2024年12月26日，星期四，第1141期

东方点评，有外媒报道称，应塞尔维亚要求上合组织，首支哈萨克斯坦反恐部队将进驻塞尔维亚

【媒体报道】

12月25日，“大熊星座”号干货船的船东俄罗斯国防物流公司表示，“大熊星座”号在地中海沉没的原因是遭到恐怖袭击。

12月25日，有外媒称，应塞尔维亚要求上合组织，首支哈萨克斯坦反恐部队将进驻塞尔维亚。

12月26日，俄罗斯联邦安全局官员阻止了一起由乌克兰情报部门招募的特工人员企图在莫斯科州实施的恐怖袭击事件。

【讨论纪要】

●再次强调，俄方若就“蒙古问题”作为“愿意共同解决历史遗留问题”之切入点，诚意尚可，但仍显务虚

当前白俄罗斯的情况比较危急。目前，有关卢卡申科访华的具体行程尚未有官方公布。在我们看来，第一，中国、俄罗斯和白俄罗斯之间，有些问题还没有协调妥当；第二，在“第一”的基础上，之所以有消息传出，至少说明白俄罗斯，也许还有俄罗斯，想要借“卢卡申科于2024年年底紧急访俄，尤其是访华”一事的“吹风”给西方发信号，给对方上压力。值得一提的是，外媒开始广泛关注卢卡申科年底紧急出访俄罗斯，尤其是中国一事。有外媒指出，普京已经护不住白俄罗斯了，中国曾经帮过白俄罗斯一次，是否还要再帮第二次？显然，这个信号，西方接收到了。

在我们看来，之所以西方对此事如此关注，其中一个主要原因就在于，叙利亚阿萨德政权被颠覆后，西方（拜登政府）对俄罗斯进一步施加战略压力的焦点集中于白俄罗斯，这使得白俄罗斯战略处境空前恶化，为此，俄罗斯不得不对中国有所让步。所以，12月8日，阿萨德政权刚刚被颠覆，12月11日，俄罗斯二号政治人物梅德韦杰夫便紧急访华。

有趣的是，12月12日，梅德韦杰夫参观中国共产党历史展览馆，并称呼我方为“同志”。在我们看来，此举应是有意为之，或在向西方传递某种明确信号——尽管俄罗斯现在困难，但绝没有当年中国共产党的革命历程困难，也没有当年新中国抗美援朝时期困难。

当然，客观地说，中俄双方就进一步展开合作的意愿是明确的，但具体事情应落实到什么程度，如何落实，还要详细谈。有意思的是，在梅德韦杰夫访华结束的第二天，也就是12月14日，俄罗斯总统普京在统一俄罗斯党代表大会上强调，俄罗斯不仅要在军事领域捍卫自己，还要在文化、经济、教育等各个方面进行全面反击，绝不容忍西方国家对俄罗斯的挑战。在我们看来，普京的这番言论侧面证实，双方的确就“具体事情应落实到什么程度，如何落实”这一问题达成了某些共识。后来就传出了“俄方愿意同中方一道解决历史遗留问题”的消息。

“俄方愿意同中方一道解决历史遗留问题”，在我们看来，不会涉及中俄领土划定问题。否则，很可能会影响到普京政权的稳定。所以，对方基于政治层面可以再“历史遗留问题”做文章的只有蒙古问题。蒙古问题的本质是，当年美苏在二战结束后，基于“美苏G2模式”之“雅尔塔体系”，就中国核心利益私相授受，蒋介石国民政府被迫接受蒙古独立，作为二战战胜国，中国反而成为受害者。对此，我们的看法是，诚意尚可，但仍显务虚（比如，需要较长时间处理）。

●长期以来，包括塞尔维亚，尤其是中亚国家，经常出现社会不稳定情况，根本原因在于俄罗斯始终不愿选择与中国实质性联手

12月25日，我们注意到，数百名大学生再次在贝尔格莱德进行集会，抗议总统武契奇及其领导的执政党塞尔维亚进步党的政策，他们指责该党应为上月造成15人死亡的铁路事故负责。

