好了，那就是伊朗。显然，这则由美国五角大楼前顾问释放的令人毛骨悚然的消息，首先意味着美国内部已经有人对上任两个月，无论是对内还是对外均交了“白卷”的特朗普发出严厉警告。其中也许就包括近期因美国股市暴跌导致亏钱的华尔街的一部分人。至少意味着，随着这一警告的发出，暗杀特朗普的阻力变小了。当然，被一并警告的还有“马部长”。

此外，在我们看来，这也是对乌克兰泽连斯基政府和俄罗斯普京政府发出的警告。如果真的局势发展到“不仅‘蛋糕’没了，连‘烤箱’也都毁了”的地步，恐怕是真的要死人的。

在这里，尤其需要提醒俄罗斯决策层的是，如果俄罗斯总统普京被干掉，目前特朗普政府遭遇的困境也能缓解相当程度。至少，将俄罗斯做成“蛋糕”并瓜分之的故事是可以吸引到一大批人并阶段性缓解美国日益加剧的内部矛盾的。所以，某种意义上，俄罗斯总统普京以及“普京的身边人”比特朗普的处境更危险。在一些人眼中，无论是特朗普，还是普京，人死了，水搅浑，也许一些事情就能迎来转机。

对国际社会而言，这意味未来一段时间，国际局势的后续发展将更加具有不确定性。且首先就源自美国日益复杂化、白热化的内斗恶斗。为此，国际社会务必做好最坏打算，随时准备启动“最低限度经济内循环”。从这个角度来说，也许目前已经让大家感到有些心力交瘁的眼下或仍是相对较好的情况。或者说，相对于情况更糟的局面，眼下不过是刚刚开始。当然，以此做好最坏打算为基础，争取最好结果的可能性一样存在。那就是，特朗普政府极限战略讹诈失败，不得不重归客观层面的“河渡人”，这样一来，我们就有充裕的时间继续完成结构调整和产业升级。中华民族伟大复兴，将引导全世界走上“一带一路”与共同发展，而这是目前我们能观察到的人类社会可能健康发展的唯一出路。

声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

Friday, March 14, 2025, Issue No. 1203

Deputy Foreign Ministers of China, Russia, and Iran Gather in Beijing to Discuss the Iranian Nuclear Issue

[Media Coverage]

China will host a trilateral meeting on the Iranian nuclear issue in Beijing on March 14, involving China, Russia, and Iran. Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu will chair the meeting, with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi attending. The three parties will exchange views on the Iranian nuclear issue and other matters of mutual concern.

【Discussion Summary】

● A "Not So Common" New Model for Discussing the Iranian Nuclear Issue

Before we begin today’s discussion, let’s first look at a very interesting news report.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson announced that China will host a trilateral meeting on the Iranian nuclear issue in Beijing on March 14, involving China, Russia, and Iran. Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu will chair the meeting, with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi attending. The three parties will exchange views on the Iranian nuclear issue and other matters of mutual concern.

In our observations and assessments, the trilateral discussion between China, Russia, and Iran in Beijing on the Iranian nuclear issue is a continuation of the recently concluded "Peace Bond-2025" joint naval exercise involving the three countries. It must be said that it is not common for China, Russia, and Iran to gather together, especially in Beijing, to discuss the Iranian nuclear issue.

The phrase "not so common" implies that this model of discussing the Iranian nuclear issue is, in a sense, a "new model." This stands in contrast to the traditional mechanisms, such as the six-party talks on the Iranian nuclear issue (involving China, the U.S., Russia, France, the U.K., and Germany) and Iran’s separate communication channels with the West on the issue. It is worth noting that this "new model" is clearly led by the international community, with the highest level of "international community leadership" being the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Interestingly, Beijing is the capital of China, and China is a core member and founding nation of the SCO. Clearly, Iran, and especially Russia, are using the "SCO mechanism on the Iranian nuclear issue" to challenge the West.

