https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/R2sZufFqvPEOeYZI-z0QfQ
2025年1月17日，星期五，第1160期 为什么俄伊两国在美方明确发出“或将战略收缩”之强烈信号后，如此迅速地签署了全面战略伙伴关系条约？ 【媒体报道】 1月16日，美国总统拜登援引了艾森豪威尔总统1961年离任时对“军工联合体”崛起的警告，声称他对“科技工业综合体”的崛起有着同样的担忧，“它也可能给我们的国家带来真正的危险”。 1月17日，俄罗斯总统普京与伊朗总统佩泽希齐扬在莫斯科签署全面战略伙伴关系条约。 1月17日，应美方邀请，*******特别代表、*******将赴美国首都华盛顿出席于1月20日举行的特朗普总统就职典礼。 【讨论纪要】 ●目前美国资本利益已严重分裂，且仍在不断“重组”之中。关键时候美军到底听谁的，还需密切观察 今天的讨论，我们首先，继续聊一聊，美现任驻日大使称“最大威胁不是中国”，折射出拜登政府与美军工复合体（美军）之间怎样微妙关系的话题。 在展开讨论前，我们一起来看一则新闻报道。 1月16日，美国总统拜登援引了艾森豪威尔总统1961年离任时对“军工联合体”崛起的警告，声称他对“科技工业综合体”的崛起有着同样的担忧，“它也可能给我们的国家带来真正的危险”。 在美国政府即将迎来新老交接之际，拜登和“拜登们”与美国军工复合体之间的矛盾似乎出现了公开化的迹象。继美现任驻日大使后，拜登亲自借美国前总统艾森豪威尔之口直接点了军工复合体的名。值得注意的是，拜登还提到了“科技工业综合体”的说法，且将其与美国军工复合体相提并论，并认为科技工业综合体才是美国真正要面对的危险，矛头直指马斯克“这伙人”，这意味着，围绕本次美国总统大选，随着2025年1月20日即将到来，代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益内部的分裂倾向不减反增。以至于拜登和“拜登们”与原本依靠拜登政府乌克兰政策赚得盆满钵满的美国军工复合体之间的激烈争斗已经到了公开化的地步。大家知道，美国军工复合体中的很多高官之前都有在美军服役并任职高层的经历。所以，某种意义上说，拜登公开责骂美国军工复合体就等于在公开责骂美军。 无论是勒令北约成员国增加军费，还是“一切为了股市”，在已经严重金融化的美国军工复合体看来，即将上台的特朗普的许诺似乎更具吸引力，至少不妨碍他们和特朗普一起惬意地喝杯下午茶。此外，和美国军工复合体有类似想法的或还有美国的媒体集团。 由于美军是代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益的“核心资产”之一，关键时候美军到底听谁的，还需密切观察。也就是说，决定美军如何行动的是美国资本利益，但目前美国资本利益已严重分裂，且仍在不断“重组”之中。对于尹锡悦来说，如果能够官复原职，他能做的唯一的事情就是“接电话”，也就是只管按驻韩美军（美军）命令行事。 1月17日，我们注意到，应美方邀请，*******特别代表、*******将赴美国首都华盛顿出席于1月20日举行的特朗普总统就职典礼的新闻报道。 近段时间一直将“美国或战略收缩”话题挂在嘴边儿的特朗普，在相对缓和对华关系的问题上取得了部分效果。对特朗普来说，1月20日之前，如果美国军工复合体始终未能做出什么出格儿的事情，绝对可以说是个“好消息”。 不难看出，无论特朗普炒作“美国或战略收缩”的话题，还是炒作“相对缓和对华关系”的话题，都与美国内部“恶斗”升级、美国资本利益内部严重分裂有着莫大的关系。对特朗普来说，借助“第三方势力”，包括美国内部的，原本和拜登与“拜登们”关系甚密的美国军工复合体，以及美国外部的中国，不断孤立拜登政府，是一个反制拜登和“拜登们”的不错主意。在这种情况下，如果在关键时刻，美军拒绝执行即将下台的拜登政府的命令，那么，韩国总统尹锡悦很可能由此沦为一枚“废子”。这意味着尹锡悦很难善终，要么进监狱，要么进坟墓。 ●如果美国想要将俄罗斯对西方的这种不切实际的政治幻想“消化”一些，和中国相对缓和关系是必要前提条件 有的网友也许会问，中国为什么派出高级别官员出席美国候任总统特朗普的就职典礼。说起来原因也不复杂，既然特朗普打算玩一出基于现代版“礼崩乐坏”之“战国”格局下的合纵连横，作为玩合纵连横老祖宗的中国，索性陪你玩玩好了。特朗普和“特朗普们”欲借助中国之力平衡拜登和“拜登们”的影响，中国又何尝不是借此机会将“统战”工作做到了美国内部？而且很大程度上还能阻止韩国总统尹锡悦变为“尹疯子”，何乐不为？ 倒是奉劝“日日思君（特朗普）不见君，共饮‘西方’水”的俄罗斯与上赶着要派消防员协助美国扑灭加州山火的伊朗好好读书，搞明白到底什么是合纵连横。合纵连横是产生在中国古代战国中期的一种外交策略，且并非一开始就针对秦国。或者说，合纵连横从一开始到后来的“山东六国合纵攻秦”是经历了一个漫长过程的。这个过程中一个典型的格局就是秦齐两强并立。其中，秦国和齐国都忠实执行了远交近攻的策略，纷纷拉着几个相对弱小的国家去吞并另一个弱小的国家。所以，在已经于心中默认中国是比美国更强的强国，俄罗斯则是比美国弱得多的多的弱国之现实下，特朗普选择和中国相对缓和关系并开启合纵连横在逻辑上是说得通的。俄罗斯和伊朗，在美国眼中，既可以拉拢其进行合纵，更可以拉拢其他势力合纵将其吞并。可以说，稍有不慎，参与合纵连横的国家和国家主要领导人就会万劫不复，如同当年的楚国和楚怀王那样。 熟悉东方时事解读的朋友们也许还记得，我们曾就俄罗斯可能的某种战略选择给出过明确警告：如果俄罗斯胆敢以牺牲中国核心利益为前提与西方媾和，中国一定会将其送上“被西方实质性消化的快车道”。这种情况，某种意义上说，何尝又不是中美两强并立格局下的合纵连横过程中的一种可能情况？ 2023年8月5日至6日，乌克兰问题国际会议在沙特第二大城市吉达举行，除美欧等西方国家之外，中国代表也受邀出席——这件事，俄罗斯应该记得。就在这次乌克兰问题国际会议召开前两天，也就是2023年8月3日，蒙古国总理奥云额尔登访问华盛顿，并与美国副总统哈里斯会面，表示将深化与美国在稀土开采方面的合作，并发表关于美利坚合众国和蒙古之间“第三邻国”战略伙伴关系的联合声明。在这里我们可以明确地说，那一次中国参加乌克兰问题国际会议就是公开对俄罗斯发出的严厉警告。所以，这一次，中国为什么派出高级别官员出席美国候任总统特朗普的就职典礼同样是对俄罗斯的严厉警告。而在特朗普看来，如果其想要将俄罗斯对西方的这种不切实际的政治幻想“消化”一些，和中国相对缓和关系是必要的前提条件，否则凭今天美国的实力，它接不住！ 也就是说，如果美国不选择和中国相对缓和关系，反而不断激化与中国之间的矛盾，俄罗斯的心思就会立刻活泛起来，而面对这样一个心思活泛的俄罗斯，美国何谈将俄罗斯对西方的这种不切实际的政治幻想进行“消化”？恐怕这种机会，美国第一个就会将其彻底封杀。何况美国人心里清楚得很，其一，基于现实中美绝对、相对实力的对比，和中国硬碰硬绝对是“收益递减”；其二，即便基于历史上中美绝对、相对实力的对比，即便“美强中弱”的情况下，尝试和中国硬碰硬，美国人得到的更是只有痛苦和恐惧；其三，同样基于现实，尤其是基于历史，比如，苏联解体、“两机事件”、俄成建制部队在叙利亚被美军消灭、俄乌战争、从来都非常好用的核讹诈、叙利亚阿萨德政权被颠覆等等，美国选择和俄罗斯硬碰硬却总能尝到甜头。 既然俄罗斯和伊朗愿意继续对西方抱有不切实际的政治幻想，那就“天要下雨，娘要嫁人，古来有之，随他去吧”。 ●在中东问题上，尤其在叙利亚问题上，主要责任在俄罗斯而非伊朗 当然，话说回来，虽然伊朗和俄罗斯一样对西方抱有不切实际的政治幻想，但局面走到今天，在中东问题上，尤其在叙利亚问题上，主要责任在俄罗斯而非伊朗。 2023年9月19日，俄罗斯防长绍伊古抵达德黑兰，开始访问伊朗。2023年10月7日，巴勒斯坦伊斯兰抵抗运动（哈马斯）下属卡萨姆旅发动从加沙地带向以色列发起近年来最大规模火箭弹袭击军事行动，是为“阿克萨洪水”行动。在我们看来，这是伊朗领导的“什叶派抵抗之弧”为俄罗斯分担乌克兰方向的巨大战略压力而采取的行动。然而，对这样一个“本就有问题”的伊朗，在同时面对美国和以色列两个有核国家施加的巨大政治、军事压力的整个过程中，直到叙利亚阿萨德政权被颠覆，俄罗斯始终未能对其提供必要的安全背书，比如，核安全背书。在俄罗斯看来，只有将伊朗逼到和美国、以色列全面开战，将美军彻底拖下水，且到了“不可逆”的地步，才有可能对伊朗提供必要的安全背书。至于结果，大家也看到了，叙利亚阿萨德政权就在俄罗斯与伊朗“你看我，我瞅你”的拖来拖去的过程中被颠覆。 ●经济版的“俄罗斯阿富汗政策小九九”呼之欲出 1月17日，俄罗斯总统普京与伊朗总统佩泽希齐扬在莫斯科签署全面战略伙伴关系条约。 我们注意到，在签署协议之前，俄罗斯和伊朗双方都强调，俄伊全面战略伙伴关系条约不是军事同盟。