https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/R2sZufFqvPEOeYZI-z0QfQ
2024年12月28日，星期六，第1143期 美英威胁俄驻叙军事基地，伊朗外长因内忧外患紧急访华，再次证明“以妥协求团结团结必亡”之斗争真理的正确性 【媒体报道】 12月27日，俄罗斯军控负责人警告美国即将上任的特朗普政府，由于特朗普的激进立场，莫斯科正考虑在核试验问题上采取一系列可能的举措。 12月28日，俄罗斯对外情报局新闻处称，华盛顿和伦敦正准备对俄罗斯在叙利亚的军事基地发动恐怖袭击。 【讨论纪要】 ●再次提醒，对于美国可能使出的声东（白俄罗斯）击西（伊朗），俄罗斯，尤其是伊朗决策层务必保持高度警惕 12月27日，我们注意到“俄罗斯军控负责人警告美国即将上任的特朗普政府称，由于特朗普的激进立场，莫斯科正考虑在核试验问题上采取一系列可能的举措”的新闻报道。 此前有美媒报道称，在特朗普2017年至2021年的第一个总统任期内，他的政府讨论了是否要开展美国自1992年以来的首次核试验。而在苏联解体后，俄罗斯没有进行过核试验。苏联最后一次进行核试验是在1990年。 核试验总归对全人类的安全而言不是一件好事，尤其在当前背景下，也就是叙利亚阿萨德政权被颠覆，白俄罗斯战略处境急剧恶化的背景下，如果俄罗斯真的进行了核试验，那么其一定具有极其强烈的“临战测试”的意味。俄罗斯目前承受战略压力之大，可见一斑。 当然，比其越来越靠近核战争的乌克兰局势而言，拜登政府更可以选择继续搅乱中东局势，比如，推动伊朗和以色列之间双边关系继续恶化，甚至美军直接下场军事打击伊朗（也可以瞄着叙利亚局势后续发展，激化以色列与土耳其之间的矛盾）的可能性不能排除。 中东地区是美国全球战略之重中之重，美国苦心经营多年，且相对远离中、俄影响力较强的地区。在对外层面，控制局势相对容易（比如，尽量避免出现波斯湾大乱的情况）。在对内层面，战略讹诈特朗普也相对安全。所以，再次提醒，对于美国可能使出的声东（白俄罗斯）击西（伊朗），俄罗斯，尤其是伊朗决策层务必保持高度警惕。 ●拜登政府摆出了一副，不惜在西太方向这个“危险系数”最高的战略方向挑动地区不稳，甚至引爆局部战争的姿态 让我们将讨论的焦点转移到西太方向。 当地时间12月26日，韩国国会表决通过了3名宪法法院法官的任命案。按照相关程序，需由当时代行总统职权的韩德洙正式任命。但韩德洙却表示暂缓任命法官。加之此前，韩德洙在“内乱特检法”和“金建希特检法”上的不配合，在野党共同民主党随即提请国会处理针对韩德洙的弹劾动议案。 宪法法官将对尹锡悦弹劾案能否最终通过产生重大影响。全员应为9名法官的宪法法院目前只有6人。“6人体制”理论上具备审理可行性，但只要有一人反对，弹劾案就会被驳回，尹锡悦将官复原职。而在有9名法官的情况下，有6人同意即可弹劾尹锡悦。 在我们看来，围绕韩国总统尹锡悦弹劾案一事展开的“肥皂剧”完全是在拖时间，“脚本”自然是美国（美军）一手安排，且其中带有明显威胁国际社会的意味。也就是说，拜登政府摆出了一副，不惜在西太方向，这个“危险系数”最高的战略方向挑动地区不稳，甚至引爆局部战争的姿态。对外威胁国际社会，对内威胁特朗普和“特朗普们”。当然，拜登政府这样做绝非蛮干，“危险系数”最高的战略方向“挑事儿”，其也会权衡一下战略风险的大小以及可控难易程度分出一个三六九等来。 在拜登政府看来，风险相对最小、可控难度相对最低的是南海问题。但由于中国已经在南海问题上做到最大限度的忍让并获得了绝大多数东盟国家的理解和认可，一旦菲律宾玩出了圈被中国教训，美国最多指责中国“以大欺小”。也就是说，在南海问题上搞事情起不到威胁中国的作用。 同样在拜登政府看来，风险相对最大、可控难度最高，甚至只要触及红线很可能一发不可收拾的当属台湾问题。所谓“一发不可收拾”的意思就在于，一旦在台湾问题上触碰中国红线，极可能导致中国迅速收台、进而导致西太安全框架崩塌，美国金融霸权轰然倒地。 所以，随着形势的最新演化，在当前阶段，到目前为止（注：此前我们强调拜登最合适选择的点是“南海问题”），相比之下，朝鲜半岛问题似乎最为合适（尹锡悦已被完全控制，以至于只要一个电话就能让其动，或不动）。也就是既可以一定程度上威胁中国，又能够在“一旦出事”的情况下使得局面相对可控。但有一点可以肯定，那就是拜登的“疯狂计划”对美国政府而言，尤其是特朗普上台后的美国政府而言都不是什么好消息。 ●美英威胁俄驻叙军事基地，伊朗外长因内忧外患紧急访华，再次证明“以妥协求团结团结必亡”之斗争真理的正确性 近日，有俄罗斯媒体报道，俄罗斯总统普京对外宣称，俄罗斯已经把4000名伊朗战士运至德黑兰。 毫无疑问，俄罗斯总统普京所说的，是在叙利亚阿萨德政权被颠覆的过程中，这些成建制的伊朗部队不仅没有参加战斗，而是选择直接撤离出大马士革，快速向北进入俄罗斯赫梅米姆空军基地隐藏一事。显然，俄罗斯总统普京对伊朗军队在叙利亚的表现非常不满，甚至感到愤怒。不惜以公布真相的方式揭了伊朗的“老底”。这充分证明了，在阿萨德政权被颠覆后，尤其在伊朗最高精神领袖哈梅内伊声称与哈马斯、杰哈德、黎巴嫩真主党武装等毫无关系，他们不是伊朗的代理人后，伊朗的确处于类似利比亚前总统卡扎菲“姥姥不亲，舅舅不爱”的尴尬处境。 有趣的是，紧急访问中国的伊朗外长强调中伊关系是“患难之交”，对此我们不甚赞同。试问，俄罗斯、土耳其和伊朗将旨在“叙利亚政府被缺席”的情况下解决叙利亚问题的三边机制起名为“阿斯塔纳进程”来恶心中国时，“患难之交”在哪儿？在阿萨德政权被颠覆后一周才结束的中国和巴基斯坦“勇士-8”联合反恐演习中，伊朗一问一个不吱声，从始至终都无实质性参与其中之意，死抱着比俄罗斯阿富汗政策更可笑的“大波斯主义”不放时，“患难之交”在哪儿？ 我们说，伊朗处于“伸头一刀，缩头也是一刀”的战略处境之中。之前缩头的伊朗还不是挨了阿萨德政权被颠覆、什叶派抵抗之弧被拦腰斩断这一刀，既然如此，那就冲上去嘛！某种意义上说，现在仍在抵抗，且和以色列打得有来有回的胡塞武装的表现都比伊朗强得多！这也是我们此前就如果胡塞武装“孺子可教”而伊朗“烂泥巴扶不上墙”，则在各方的支持和策应下，不排除胡塞武装成为什叶派抵抗力量的新领袖的主要原因之一。 在我们看来，就算伊朗打算妥协、投降到底，西方就能接受伊朗吗？恐怕未必！如果西方接受伊朗，试问如何平衡沙特的影响力？恐怕到那个时候，沙特等一批海湾阿拉伯国家会更紧的跟随中国。当然，伊朗最高精神领袖哈梅内伊85岁高龄，且至今接班人没有着落，这让哈梅内伊无暇顾及其他，这我们理解，但再怎么理解这也是伊朗内部问题。对外，伊朗做什么选择，就要承担什么代价。 说完了伊朗，我们再来说说俄罗斯。 根据俄对外情报局的消息，美英两国正准备对俄罗斯在叙利亚的军事基地发动恐怖袭击。 这一新闻报道属于“等待性质新闻”，在我们看来，只要俄罗斯在驻叙利亚军事基地是走是留的问题上表现出“想留”的态度，方方面面都会以俄罗斯叙利亚驻军为人质找俄罗斯的麻烦。当然，美英如此讹诈，自然也是冲着白俄罗斯去的。在西方看来，俄罗斯在中亚问题上进一步靠近中国到底是什么意思，一试便知。 因此，我们此前强调，“俄罗斯是否全面从叙撤军”问题及“伊朗是否实质性参与南亚反恐”问题，是观察两国战略决策走向的绝佳窗口。恐怕对于我们这一判断，包括西方在内的方方面面都深以为然。而美英威胁俄驻叙军事基地，伊朗外长因内忧外患紧急访华这两起事例再次证明，“以妥协求团结团结必亡”之斗争真理的正确性。 【相关话题】 第7659期－若伊朗继续怂下去，“拜登们”恐怕就不得不直接搞事，将中东，甚至乌克兰局面（不排除西太）继续往失控方向驱赶（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 28, 2024, Saturday, Issue 1143 US and UK Threaten Russian Military Base in Syria, Iran's Foreign Minister Makes Urgent Visit to China Amid Internal and External Challenges, Proving Once Again the Truth of the Struggle Principle: "Seeking Unity Through Compromise Leads to the Demise of Unity" [Media Reports] On December 27, Russia's arms control chief warned the incoming Trump administration in the United States that due to Trump's radical stance, Moscow is considering a series of possible measures on the issue of