可以肯定，这是西方搞的名堂。大家知道，塞尔维亚对中、俄关系均较为特殊。2024年5月8日，*******在贝尔格莱德塞尔维亚大厦同塞尔维亚总统武契奇共同宣布，中塞双方构建新时代中塞命运共同体。国际社会有意将塞尔维亚打造成“欧洲的义乌”。塞尔维亚有丰富的铜矿、锂矿。塞尔维亚的旁边就是匈牙利，而匈牙利又对新能源车产业很上心，所以，塞尔维亚对国际社会在欧洲布局电动车产业链具有重大意义。此外，塞维尔亚与俄罗斯同属斯拉夫文化体系，也是俄罗斯在欧洲的唯一“桥头堡”。

某种意义上说，本次塞尔维亚国内局势出现不稳定迹象，是从2007年发展至今的科索沃独立进程的后续发展。长期以来，尤其是中亚国家，包括塞尔维亚经常出现社会不稳定情况，根本原因在于俄罗斯始终不愿选择与中国实质性联手，这些国家可谓深受其害。这种情况始终让西方有机会在这些国家兴风作浪，以至于这些国家不得不采取相对平衡的外交政策“在几个鸡蛋上跳舞”。而这不仅让俄罗斯自己反受其害，而且我们也经常因此受到连带压力。

●中、俄、哈三方基于越来越多的共同利益交集共同促使中亚地区稳定，是“中俄联手稳定中亚”问题上取得的重大跃进

12月25日，俄罗斯外交部发言人扎哈罗娃表示，美国敦促其公民离开白俄罗斯的做法是挑衅，旨在重要事件发生前夕加剧紧张气氛。

我们对俄罗斯外交部发言人扎哈罗娃就“美国敦促其公民离开白俄罗斯”一事，点明其意图旨在“重要事件发生前夕加剧紧张气氛”的说法表示赞同。可以说，目前白俄罗斯承压已经显性化，而且情况在迅速恶化。对此，我们再次提醒俄罗斯决策层，千万注意对方声东击西，迫使俄罗斯在防御的过程中，顾此失彼，露出破绽。

无独有偶，近日，俄罗斯联邦安全局官员阻止了一起由乌克兰情报部门招募的特工人员企图在莫斯科州实施的恐怖袭击事件。尤其是西方媒体对该起事件细节的炒作，带有刻意于俄罗斯社会制造紧张，恐慌和不满氛围的险恶意图，当然，这也是声东击西的绝佳手段。

白俄罗斯危机重重，塞尔维亚又出现不稳，如果塞尔维亚武契奇政权也被颠覆，塞尔维亚被欧盟“整合”，首先对俄罗斯而言绝不是什么好事，对我们来说也是损失。就算俄罗斯有心维护塞尔维亚，一方面由于俄罗斯距离塞尔维亚较远，救援无法迅速抵达，另一方面，进行将近3年俄乌战争的俄罗斯恐怕目前也无力救援塞尔维亚。于是，想到了哈萨克斯坦。而在我们看来，哈萨克斯坦之所以现在愿意做这件事，一方面在于西方对哈萨克斯坦也在施压，另一方面，也是最重要的是，哈萨克斯坦现在或有了“新想法”。

所谓“新想法”，在我们看来：

第一，“中吉乌铁路”项目即将动工开建，尽管哈萨克斯坦对此心中有所不满（目前中欧班列主要经过哈萨克斯坦，所以哈萨克斯坦认为，“中吉乌铁路”项目可能会分流运输，使哈萨克斯坦利益受损），但总体上仍服从于这一局面。由于“中吉乌铁路”开工建设一定经过了俄罗斯的默许，在客观上，俄罗斯与哈萨克斯坦之间的关系或会有所拉近。至于靠多近，另当别论，但有一点可以肯定，俄罗斯和哈萨克斯坦现在都离不开中国；

1. 如果说，俄方就“蒙古问题”作为“愿意共同解决历史遗留问题”之切入点，诚意尚可，但仍显务虚的话。那么在相对务实的层面，我们注意到，据英国媒体报道，在中、俄、哈三方协商下，俄罗斯原子能公司旗下的铀一集团已将其在哈萨克斯坦扎列奇诺耶铀矿的49%股份，转交给了中国核铀资源开发公司的消息出现。当然，这一消息尚待有关方的官方进一步确认；

第三，如果这一消息被证实无误，在我们看来，基于“在商言商”的层面，也算是俄方诚意在务实方面的具体表现。相应的，我们对俄罗斯的战略策应会比之以往更加有力一些（仍达不到实质性战略策应的程度）；