在我们看来，在叙利亚阿萨德政权被颠覆后，就算俄罗斯愿意和伊朗签署军事同盟条约，恐怕伊朗也没什么兴趣了，何况，俄罗斯到现在为止，出于伊朗与美国、以色列之间的紧张关系，更无意与伊朗签署什么军事同盟条约。颇有些讽刺的是，这个不涵盖军事同盟性质的全面战略伙伴关系条约，两国倒是很痛快地就签了。而在此前大约一年的时间里，关于这一条约的签订，始终是“只听楼梯响，不见人下来”。 值得大家注意的是，俄罗斯和伊朗就这样一个不涉及军事同盟内容的全面战略伙伴关系条约立刻签署的动作显然对外界，尤其是即将上台的、整天将“美国或将战略收缩”挂在嘴边的特朗普政府传递出明确信号： 第一，俄罗斯和伊朗签署全面战略伙伴关系条约对美国，包括以色列，没有威胁之意； 第二，在“第一”的基础上，既然这一条约不涉及基于传统安全层面针对美国（西方），那么这一条约一定涉及基于非传统安全层面针对“其他”。至于“其他”是谁，美国（西方）心知肚明，那就是中国和中国倡导的“一带一路”倡议； 第三，在“第二”的基础上，俄罗斯和伊朗，或客观上也代表了一众准备或已经介入后“美国战略收缩”时期之合纵连横棋局的方方面面，发出了“我就是合纵对象，快到碗里来”之“自白书”； 第四，在“第三”的基础上，“自白书”的本质就是在美国或将战略收缩之强烈信号刺激下，现阶段主要基于非传统安全层面的“俄罗斯阿富汗政策小九九”。或者说经济版的“俄罗斯阿富汗政策小九九”。其核心内容就是，通过俄罗斯、伊朗一直倡导的所谓“南北经济走廊项目”，在地缘层面，纵向截断“一带一路”倡议，并希望在政治上获得西方的青睐，尤其是投入资源，进而遏制中国基于全球层面快速扩展开来的强大影响力。 ●特朗普还未正式上台，合纵联合策略还未正式展开，麻烦就已经源源不断了 对于俄罗斯和伊朗发出的“我就是合纵对象，快到碗里来”之“自白书”，与那条呼之欲出的经济版“俄罗斯阿富汗政策小九九”，已经放风准备和中国相对缓和关系的特朗普自然会大加利用。这意味着布热津斯基“大棋局”中描述地对美国战略威胁最大的三种战略格局之“中、俄、伊大三角”出现的可能性有所降低。这当然可以看作是特朗普“合纵连横计划”的一部分。 在我们看来，合纵连横从来不是一家玩得转的，美国可以利用，中国又何尝不能利用？比如，借英国、日本这两个主要西方国家、美国的“核心盟友”也玩一把玩合纵连横？ 尽管一些国家已经主动在自己的脑门儿上贴上了“我是合纵对象”（插标卖首？）的标签，并急不可耐的准备或开始享受相关的好处和便利，但毕竟美国到底是否战略收缩，是否国际局势发展会因此“礼崩乐坏”并进入“战国”时期，仍需观察。至少要等特朗普顺利上位之后再说。不过这并不妨碍我们提前就这种可能的合纵连横做一些初步评估。 1月17日，俄罗斯常驻联合国代表瓦西里·涅边贾说，俄罗斯完全有理由认为，乌克兰对“土耳其溪”天然气管道的攻击是在美国和英国的授意下实施的，它们有意让欧盟依赖美国的昂贵液化天然气。 在我们看来，涅边贾口中的“美英”，英国自然指的是现在的斯塔默政府，而美国则指的是还未下台的拜登政府。现在的拜登政府和欧洲靠得更近一点。 在拜登政府看来，攻击“土耳其溪”，有利于进一步刺激包括英国和“老欧洲”等一干欧洲国家从中东拉一条不依赖美国的能源管线的心思，而这种倾向自然是即将上台的特朗普不愿看到的，这既不利于美国对欧洲能源命脉的控制，更不利于美国稳定中东局势，是妥妥的“严重损害美国国家利益”。但这就是拜登政府想要的——只要能给特朗普施压，给特朗普找麻烦就行。既然特朗普想要通过合纵连横拉拢俄罗斯，甚至要搞什么美俄控制全球能源价格，那我拜登就要破坏，就要“拉着”（手段是刺激欧洲）欧洲搞一条脱离美国控制的能源通道。至于其中是否有损所谓“美国国家利益”，关我拜登屁事？我拜登就是“对人不对事”，我反对的是特朗普，不是美国总统。就算特朗普即将接任美国总统也是一样！ 值得一提的是，乌克兰泽连斯基政府已经明显预感到，即将上任的美国特朗普政府很可能在乌克兰问题上牺牲自己，所以，其现在也心甘情愿充当“棋子”被即将下台的拜登政府驱使。而这又何尝不是乌克兰泽连斯基政权也将自己贴上“我是合纵国”标签的具体表现？看样子，特朗普还未正式上台，合纵联合策略还未正式展开，麻烦就已经源源不断了。其中，中国不掺和就算帮美国人的忙了。所以，我们也注意到，在中国宣布将派出高级代表参加特朗普就职典礼的同时，中国也开始高调处理泰国电诈案件，对此，特朗普恐怕不能反对。 ●俄罗斯和伊朗因为都有自己的小九九、小心思，所以对合纵联合这四个字看不明白，甚至不如沙特 此前，我们注意到土耳其总统埃尔多安在首都安卡拉会见叙利亚过渡政府外交部长希巴尼时，呼吁国际社会解除对叙利亚的制裁的新闻报道。 随着中东局势因叙利亚局势后续发展变得愈加复杂而显得愈加混乱，在这种情况下，土耳其开始公开呼吁解除对叙利亚的制裁。在我们看来，对此，欧盟或持默许态度，阿盟也不会加以反对。 至于欧盟到底会不会解除对叙利亚的制裁，也许还要看乌克兰局势的后续发展，尤其是特朗普上台后在乌克兰问题上，中东问题上有何调整。在叙利亚局势后续发展“八字还没一撇”的情况下，土耳其呼吁解除对叙利亚的制裁显得有些突兀，显然，土耳其这样呼吁的主要目的并不真的在于叙利亚重建问题，而在于为特朗普上台后的叙利亚局势，中东局势，尤其全球局势的可能变化，如，美国或真的进行战略收缩制造筹码，且这个筹码除了土耳其外，沙特、埃及、欧洲、联合国，甚至中国都可以利用，唯独美国不能利用。如果有朝一日，一条通过土耳其拉到欧洲的能源管线在各方默认，甚至支持下真的建成，恐怕美国人同样不能反对，否则必被孤立。如果是这样，就算拉上一个俄罗斯，美国还能继续玩合纵连横吗？ 在最后需要补充的是，俄罗斯和伊朗签署全面战略伙伴条约的另一个主要意图或就与能源管道，准确地说俄罗斯输欧能源管道密切相关。如果俄罗斯能够将一条能源管道，基于“南北经济走廊项目”一路连到伊朗，不仅可以截断“一带一路”倡议，更可以截断欧洲试图从中东地区拉出的能源管道。所以，从这个角度看，俄罗斯似乎也只能寻求和美国合作，这一点在如今俄乌战争仍在继续，库尔斯克的北约军事存在尚未被彻底清除的背景下去观察，显得颇为滑稽。 特朗普似乎正在着手推动“中、美两强并立”之格局的形成，只有这样才能开启合纵连横。而对于中、美而言，都在玩各自的远交近攻，而其中的远交就是彼此。而俄罗斯和伊朗因为都有自己的小九九、小心思，所以对合纵联合这四个字看不明白，甚至不如沙特。 对于后续国际局势的发展，大家不妨首先观察美国新老政府如何交接，能否顺利交接，再观察特朗普第二任期治下的美国是否真的玩战略收缩。通过这几天的讨论，大家不难看出，合纵连横的局面有利于国际社会，更是一种美国主动接受“河渡人”局面的具体表现。这种“河渡人”的局面对国际社会而言似乎比之以往更容易把握。 【相关话题】 第7725期－美国的命运会像中国春秋战国时期，热衷于“合纵”的齐国那样，在战国末期不战而降吗？（2025-1-14） 声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。
Friday, January 17, 2025, Issue No. 1160 Why did Russia and Iran sign a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty so quickly after the US sent a strong signal of "possible strategic retraction"? [Media Coverage] On January 16, US President Biden invoked President Eisenhower's 1961 warning about the rise of the "military-industrial complex" as he left office, expressing similar concerns about the rise of the "technology-industrial complex," saying, "it too may pose a real danger to our country." On January 17, Russian President Putin and Iranian President Raeisi signed a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty in Moscow. On January 17, at the invitation of the US, the special representative of ******* and ******* will attend the inauguration ceremony of President Trump in Washington, DC, on January 20. 