nuclear testing. On December 28, the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service's press office stated that Washington and London are preparing to launch terrorist attacks on Russian military bases in Syria. [Discussion Minutes] ● A reminder once again: Russian and, especially, Iranian decision-makers must remain highly vigilant against the possibility of the US employing a decoy strategy (Belarus) to strike elsewhere (Iran). On December 27, we noted a news report stating that "Russia's arms control chief warned the incoming Trump administration in the United States that due to Trump's radical stance, Moscow is considering a series of possible measures on the issue of nuclear testing." Previously, US media reported that during Trump's first presidential term from 2017 to 2021, his administration discussed whether to conduct the first nuclear test in the US since 1992. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has not conducted any nuclear tests. The Soviet Union last conducted a nuclear test in 1990. Nuclear tests are never a good thing for the safety of all humanity. Especially in the current context, where the Assad regime in Syria has been overturned and Belarus's strategic situation has deteriorated sharply, if Russia were to conduct nuclear tests, it would certainly carry a strong implication of "pre-war testing." This underscores the immense strategic pressure Russia is currently under. Of course, compared to the Ukrainian situation, which is increasingly nearing a nuclear war, the Biden administration may choose to continue stirring up turmoil in the Middle East. For example, it could escalate tensions between Iran and Israel or even directly engage in military strikes against Iran (it could also focus on the subsequent developments in Syria, intensifying conflicts between Israel and Turkey). Such possibilities cannot be ruled out. The Middle East is a top priority in the US global strategy, an area where the US has exerted considerable effort over the years and is relatively distant from regions with strong Chinese and Russian influence. Externally, it is relatively easy for the US to control the situation (for example, by avoiding major upheavals in the Persian Gulf). Internally, strategically coercing Trump is also relatively safe. Therefore, a reminder once again: Russian and, especially, Iranian decision-makers must remain highly vigilant against the possibility of the US employing a decoy strategy (Belarus) to strike elsewhere (Iran). ● The Biden administration has demonstrated a posture of provoking regional instability or even igniting localized wars in the Western Pacific, the most "dangerous" strategic direction. Let's shift our focus to the Western Pacific. On December 26, local time, South Korea's National Assembly voted to approve the appointment of three Constitutional Court justices. According to relevant procedures, the acting president, Han Duck-soo, was responsible for formally appointing them. However, Han Duck-soo announced a delay in the appointment. Coupled with his previous lack of cooperation regarding the "Special Prosecutor's Law on Internal Strife" and the "Special Prosecutor's Law on Kim Keon-hee," the opposition Minjoo Party of Korea immediately submitted a motion to impeach Han Duck-soo to the National Assembly. The Constitutional Court justices will have a significant impact on whether the impeachment case against President Yoon Seok-youl will be ultimately approved. The Constitutional Court, which should have nine justices, currently has only six. Theoretically, the "six-member system" is feasible for hearings, but if even one justice opposes, the impeachment case will be dismissed, and Yoon Seok-youl will be reinstated. With nine justices, however, the