第四，所谓“在商言商”的意思在于，如果俄罗斯希望我们提供更有力一些的战略策应，在诸如“中俄实质性联手稳定中亚”“俄罗斯实质性放弃阿富汗政策‘小九九’”等话题得出“最终结论”之时机仍不成熟的背景下，就需要用真金白银的利益进行交换。基于此，我们认为，这一传闻的可行性是较高的；

第五，尽管目前诸如“中俄实质性联手稳定中亚”“俄罗斯实质性放弃阿富汗政策‘小九九’”等话题得出“最终结论”之时机仍不成熟，但中亚稳定问题似乎正在以另外一种形式慢慢形成，那就是中、俄、哈三方基于越来越多的共同利益交集，尤其是，对我们来说是资产，对俄罗斯来说是“后腰”的安全，对哈萨克斯坦来说是得到中俄提供的安全保障（对哈萨克斯坦来说，稳定最重要。而想要实现稳定，唯一途径就是依靠中俄，依靠上合），共同促使中亚地区稳定。所以，这一变化虽然距离质变层面还有距离，但可以看作量变层面的一种重大跃进；

第六，综上五点，或是哈萨克斯坦愿意向塞尔维亚部署部队的主要原因之一。值得注意的是，有媒体报道，本次哈萨克斯坦向塞尔维亚派遣特种部队，是在塞尔维亚向上合请求下，基于“反恐”进行的。值得一提的是，2001年6月15日成立的上合，哈萨克斯坦是创始成员国之一。如果俄罗斯最终选择与中国实质性联手，那么上合就会被有效“重启”，一旦如此，中俄共同组成“党小组核心”（类似于，党组书记），包括哈萨克斯坦在内的创始成员国将成为“党小组核心成员”（类似于，党组成员）。

●这种战略策应的核心就在于，西方惧怕中国的战争机器介入俄乌战争，且明显有侧重

在以上的基础上，我们再去回顾白俄罗斯总统卢卡申科2024年年底紧急访俄，尤其是访华这件事，也就不难明白为什么有关事宜尚未敲定，白俄罗斯（俄罗斯）方面就大张旗鼓进行“吹风”了。

值得一提的是，今年7月举行的中白“雄鹰突击-2024”陆军联合训练（地点在白俄罗斯与波兰边境的布列斯特地区进行，也就是在北约“家门口”演习，指向性非常明确）对西方的震慑作用非常明显，有传闻称，中白军演刚拦截完27枚高超音声导弹，紧接着“免费陪练”出现，乌克兰向白俄罗斯发射北约各型先进导弹24枚，无人机十余架，皆被成功拦截！所以，西方媒体高度关注白俄罗斯总统卢卡申科2024年年底紧急访俄，尤其是访华的过程中再次提出中国会否第二次保护白俄罗斯的问题也就不足为奇了。这本身就是对俄罗斯的一种强大战略策应，也展现出我方与俄方进一步展开合作的诚意。

12月25日，我们注意到俄罗斯方面将俄罗斯国防物流公司所属“大熊星座”号在地中海沉没的原因归结为恐怖袭击的新闻报道。

在我们看来，俄方这一表态意味着俄罗斯方面就乌克兰问题仍然没有放弃对西方不切实际的政治幻想，俄方还在满心期待特朗普上台后会有新的变化出现。这是我们认为俄罗斯距离最终选择与中国实质性联手问题上还有距离的原因之一。

所以我们再次强调，俄罗斯是白俄罗斯国家安全的“第一责任人”，而对于白俄罗斯的态度仍然像我们在上一次讨论中所说的那样：

1. 绝不坐视西方邪恶势力对白俄罗斯进行军事挑衅、军事入侵、在白俄罗斯社会内部制造动荡、混乱，甚至颠覆白俄罗斯现有政权；

1. 坚决支持白俄罗斯动用一切手段捍卫国家主权独立、领土完整与国家安全；

1. 在“第一”“第二”的基础上，将给予白俄罗斯一切可能的帮助。

至于其他的，比如，说出一句“任何人试图武力解决俄罗斯问题的后果不可想象”，这个话不好说。再说白一些，基于“俄罗斯距离最终选择与中国实质性联手问题上还有距离”，我们不会让“理应”由俄罗斯主导的白俄罗斯保卫战变成“不应”由中国主导的白俄罗斯保卫战。当然，这不代表PLA绝不会再次前往白俄罗斯，比如，PLA“二出白俄罗斯”，再多留下一些武器装备也是可以考虑。如果白俄罗斯方面需要无人机、反无人机、情报支援体系、卫星导航等设备和支撑，我们也可以考虑。至于白俄罗斯给谁用我们无需考虑。对此，白俄罗斯可以充分发挥想象空间，可劲儿的宣传。