【Discussion Summary】 ●The capital interests of the US are currently severely divided and still undergoing constant "reorganization." It remains to be seen who the US military will follow in critical moments. In today's discussion, let's continue to talk about the topic of the current US ambassador to Japan stating that "the greatest threat is not China," and what this reveals about the delicate relationship between the Biden administration and the US military-industrial complex (US military). Before diving into the discussion, let's take a look at a news report. On January 16, US President Biden invoked President Eisenhower's 1961 warning about the rise of the "military-industrial complex" as he left office, expressing similar concerns about the rise of the "technology-industrial complex," and stating that it too may pose a real danger to our country. He specifically mentioned the "technology-industrial complex," equating it with the US military-industrial complex, and believing that it is the real danger facing the US, with the tip of his spear pointed at figures like Musk. This suggests that, with the upcoming US presidential election and the approach of January 20, 2025, the internal divisions within US capital interests, which represent Western capital, are increasing. The intense struggle between Biden and his allies, and the US military-industrial complex, which has been making huge profits from the Biden administration's Ukraine policy, has reached a point of public confrontation. It's worth noting that many senior officials in the US military-industrial complex have previously served in high-ranking positions in the US military. Therefore, in a sense, Biden's public criticism of the US military-industrial complex is tantamount to publicly criticizing the US military. Whether it's ordering NATO members to increase military spending or "everything for the stock market," the heavily financialized US military-industrial complex seems to find the promises of the incoming Trump administration more appealing, or at least not obstructive enough to prevent them from enjoying a leisurely afternoon tea with Trump. In addition, the US media conglomerates may share similar views with the US military-industrial complex. Since the US military is one of the "core assets" of US capital interests that represent Western capital, it remains to be seen who the US military will follow in critical moments. In other words, it is US capital interests that determine the actions of the US military, but these interests are currently severely divided and still undergoing constant "reorganization." For Yoon Seok-youl, if he can be reinstated to his original position, the only thing he can do is "answer the phone," meaning he will only follow the orders of the US military (stationed in South Korea). On January 17, we noted a news report that at the invitation of the US, the special representative of ******* and ******* will attend the inauguration ceremony of President Trump in Washington, DC, on January 20. Trump, who has been talking about the topic of "possible US strategic retraction" recently, has achieved some results in easing relations with China. For Trump, it would definitely be "good news" if the US military-industrial complex refrains from doing anything outrageous before January 20. It is not difficult to see that both Trump's hyping of the topic of "possible US strategic retraction" and his talk of "easing relations with China" are closely related to the escalating "internal strife" and severe divisions within US capital interests. For Trump, using "third-party forces," including those within the US, such as the US military-industrial complex, which