impeachment of Yoon Seok-youl can be approved with the agreement of six justices. In our view, the "soap opera" surrounding the impeachment case of South Korean President Yoon Seok-youl is merely a stalling tactic, orchestrated by the US (and the US military), with clear implications of threatening the international community. That is, the Biden administration has demonstrated a posture of provoking regional instability or even igniting localized wars in the Western Pacific, the most "dangerous" strategic direction, to threaten the international community externally and Trump and "the Trumps" internally. Of course, the Biden administration is not acting recklessly in "stirring up trouble" in the most "dangerous" strategic direction; it will also weigh the strategic risks and the ease of control, categorizing them accordingly. In the view of the Biden administration, the South China Sea issue poses the relatively smallest risk and is the easiest to control. However, since China has shown maximum restraint in the South China Sea issue and gained understanding and recognition from most ASEAN countries, if the Philippines goes too far and is taught a lesson by China, the US can only accuse China of "bullying the weak." That is, stirring up trouble in the South China Sea issue does not threaten China. Similarly, the Biden administration sees the Taiwan issue as posing the greatest risk, the most difficult to control, and potentially uncontrollable once a red line is crossed. The so-called "uncontrollable" refers to the possibility that once China's red line on the Taiwan issue is crossed, it could lead to China swiftly taking back Taiwan, which in turn could cause the collapse of the security framework in the Western Pacific and the US financial hegemony. Therefore, with the latest developments in the situation, at this stage, compared to previous options (we previously emphasized that the South China Sea issue was the most suitable choice for Biden), the Korean Peninsula issue seems to be the most appropriate (Yoon Seok-youl is fully controlled, to the extent that a single phone call can make him act or not act). It can threaten China to some extent while keeping the situation relatively controllable "if something goes wrong." However, one thing is certain: Biden's "crazy plan" is not good news for the US government, especially for the US government under Trump. ● The US and UK Threaten Russia's Military Base in Syria, and Iran's Foreign Minister Makes an Urgent Visit to China Amid Internal and External Troubles, Once Again Proving the Correctness of the Struggle Truth that "Seeking Unity Through Compromise Leads to the Demise of Unity" Recently, Russian media reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia had transported 4,000 Iranian fighters to Tehran. Undoubtedly, what Russian President Putin referred to was that during the process of overthrowing the Assad regime in Syria, these organized Iranian troops did not participate in the fighting but chose to withdraw directly from Damascus and quickly moved north to hide at Russia's Khmeimim Air Base. Obviously, Russian President Putin is very dissatisfied and even angry with the performance of the Iranian army in Syria. He even revealed Iran's "dirty laundry" by disclosing the truth. This fully proves that after the overthrow of the Assad regime, especially after Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei claimed that there is no relationship with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and other armed groups, and they are not Iran's proxies, Iran is indeed in an awkward situation similar to that of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, who was "loved by neither aunt nor uncle". Interestingly, the Iranian foreign minister, who made