对于我们自己，当然相关的准备还是要做扎实，比如，目前仍在低调进行的“围台军演”，只做不说，至于到底是什么意思，西方不是喜欢猜吗？那就去猜好了。
这让我们想起了1969年中苏关系恶化，为保国庆典礼顺利，我国首次进行地下核试验的往事。这次核试验直接炸蒙了苏联，苏联认为我方是在进行临战测试，遂未敢轻举妄动，于是那一年的国庆节就在苏联人的猜测中安然度过。所以，从这一点看，我们也为白俄罗斯提供了另一种强有力的战略策应。只是有些战略策应你要求我们也不会给，有些战略策应没有要求我们也会给。而这种战略策应的核心就在于，西方惧怕中国的战争机器介入俄乌战争，且明显有侧重。

需要补充一点的是，目前，伊朗过于表现出投降意味，主要就在于叙利亚阿萨德政权倒台对伊朗造成的巨大损失导致其内部政治势力开始剧烈的进一步整合。俄罗斯与白俄罗斯也是如此。且这种整合的性质一定是“东风压到西风”，要么是“西风压倒东风”。一旦“西风压倒东风”，这对国际社会来说或国际局势将就此正式触及“半渡”。以俄罗斯威力，如果俄罗斯不可逆选择奋起反击，我们当然会给实质性援助，用时间换空间。正所谓，天予不受，反受其咎。

【相关话题】

第7648期－在未来不到30天，方方面面，尤其是俄伊两国，千万不要低估为博取一己私利四处煽风点火、几近疯狂的拜登与“拜登们”的巨大破坏力（2024-12-22）
第7654期－拜登政府结束任期只剩26天之际，“美国务院警告美国公民尽快离开白俄”传递出什么信号？（2024-12-24）
第7660期－面对访俄是假，“问计”中国是真的白俄罗斯总统卢卡申科，国际社会将如何应对？（2024-12-25）

声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

December 26, 2024, Thursday, Issue 1141

Oriental Commentary: Foreign media reported that at the request of Serbia to the SCO, the first Kazakhstani anti-terrorism force will be stationed in Serbia

[Media Reports]

On December 25, the Russian Defense Logistics Company, the owner of the "Ursa Major" dry cargo ship, stated that the ship sank in the Mediterranean due to a terrorist attack.

On December 25, foreign media reported that at Serbia's request to the SCO, the first Kazakhstani anti-terrorism force will be stationed in Serbia.

On December 26, officials from the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation thwarted a terrorist attack attempted by agents recruited by Ukrainian intelligence services in the Moscow Region.

[Discussion Summary]

●It is emphasized once again that if Russia uses the "Mongolia issue" as an entry point for "willingness to jointly resolve historical legacy issues," the sincerity is there but still lacks substance.

The current situation in Belarus is quite critical. At present, there has been no official announcement regarding the specific itinerary of Lukashenko's visit to China. In our view, first, there are still some issues that have not been properly coordinated among China, Russia, and Belarus; second, based on the "first" point, the fact that there is news about this at least indicates that Belarus, and perhaps also Russia, wants to send a signal to the West and put pressure on them by "announcing" Lukashenko's urgent visits to Russia and especially China at the end of 2024. It is worth mentioning that foreign media has started to pay widespread attention to Lukashenko's urgent visits to Russia and especially China at the end of the year. Some foreign media pointed out that Putin can no longer protect Belarus, and China has helped Belarus once before, will it help again? Obviously, the West has received this signal.

In our view, one of the main reasons why the West is paying so much attention to this is that after the Assad regime in Syria was overthrown, the West (the Biden administration) has focused its strategic pressure on Russia further on Belarus, which has worsened Belarus's strategic situation unprecedentedly. As a result, Russia has had to make concessions to China. Therefore, on December 8, shortly after the Assad regime was overthrown, on December 11, Russia's second-highest political figure, Medvedev, made an urgent visit to China.