was previously closely aligned with Biden and his allies, and external forces like China, to continuously isolate the Biden administration is a good strategy to counter Biden and his allies. In this situation, if the US military refuses to execute the orders of the outgoing Biden administration at a critical moment, then South Korean President Yoon Seok-youl is likely to become a "useless pawn." This means that Yoon Seok-youl's future is uncertain, with the possibilities of either going to jail or the grave. ●If the United States wants to "digest" Russia's unrealistic political illusions about the West, easing tensions with China is a necessary precondition. Some netizens may ask why China sent high-level officials to attend the inauguration ceremony of U.S. President-elect Trump. The reasons are not complicated. Since Trump intends to play a game of alliance and counter-alliance based on the modern version of the "Warring States" landscape where "rites and music have collapsed", China, as the ancestor of this strategy, might as well play along. Trump and his camp aim to leverage China's power to counterbalance the influence of Biden and his supporters, and China, in turn, sees this as an opportunity to extend its "united front" work into the United States. Moreover, to a great extent, this can also prevent South Korean President Yoon Seok-youl from becoming "Yoon the Madman". Why not? Instead, I advise Russia, which is constantly yearning for Trump while sharing the "Western" water, and Iran, which is eager to send firefighters to assist the United States in putting out wildfires in California, to read up and understand what alliance and counter-alliance really mean. Alliance and counter-alliance were diplomatic strategies that emerged in the mid-Warring States period in ancient China, and they were not initially directed against the State of Qin. Rather, from the beginning to the later "Six States of Shandong forming an alliance to attack Qin", it went through a long process. A typical pattern during this process was the coexistence of two powerful states, Qin and Qi. Both Qin and Qi faithfully implemented the strategy of befriending distant states while attacking nearby ones, each pulling a few relatively weak states to annex another weak state. Therefore, given the reality that China is perceived as a stronger power than the United States, and Russia as a much weaker power than the United States, it makes logical sense for Trump to choose to ease tensions with China and initiate alliance and counter-alliance. In the eyes of the United States, both Russia and Iran can be wooed for alliance or, together with other forces, be annexed through alliance. It can be said that with the slightest misstep, countries and their leaders involved in alliance and counter-alliance may face dire consequences, just like the State of Chu and its king, King Huai, did in ancient times. Friends familiar with Eastern Current Affairs Interpretation may recall that we issued a clear warning regarding a possible strategic choice by Russia: if Russia dares to sacrifice China's core interests to make peace with the West, China will surely put it on the "fast track to be substantially digested by the West". In a sense, this is also a possible scenario in the process of alliance and counter-alliance under the bipolar pattern of China and the United States. From August 5 to 6, 2023, an international conference on the Ukraine issue was held in Jeddah, the second largest city in Saudi Arabia. In addition to Western countries such as the United States and Europe, Chinese representatives were also invited to attend. Russia should remember this. Just two days before the international conference on the Ukraine issue, on