Iran is one of the major countries in the Middle East and a key leverage point for Russia’s influence in the region. After the overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria, Russia and Iran have been seeking to substantially return to Syria. At the time of the dramatic changes in the Syrian situation, Eastern Commentary immediately pointed out, and has repeatedly emphasized since, that the only effective way for Russia and Iran to return to Syria is to "return to the SCO." That is, based on China and Russia jointly stabilizing Central Asia, using Iran as a strategic pivot to push the "frontline" of their confrontation with the U.S. to the Middle East, specifically Syria, known as the "crossroads of the Middle East."

Clearly, this time, Iran, and especially Russia, are discussing the Iranian nuclear issue with China in Beijing, throwing this possibility in the face of the Trump administration.

● Despite Russia’s Continued Unrealistic Political Fantasies About the West, It Will Not Be Easy to Get the Russian Decision-Makers to Sign a "Minsk Agreement 2.0"

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

On March 13, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that he agrees with the U.S. proposal to halt military operations in Ukraine, but the ceasefire must lead to long-term peace and address the root causes of the crisis.

Putin emphasized that the idea of a ceasefire (with Ukraine) is correct in itself, and Russia certainly supports it, but there are some issues that need to be discussed. What will these 30 days (of ceasefire) be used for? To continue forced conscription in Ukraine? To send weapons there? To train newly mobilized troops? Or will none of the above happen? Then, the question arises: how will it be done? How will supervision and verification issues be resolved? How can we ensure that the above situations do not occur? How will supervision be established?

From Russian President Putin’s specific statements on the ceasefire, especially the need to scrutinize certain "details," it is clear that Russia has only expressed a "willingness to consider" the ceasefire and has not accepted it. It is worth noting that the Trump administration seems to be copying the "Minsk Agreement," offering to tacitly allow Russia to retake the Kursk region in exchange for Russia releasing the besieged Ukrainian (NATO) heavy forces. If the Russian decision-makers ultimately agree, in our view, this would essentially be a "Minsk Agreement 2.0."

Nevertheless, based on Putin’s statement that "the core is a permanent ceasefire and resolving the root causes of the war," despite Russia’s continued unrealistic political fantasies about the West, it will not be easy to get the Russian decision-makers to sign a "Minsk Agreement 2.0." Russia’s stance can at least be understood as follows: although Russia is still willing to "make a deal" with the U.S., the ongoing state of the Russia-Ukraine war is unlikely to fundamentally change until Russia’s conditions are met. The reason for Russia’s relatively "diplomatic" tone is entirely due to the current Western media narrative that Russia "wants to fight, not talk." Therefore, Russia will not publicly and explicitly state that "if talks fail, we will continue to fight," at least not now. From Russia’s specific actions, this might be even more serious than an explicit statement:

First, Russia conducted the "Peace Bond-2025" joint naval exercise with China and Iran;

Second, it brought Iran to Beijing to discuss the "Iran nuclear deal" with China, a core member and founding nation of the SCO;

Third, it explicitly hinted to the U.S. that if the U.S. is unwilling to help Russia effectively return to Syria, Russia has other options!

It should be added that at this stage, as internal strife in the U.S. intensifies, the Trump administration’s reliance on the traditional military-industrial complex (the "critical minority") that adheres to "extreme Zionism" and has close ties to Netanyahu is growing. This is reflected in U.S.-Israel relations, where the Trump administration is essentially "taking orders" from the Netanyahu clique. However, the Netanyahu clique does not feel grateful to such a Trump administration; instead, they see it as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to consolidate their regime and realize the so-called "Greater Israel Dream." In other words, before realizing the "Greater Israel Dream," the Netanyahu clique has no reason to help the Trump administration further stabilize its position.

From this perspective, the Middle East situation is clearly unsolvable in the short term. If this continues, the Trump administration’s Middle East policy will inevitably reach a point where it becomes "isolated." It is unrealistic for Russia to expect such a U.S. to effectively return to Syria. Therefore, specifically in the Ukraine issue, Russia will not easily sign any agreement. Russia’s current mindset is similar to Israel’s: before securing Trump’s assistance to effectively return to Syria, it has no reason to help the Trump administration further stabilize its position.

● This Is the Correct Way for Russia to "Effectively Return to Syria"

The Middle East has long been in a state of war and chaos, with no peace or development to speak of. Take Saudi Arabia, for example: it can only be an "oil seller." The weapons they purchase at great cost from the West (Europe and the U.S.) can only be used for "internal conflicts"—Middle Eastern countries can fight each other, but as soon as Israel is involved, these weapons immediately become "firewood" (one of the main reasons Israel has been able to dominate the Middle East for so many years).