Interestingly, on December 12, Medvedev visited the Exhibition Hall of the History of the Communist Party of China and referred to our side as "comrades." In our view, this move was deliberate, perhaps sending a clear signal to the West that although Russia is facing difficulties now, they are not as difficult as the revolutionary journey of the Communist Party of China or the difficulties faced by New China during the Korean War.

Of course, objectively speaking, both China and Russia have a clear willingness to further cooperate, but the specific details and implementation need to be discussed in depth. What's interesting is that on December 14, the day after Medvedev's visit to China, Russian President Putin emphasized at the congress of the United Russia party that Russia must defend itself not only in the military field but also launch a comprehensive counterattack in culture, economy, education, and other aspects, and will never tolerate challenges from Western countries. In our view, Putin's remarks indirectly confirm that both sides have indeed reached some consensus on the issue of "the specific details and implementation." Later, news emerged that "Russia is willing to work with China to resolve historical legacy issues."

"Russia is willing to work with China to resolve historical legacy issues," in our view, will not involve the delineation of Sino-Russian territory. Otherwise, it could potentially affect the stability of Putin's regime. Therefore, the only issue related to historical legacy that can be addressed at the political level is the Mongolia issue. The essence of the Mongolia issue is that after World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union, based on the "Yalta system" of the "US-Soviet G2 model," privately negotiated over China's core interests, forcing the Chiang Kai-shek government to accept Mongolia's independence. As a victorious country in World War II, China became the victim. In our opinion, the sincerity is there but still lacks substance (for example, it will take a long time to address).

●For a long time, including in Serbia and especially Central Asian countries, social instability has often occurred, fundamentally because Russia has been unwilling to substantially join hands with China.

On December 25, we noticed that hundreds of university students once again gathered in Belgrade to protest against President Vucic and his ruling Serbian Progressive Party's policies, accusing the party of being responsible for the railway accident that killed 15 people last month.

Certainly, this is some scheme cooked up by the West. As we all know, Serbia has a special relationship with both China and Russia. On May 8, 2024, ******* jointly announced with Serbian President Vucic at the Serbia Tower in Belgrade that China and Serbia have established a new era of a community with a shared future for both countries. The international community intends to make Serbia the "Yiwu of Europe." Serbia is rich in copper and lithium mines. Next to Serbia is Hungary, which is very interested in the new energy vehicle industry. Therefore, Serbia is of great significance to the international community's layout of the electric vehicle industry chain in Europe. In addition, Serbia and Russia belong to the Slavic cultural system and Serbia is Russia's only "bridgehead" in Europe.

In a sense, the current signs of instability in Serbia are a continuation of the Kosovo independence process that has been developing since 2007. For a long time, especially in Central Asian countries, including Serbia, social instability has often occurred, fundamentally because Russia has been unwilling to substantially join hands with China. These countries have suffered greatly as a result. This situation has consistently given the West opportunities to stir up trouble in these countries, forcing them to adopt a relatively balanced foreign policy, "dancing on several eggs." This not only harms Russia itself but also often puts pressure on us as a result.

●China, Russia, and Kazakhstan, based on an increasing convergence of common interests, are jointly promoting stability in Central Asia, marking a significant leap forward in the issue of "China-Russia joint efforts to stabilize Central Asia."

On December 25, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova stated that the US urging its citizens to leave Belarus is a provocation aimed at escalating tensions on the eve of significant events.

We agree with Zakharova's statement that the US urging its citizens to leave Belarus is intended to "escalate tensions on the eve of significant events." It can be said that the pressure on Belarus has become apparent, and the situation is deteriorating rapidly. In this regard, we once again remind Russian decision-makers to beware of diversionary tactics that may force Russia to defend itself in multiple fronts, leading to vulnerabilities.

Similarly, recently, Russian Federal Security Service officials thwarted a terrorist attack attempted by agents recruited by Ukrainian intelligence in the Moscow Oblast. The western media's exaggeration of the details of this incident carries a sinister intention to create tension, panic, and dissatisfaction in Russian society. Of course, this is also an excellent tactic of diversion.