August 3, 2023, the Prime Minister of Mongolia, Oyun-Erdene, visited Washington and met with U.S. Vice President Harris. They expressed their intention to deepen cooperation with the United States in rare earth mining and issued a joint statement on the "Third Neighbor" strategic partnership between the United States of America and Mongolia. Here, we can clearly state that China's participation in the international conference on the Ukraine issue was a public and severe warning to Russia. Therefore, China's sending high-level officials to attend the inauguration ceremony of U.S. President-elect Trump is also a severe warning to Russia. In Trump's view, if he wants to "digest" Russia's unrealistic political illusions about the West to some extent, easing tensions with China is a necessary precondition. Otherwise, with today's U.S. strength, it cannot handle it! In other words, if the United States chooses not to ease tensions with China but instead continues to escalate conflicts with it, Russia's intentions will immediately become active. And facing such an active Russia, how can the United States even think about "digesting" Russia's unrealistic political illusions about the West? The United States is likely to be the first to completely block such an opportunity. Besides, Americans know very well that, firstly, based on the comparison of absolute and relative strength between China and the United States, a head-on confrontation with China is definitely a "diminishing return"; secondly, even based on the historical comparison of absolute and relative strength between China and the United States, when "the United States was strong and China was weak", attempting a head-on confrontation with China only brought Americans pain and fear; thirdly, based on both reality and history, such as the collapse of the Soviet Union, the "two plane incidents", the annihilation of Russian organized troops in Syria by U.S. forces, the Russia-Ukraine war, the always effective nuclear blackmail, and the overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria, the United States has always tasted sweet success when choosing to confront Russia head-on. Since Russia and Iran are willing to continue harboring unrealistic political illusions about the West, then "let it be; it's like rain falling from the sky or a mother marrying off her daughter—it's been happening since ancient times, so let it be." ● Russia, Not Iran, Bears the Primary Responsibility in the Middle East, Especially in Syria Of course, having said that, although both Iran and Russia harbor unrealistic political fantasies about the West, the situation has evolved to the point where Russia, rather than Iran, bears the primary responsibility for the issues in the Middle East, particularly in Syria. On September 19, 2023, Russian Defense Minister Shoigu arrived in Tehran for a visit to Iran. On October 7, 2023, the Qassam Brigades, a military wing of the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), launched the largest rocket attack from the Gaza Strip against Israel in recent years, known as "Operation Al-Aqsa Flood." In our view, this was an action taken by Iran's "Shiite Resistance Arc" to alleviate the enormous strategic pressure on Russia in the Ukraine direction. However, towards such a "problematic" Iran, throughout the entire process of facing immense political and military pressure from both the United States and Israel, Russia failed to provide necessary security guarantees, such as nuclear security guarantees, even as the Assad regime in Syria was on the brink of being overthrown. In Russia's view, only by pushing Iran into a comprehensive war with the United States and Israel, dragging the US military into the quagmire