When the Houthi rebels and Saudi Arabia were at odds, armed conflicts often occurred, and every time the Saudi military gained the upper hand and was about to eliminate the Houthi rebels, the Americans would always intervene in time, urging Saudi Arabia to "be lenient." Everyone knows that the Houthi rebels, like al-Qaeda in the past, were nurtured by the Americans—this is the strategy of "raising bandits to enhance one’s own importance." It is worth noting that the Houthi rebels were once a "brick in the hands of the U.S. empire," similar to Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq. Iraq under Saddam was one of the few countries where a Sunni minority ruled over a Shia Muslim majority (the Iran-Iraq war made the U.S. military-industrial complex a fortune).

A similar situation existed in Syria under Assad, where a Shia minority ruled over a Sunni Muslim majority. Only in this way could these ruling minorities be easily controlled by the U.S.—if they wanted to continue their rule, they had to accept American "assistance."

Therefore, if Russia can effectively "restart" the SCO by substantively cooperating with China to stabilize Central Asia, using Iran as a strategic pivot to push the "frontline" of their confrontation with the West to the Middle East and fully implement it, rather than using it as a bargaining chip with the Trump administration, it will not only gain comprehensive strategic support from the international community but also the understanding and support of numerous Middle Eastern countries. This is the correct way for Russia to "effectively return to Syria."

● Although China Is Committed to "Crossing the River by Feeling the Stones," It Will Never Abandon Any Principles for the Sake of It

Before furthering the discussion, let’s look at another news report.

On March 13, Chinese State Council Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Chen Binhua stated that Lai Ching-te, during a so-called "national security high-level meeting" and in his subsequent speech, once again propagated the separatist fallacy of "mutual non-subordination" between the two sides of the strait, absurdly claiming that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent democratic country," and vigorously hyped up the "mainland threat," defining the mainland as an "external hostile force." He also proposed a so-called "17-point strategy to address five threats," demonstrating his stubborn "Taiwan independence" stance and brazen provocation and confrontation. This once again proves that he is an out-and-out "destroyer of cross-strait peace" and "creator of the Taiwan Strait crisis."

It is not hard to see that the "Taiwan independence" authorities’ "fight to the death" posture is undoubtedly encouraged by the Trump administration. The Trump administration is simply trying to send a political signal to the Chinese government that "if push comes to shove, the U.S. will wash its hands of the Taiwan issue," implying that if China refuses to cooperate, a major "Taiwan independence" incident could occur at any time.

In response, China’s stance is very clear: although China is committed to "crossing the river by feeling the stones," it will never abandon any principles for the sake of it:

First, China will not discuss the Taiwan issue with the U.S. Whether it is the Trump administration’s earlier hype about "abandoning Taiwan" or the idea of "selling Taiwan cheaply to China," China will ignore it all. Taiwan is a province of China, and the Taiwan issue is purely China’s internal affair—there is nothing to discuss;

Second, China can tacitly allow the Trump administration to pursue the "red giant effect," but it must meet the conditions set by China;

Third, the so-called "conditions" either pertain to the "implementation level" of "the Pacific Ocean being big enough to accommodate both China and the U.S." or to the "South China Sea issue" (the observation point being the follow-up to the arrest of former Philippine President Duterte). In our observations and assessments, the higher the "Taiwan independence" forces jump under the Trump administration’s encouragement, the greater the concessions they will make when they are ultimately cornered. This is because their core goal is to forcibly secure a "ticket" to visit China.

Fourth, it is necessary to remind everyone that no matter how advantageous the international community’s strategic position is, the probability of the Trump administration choosing to "go all out, take strategic risks" versus choosing to accept "crossing the river by feeling the stones," whether actively or passively, remains 50-50. In other words, the international community must prepare for the worst while striving for the best outcome. In a sense, with the Trump administration, representing the U.S. authorities, being unprecedentedly plagued by internal and external troubles, the signs of them choosing to "go all out, take strategic risks" have already emerged.