Belarus is facing numerous crises, and Serbia is also becoming unstable. If the Vucic regime in Serbia is overthrown and Serbia is "integrated" into the EU, it would not bode well for Russia, and it would also be a loss for us. Even if Russia wants to support Serbia, on the one hand, Russia is far from Serbia, making rapid assistance impossible. On the other hand, after nearly three years of the Russia-Ukraine war, Russia may currently be unable to assist Serbia. Hence, Kazakhstan comes to mind. In our view, Kazakhstan's willingness to do this now stems partly from the pressure exerted by the West and partly, most importantly, from Kazakhstan's "new ideas."

By "new ideas," we mean the following:

Firstly, the "China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway" project is about to commence construction. Although Kazakhstan is somewhat dissatisfied with this (currently, China-Europe freight trains mainly pass through Kazakhstan, so Kazakhstan believes that the "China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway" project may divert traffic and harm its interests), it generally accepts this situation. Since the construction of the "China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway" has undoubtedly been approved by Russia, objectively, relations between Russia and Kazakhstan may improve to some extent. How close they will become is another matter, but one thing is certain: both Russia and Kazakhstan now rely on China.

Secondly, if Russia's approach to the "Mongolia issue" as an entry point for "willingness to jointly resolve historical legacy issues" shows some sincerity but still lacks substance, then at a more pragmatic level, we note that according to British media reports, following consultations among China, Russia, and Kazakhstan, Russia's Uranium One Group, a subsidiary of Rosatom, has transferred its 49% stake in the Zarechnoye uranium mine in Kazakhstan to China National Nuclear Uranium Resource Development Corporation. Of course, this news awaits further official confirmation from the parties involved.

Thirdly, if this news is confirmed, in our view, from a business perspective, it can be regarded as a concrete manifestation of Russia's sincerity in pragmatic terms. Correspondingly, our strategic support for Russia will be somewhat stronger than before (although not yet reaching the level of substantial strategic support).

Fourthly, by "from a business perspective," we mean that if Russia expects us to provide stronger strategic support, and given that the timing for reaching "final conclusions" on topics such as "China-Russia substantially joining hands to stabilize Central Asia" and "Russia substantially abandoning its 'hidden agenda' on Afghanistan policy" is not yet ripe, then Russia needs to exchange real benefits. Based on this, we believe that the feasibility of this rumor is high.

Fifthly, although the timing for reaching "final conclusions" on topics such as "China-Russia substantially joining hands to stabilize Central Asia" and "Russia substantially abandoning its 'hidden agenda' on Afghanistan policy" is not yet ripe, the issue of stability in Central Asia seems to be slowly taking shape in another form. That is, China, Russia, and Kazakhstan, based on an increasing convergence of common interests, particularly security, which is an asset for us, the "midfield" for Russia, and a necessity for Kazakhstan to obtain security guarantees from China and Russia (for Kazakhstan, stability is paramount. And the only way to achieve stability is to rely on China and Russia, and on the SCO), are jointly promoting stability in Central Asia. Although this change is still far from a qualitative leap, it can be seen as a significant leap at the quantitative level.

Sixthly, based on the above five points, this may be one of the main reasons why Kazakhstan is willing to deploy troops to Serbia. It is worth noting that according to media reports, Kazakhstan's dispatch of special forces to Serbia is based on a request from Serbia to the SCO for "anti-terrorism" purposes. It is worth mentioning that Kazakhstan is a founding member of the SCO, established on June 15, 2001. If Russia ultimately chooses to substantially collaborate with China, the SCO will be effectively "revitalized." Once this happens, China and Russia will jointly form the "core leadership group" (analogous to the party secretary and deputy secretary), and founding members, including Kazakhstan, will become "core members of the leadership group" (analogous to party committee members).

●The core of this strategic support lies in the West's fear of China's war machine intervening in the Russia-Ukraine war, with a clear emphasis.

Based on the above, when we look back at Belarusian President Lukashenko's urgent visits to Russia and especially to China at the end of 2024, it's not difficult to understand why Belarus (or Russia) made a big fuss about 'briefing' the matter even though the details had not yet been finalized.