irreversibly, would it be possible to provide Iran with the necessary security guarantees. As for the outcome, as we all know, the Assad regime in Syria was overthrown amidst the procrastination between Russia and Iran. ● An Economic Version of "Russia's Afghanistan Policy Maneuver" Emerges On January 17th, Russian President Putin and Iranian President Raisi signed a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty in Moscow. We note that before signing the agreement, both Russia and Iran emphasized that the comprehensive strategic partnership treaty was not a military alliance. In our opinion, after the overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria, even if Russia were willing to sign a military alliance treaty with Iran, Iran might not be interested anymore. Moreover, Russia has no intention of signing a military alliance treaty with Iran due to the tense relations between Iran and the United States and Israel. Ironically, both countries quickly signed the comprehensive strategic partnership treaty, which does not cover a military alliance. Yet, for about a year prior to this, the signing of this treaty was always "all talk and no action." It is worth noting that the swift signing of this comprehensive strategic partnership treaty, which does not involve a military alliance, by Russia and Iran clearly sends a message to the outside world, especially to the incoming Trump administration, which constantly talks about "potential US strategic retraction": First, the signing of the comprehensive strategic partnership treaty between Russia and Iran is not intended to threaten the United States, including Israel. Second, based on the "first" point, since this treaty does not involve traditional security threats against the United States (the West), it must involve non-traditional security threats against "others." As for who these "others" are, the United States (the West) knows very well that it refers to China and China's Belt and Road Initiative. Third, based on the "second" point, Russia and Iran, or objectively speaking, a group of countries preparing to or already involved in the strategic maneuvering during the post-"US strategic retraction" period, have issued a "self-declaration" stating, "We are the ones to form an alliance with; come join us." Fourth, based on the "third" point, the essence of this "self-declaration" is Russia's economic version of the "Afghanistan policy maneuver," stimulated by the strong signal of potential US strategic retraction. Its core content is to truncate the Belt and Road Initiative vertically at the geopolitical level through the so-called "North-South Economic Corridor Project" that Russia and Iran have been advocating, and to seek favor and resources from the West politically, thereby curbing China's rapidly expanding influence on a global scale. ●Trump Hasn't Taken Office Yet, and His Strategy of Alliance and Division Hasn't Been Fully Implemented, but Troubles Are Already Pouring In Russia and Iran have issued "self-declarations" saying, "We are the objects of alliance; come and get us," along with the looming economic version of the "Russian Afghanistan policy." Trump, who has signaled his intention to ease relations with China, will naturally take full advantage of this. This means that the emergence of the "China-Russia-Iran triangle," one of the three strategic configurations that pose the greatest strategic threat to the United States as described in Brzezinski's "The Grand Chessboard," is becoming less likely. This can certainly be seen as part of Trump's "strategy of alliance and division." In our view, alliance and division is not a game that one country can play alone. If the United States can use it, why can't China? For