● Trump’s Second Presidential Term: It’s No Exaggeration to Say He Has Returned with a "Revengeful Heart," Willing to Pay Any Price to Achieve His Goals

Through the discussions in the previous sections, it is not hard to see that the Trump administration is doing things that are "knowingly impossible" in Ukraine, the Middle East, and the Western Pacific. Why is this? The only explanation is probably that the life or death of the U.S. is irrelevant to Trump and the "Trump faction"! As Keynes famously said, "In the long run, we are all dead," and this is an apt description of their attitude.

In our view, Trump and the "Trump faction" may only truly care about two things: first, sparing no effort to achieve authoritarian rule within this four-year term, like Adolf Hitler, the Führer of Nazi Germany, to ensure they do not suffer brutal political purges again in four years; second, sparing no effort to make money, to ensure they can continue to enjoy wealth and luxury in four years.

The trick to achieving these two goals is: first, to constantly "turn enemies into friends" internally; second, on the basis of the first, to constantly prevent "turning friends into enemies"; third, on the basis of the second, to "make the cake bigger"; fourth, on the basis of the third, to openly and unprecedentedly "turn on the printing press"; fifth, on the basis of the fourth, to properly handle China-U.S. relations.

It is worth noting that in our observations and assessments, in the entire process of Trump and the "Trump faction" achieving these extremely selfish goals, the traditional United States of America, existing as a unified entity, may be completely destroyed. From this perspective, it is no exaggeration to say that Trump has returned with a "revengeful heart" in his second presidential term, willing to pay any price to achieve his goals. Even sacrificing the Netanyahu clique, which the Trump administration is currently catering to, is not out of the question. Precisely because of this, the future direction of internal strife in the U.S. carries a great deal of uncertainty.

● On the Question of "Who Wants to Assassinate and Who Will Take the Blame Afterwards," Trump Should Carefully Consider!

At the end of this review, let’s look at another news report.

On March 14, former U.S. Pentagon advisor and retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor stated that Kyiv might assassinate U.S. President Trump.

On the question of "who wants to assassinate and who will take the blame afterwards," Trump should carefully consider! In our view, "Scapegoat A" seems ready, and that is the Ukrainian Zelensky government. "Scapegoat B" also seems ready, and that is Iran. Clearly, this chilling news released by a former U.S. Pentagon advisor first means that some within the U.S. have issued a stern warning to Trump, who has handed in a "blank paper" both internally and externally after two months in office. This may include some on Wall Street who have recently lost money due to the U.S. stock market crash. At the very least, it means that with this warning, the obstacles to assassinating Trump have been reduced. Of course, "Secretary Ma" has also been warned.

In addition, in our view, this is also a warning to the Ukrainian Zelensky government and the Russian Putin government. If the situation really develops to the point where "not only is the cake gone, but the oven is also destroyed," people might really die.

Here, it is especially necessary to remind the Russian decision-makers that if Russian President Putin is taken out, the current difficulties faced by the Trump administration could also be alleviated to a considerable extent. At the very least, the story of turning Russia into a "cake" and dividing it could attract a large number of people and temporarily ease the increasingly intense internal contradictions in the U.S. Therefore, in a sense, Russian President Putin and "those around Putin" are in a more dangerous position than Trump. In the eyes of some, whether it is Trump or Putin, if they die and the water is muddied, perhaps some things could take a turn for the better.

For the international community, this means that in the future, the subsequent development of the international situation will become even more uncertain, and it will first stem from the increasingly complex and intense internal strife in the U.S. Therefore, the international community must prepare for the worst and be ready to launch the "minimum economic internal cycle" at any time. From this perspective, perhaps the current situation, which has already left everyone feeling somewhat exhausted, is still relatively good. Or, compared to a worse situation, the current situation is just the beginning. Of course, based on preparing for the worst, the possibility of striving for the best outcome still exists. That is, the Trump administration’s extreme strategic blackmail fails, and it has to return to the objective "crossing the river by feeling the stones." In this way, we will have ample time to continue completing structural adjustments and industrial upgrades. The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation will guide the world onto the "Belt and Road" and common development, which is the only viable path for the healthy development of human society that we can currently observe.

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