It is worth mentioning that the China-Belarus "Eagle Strike-2024" joint army training held in July this year (conducted in the Brest region on the border between Belarus and Poland, right at NATO's "doorstep," with a very clear direction) had a significant deterrent effect on the West. There were rumors that immediately after intercepting 27 hypersonic missiles during the China-Belarus military exercises, a "free sparring partner" appeared, as Ukraine launched 24 various advanced NATO missiles and over ten drones at Belarus, all of which were successfully intercepted! Therefore, it is not surprising that western media paid close attention to Belarusian President Lukashenko's urgent visits to Russia and, especially, to China at the end of 2024, during which he once again raised the question of whether China would protect Belarus a second time. This is itself a powerful strategic support for Russia and demonstrates our sincerity in further cooperating with Russia.

On December 25, we noticed news reports in which Russia attributed the sinking of the "Polyarnaya Zvezda" vessel belonging to the Russian Defense Logistics Company in the Mediterranean to a terrorist attack.

In our view, this statement by Russia indicates that Russia has not given up on unrealistic political fantasies about the West regarding the Ukraine issue and is still hopeful that things will change for the better when Trump comes to power. This is one of the reasons why we believe there is still some distance before Russia ultimately chooses to substantially collaborate with China.

Therefore, we emphasize once again that Russia is the "primary responsible party" for Belarus's national security. Our stance on Belarus remains the same as discussed in our previous conversation:

Firstly, we will never stand idly by as western evil forces engage in military provocation, military invasion, create turmoil and chaos within Belarusian society, or even overthrow the existing regime in Belarus.

Secondly, we firmly support Belarus in using all means to defend its national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national security.

Thirdly, based on the first and second points, we will provide Belarus with all possible assistance.

As for other matters, such as saying that "the consequences of anyone attempting to resolve the Russian issue through military means are unimaginable," this is not something we can easily say. To put it more bluntly, given that "there is still some distance before Russia ultimately chooses to substantially collaborate with China," we will not allow the defense of Belarus, which should be led by Russia, to turn into a defense led by China, which should not be the case. Of course, this does not mean that the PLA will never go to Belarus again. For example, the PLA could make a second trip to Belarus and leave more weapons and equipment behind, which is worth considering. If Belarus needs drones, anti-drone systems, intelligence support systems, satellite navigation equipment, and support, we can also consider providing them. As for how Belarus uses them, we need not consider that. In this regard, Belarus can use its imagination and promote it as much as it wants.

For ourselves, of course, we need to make solid preparations. For example, the "military exercises encircling Taiwan" that are still being conducted low-key—we do but don't say. As for what they really mean, the West loves to speculate, so let them speculate to their heart's content.

This reminds us of the underground nuclear test conducted by China for the first time in 1969, amid the deterioration of Sino-Soviet relations, to ensure the smooth proceeding of the National Day celebrations. This nuclear test completely stunned the Soviet Union, which believed that we were conducting pre-war tests, and therefore dared not make any rash moves. Thus, that year's National Day passed peacefully amidst Soviet speculation. So, from this perspective, we are also providing Belarus with another powerful strategic support. It's just that some strategic supports we won't provide even if asked, and some we will provide even without being asked. The core of this strategic support lies in the fact that the West fears China's war machine intervening in the Russia-Ukraine war, with obvious emphasis.

It should be added that currently, Iran is showing too much of a surrendering attitude, mainly due to the tremendous losses suffered by Iran from the fall of the Assad regime in Syria, leading to intense further consolidation within its political forces. The same is true for Russia and Belarus. And the nature of this consolidation is bound to be either "the east wind prevails over the west wind" or "the west wind prevails over the east wind." Once "the west wind prevails over the east wind," this will formally push the international community or the international situation to the brink of "crossing the halfway point." Given Russia's power, if Russia irreversibly chooses to fight back, we will certainly provide substantial assistance, buying time to gain space. As the saying goes, "He who rejects what heaven bestows will suffer the consequences."

[Related Topics]

Issue 7648 - In the next 30 days, all aspects, especially Russia and Iran, must not underestimate the tremendous destructive power of Biden and the "Bidens," who are almost frantically fanning the flames everywhere for their own selfish interests (December 22, 2024)
Issue 7654 - What signal does the "U.S. State Department's warning to U.S. citizens to leave Belarus as soon as possible" convey as the Biden administration has only 26 days left in office? (December 24, 2024)
Issue 7660 - How will the international community respond to Belarusian President Lukashenko, who is not visiting Russia but genuinely "seeking advice" from China? (December 25, 2024)

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