example, why not use Britain and Japan, two major Western countries and "core allies" of the United States, to play a game of alliance and division? Although some countries have voluntarily labeled themselves as "objects of alliance" (or "for sale," so to speak) and are eagerly preparing to enjoy the benefits and conveniences that come with it, whether the United States will strategically retrench and whether the international situation will therefore "collapse in order" and enter a "Warring States" period remains to be seen. At least, we need to wait until Trump takes office. However, this does not prevent us from making some preliminary assessments of this possible strategy of alliance and division. On January 17th, Vasily Nebenzya, Russia's permanent representative to the United Nations, said that Russia has every reason to believe that the attack on the TurkStream natural gas pipeline by Ukraine was carried out at the behest of the United States and Britain, with the intention of making the EU dependent on expensive liquefied natural gas from the United States. In our view, the "US-UK" referred to by Nebenzya includes the current Starmer government in Britain and the Biden administration, which is still in power in the United States. The Biden administration is currently closer to Europe. From the perspective of the Biden administration, attacking TurkStream is conducive to further stimulating European countries, including Britain and the "old Europe," to seek an energy pipeline from the Middle East that does not depend on the United States. This tendency is naturally not something that the upcoming Trump administration wants to see, as it is neither conducive to US control over Europe's energy lifeline nor to US stability in the Middle East. It is a clear case of "seriously damaging US national interests." But this is what the Biden administration wants - as long as it can put pressure on Trump and cause him trouble, that's all that matters. Since Trump wants to use alliance and division to woo Russia and even control global energy prices with Russia, then Biden will sabotage it and "pull" (by stimulating Europe) Europe to create an energy corridor independent of US control. As for whether this harms so-called "US national interests," Biden couldn't care less. Biden is "against the person, not the issue." He opposes Trump, not the President of the United States. Even if Trump is about to become the President of the United States, it's the same! It's worth mentioning that the Zelenskyy government in Ukraine has clearly foreseen that the upcoming Trump administration in the United States is likely to sacrifice them on the issue of Ukraine. Therefore, they are now willingly acting as "pawns" driven by the outgoing Biden administration. Isn't this also a specific manifestation of the Zelenskyy regime in Ukraine labeling itself as an "ally"? It seems that before Trump has even taken office and his strategy of alliance and division has not been fully implemented, troubles are already pouring in. Among them, China's non-involvement is already a help to the Americans. Therefore, we also notice that while China has announced that it will send a high-level delegation to attend Trump's inauguration ceremony, it has also started to deal with telecom fraud cases in Thailand in a high-profile manner. Trump probably can't object to that. ●Both Russia and Iran have their own hidden agendas, so they don't fully grasp the concept of alliance and unification. They are even less enlightened than Saudi Arabia. Previously, we noticed a news report that Turkish President Erdogan, during a meeting with the Foreign Minister of the Syrian Transitional Government, Hibani, in the capital Ankara, called on