an urgent visit to China, emphasized that China-Iran relations are a "friendship forged in adversity". We do not fully agree with this. Where was this "friendship forged in adversity" when Russia, Turkey, and Iran named the trilateral mechanism aimed at resolving the Syrian issue in the absence of the Syrian government the "Astana Process" to annoy China? Where was it when Iran remained silent throughout the "Warrior-8" joint counter-terrorism exercise between China and Pakistan, which ended a week after the overthrow of the Assad regime, and showed no intention of substantively participating, stubbornly clinging to the ridiculous "Greater Persia" doctrine, even more ridiculous than Russia's Afghanistan policy? We say that Iran is in a strategic situation where "it's a lose-lose situation whether it sticks its neck out or not". Iran, which previously chose to "stick its head in the sand", still suffered the blow of the overthrow of the Assad regime and the severing of the Shiite resistance arc. So, why not go all in? In a sense, the Houthi armed forces, which are still resisting and engaging in fierce battles with Israel, are performing much better than Iran! This is also one of the main reasons why we previously stated that if the Houthi armed forces are "teachable" while Iran is "beyond help", then with the support and coordination of various parties, it is not ruled out that the Houthi armed forces could become the new leader of the Shiite resistance. In our view, even if Iran intends to compromise and surrender completely, will the West accept Iran? Probably not! If the West accepts Iran, how can it balance the influence of Saudi Arabia? Perhaps at that time, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab countries will follow China even more closely. Of course, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is 85 years old, and there is no successor in sight, which leaves Khamenei with little time to focus on other matters. We understand this, but no matter how we understand it, this is Iran's internal issue. Externally, Iran must bear the consequences of its choices. After discussing Iran, let's talk about Russia. According to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, the United States and the United Kingdom are preparing to launch terrorist attacks on Russia's military base in Syria. This news report can be seen as a "news awaiting development". In our view, as long as Russia shows an attitude of "wanting to stay" regarding its military base in Syria, various parties will use Russia's Syrian troops as hostages to cause trouble for Russia. Of course, this blackmail by the US and the UK is also aimed at Belarus. In the West's view, Russia's further rapprochement with China on Central Asian issues is a test of Russia's intentions. Therefore, we previously emphasized that the issue of "whether Russia will fully withdraw from Syria" and the issue of "whether Iran will substantively participate in counter-terrorism in South Asia" are excellent windows for observing the strategic decision-making trends of the two countries. We believe that all parties, including the West, agree with our judgment. The two examples of the US and the UK threatening Russia's military base in Syria and Iran's foreign minister making an urgent visit to China amid internal and external troubles once again prove the correctness of the struggle truth that "seeking unity through compromise leads to the demise of unity". [Related Topics] Issue 7659 - If Iran Continues to Cower, "Bidens" May Have to Directly Stir Up Trouble, Pushing the Middle East and Even the Situation in Ukraine (and Not Ruling Out the Western Pacific) Towards Further Escalation (December 25, 2024) 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
|