the international community to lift sanctions on Syria. As the situation in the Middle East becomes increasingly complex and chaotic due to subsequent developments in Syria, Turkey has begun to publicly call for the lifting of sanctions on Syria. In our view, the EU may acquiesce to this, and the Arab League will not object. Whether the EU will lift sanctions on Syria may also depend on subsequent developments in the Ukraine situation, especially how Trump's administration will adjust its stance on Ukraine and the Middle East issues. With the subsequent development of the situation in Syria still uncertain, Turkey's call to lift sanctions on Syria seems abrupt. Obviously, Turkey's main purpose in making such a call is not really about the reconstruction of Syria, but rather to create bargaining chips for possible changes in the situation in Syria, the Middle East, and even the global situation after Trump takes office. For example, if the US really undertakes strategic retraction, this bargaining chip can be utilized by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Europe, the United Nations, and even China, but not by the US. If one day, an energy pipeline through Turkey to Europe is built with the tacit approval or even support of all parties, the Americans probably cannot object, otherwise they will be isolated. If this happens, even if Russia is brought in, can the US still continue to play the game of alliance and counter-alliance? It should be added that another main intention of Russia and Iran signing a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty may be closely related to the energy pipeline, specifically the Russian energy pipeline to Europe. If Russia can connect an energy pipeline all the way to Iran based on the "North-South Economic Corridor Project," it can not only cut off the "Belt and Road" initiative but also intercept the energy pipeline that Europe is trying to pull out of the Middle East. Therefore, from this perspective, Russia seems to have no choice but to seek cooperation with the US. This seems rather ridiculous when observed against the backdrop of the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War and the NATO military presence in Kursk that has not been completely eliminated. Trump seems to be promoting the formation of a "bipolar world" with China and the US as the two major powers, which is the only way to enable the game of alliance and counter-alliance. For both China and the US, they are playing their own versions of distant alliances and near attacks, with each other being the distant ally. However, Russia and Iran, due to their own hidden agendas, do not fully understand the concept of alliance and unification. They are even less enlightened than Saudi Arabia. Regarding the subsequent development of the international situation, we can first observe how the transition between the old and new US administrations will proceed and whether it will be smooth. Then, we can observe whether the US under Trump's second term will indeed pursue strategic retraction. Through the discussions in recent days, it is not difficult to see that a situation of alliance and counter-alliance is beneficial to the international community and is also a specific manifestation of the US actively accepting a "ferryman" role. This "ferryman" role seems easier for the international community to grasp than ever before. [Related Topics] Issue 7725: Will the fate of the US be like that of the State of Qi during China's Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods, which was enthusiastic about "alliance" but surrendered without a fight at the end of the Warring States period? (January 14, 2025)
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
|
