2025年2月6日，星期四，第1172期

结合菲副总统正式遭遇众议院弹劾，小谈中方舰艇编队过航巴西兰海峡发出何种信号

【媒体报道】

2月3日，中国人民解放军南部战区组织海空兵力经巴西兰海峡赴远海开展演训，相关行动始终保持安全、规范和专业操作，完全符合国际法和国际实践。菲方就中方舰艇编队正常过航行为进行污蔑炒作，严重损害包括中国在内的其他国家正常航运航行权利。

2月5日，菲律宾众议院正式对副总统莎拉·杜特尔特提出弹劾。有215名众议员签署了针对莎拉的弹劾申诉。根据菲律宾的相关规定，众议院需要三分之一的众议员或102名众议员的签名，即可将针对莎拉的弹劾申诉提交至参议院审理。 据称，莎拉·杜特尔特是菲律宾历史上第一位遭到众议院弹劾的副总统。

【讨论纪要】

●所谓“美军撤离叙利亚计划”，本质是对包括沙特等海湾阿拉伯国家在内的中东国家的一种政治胁迫

在上一次的讨论中，我们提到了美国“B-2”战略轰炸机在南海失踪的有关话题，尽管到目前为止这一消息仍是传闻，但其合理性的逻辑存在——春节期间，中美双方，无论基于传统安全层面，还是非传统安全层面，基于“合纵连横，远交近攻”策略，都有动作。

在继续展开讨论前，我们来看一则新闻报道：

2月5日，两名美国国防部官员表示，美国国防部正在制订从叙利亚撤出所有美军士兵的计划。官员们表示，美国总统特朗普以及与他关系密切的官员最近表达了对从叙利亚撤军的兴趣，这使得五角大楼官员开始起草在30天、60天或90天内全面撤军的计划。

尽管美国五角大楼的官员们开始起草从叙利亚撤出所有美军士兵的计划，但在我们的观察与评估中，用一个词加以形容所谓“美国叙利亚撤军计划”再合适不过，那就是，欲走还留。

在我们的观察与评估中，特朗普政府摆出这一姿态的真正目的不在于真的从叙利亚撤军，而在于以此胁迫一些中东国家进一步配合美国维持中东地区的基本稳定，并将其首先用于“内斗”。值得一提的是，2019年，在特朗普的第一个总统任期期间就曾以“美国向韩国归还战时指挥权”（也就是摆出一副美军准备撤离韩国，不管韩国的姿态）为由向韩国“狮子大开口”，以索取高达50亿美元的军费，而这已经是韩国当时缴纳美国驻军费的五倍。

不难想象的是，如果美国真的从叙利亚撤军，别的不说，土耳其会立刻在叙利亚坐大，其必然会对沙特等海湾国家在叙利亚的影响力造成重大冲击，这就在客观上形成了对沙特等海湾国家的一种战略压力。特朗普政府传递的信号很清楚，包括沙特等海湾阿拉伯国家在内的一些中东国家，如果在中东问题上不配合美国， 美国就索性“两手一摊”，不管了。

●特朗普政府正动用一切外交资源以优先满足小集团的一己私利

2024年12月8日，当时还是美国当选总统身份的特朗普就叙利亚问题发表了自己的看法，特朗普称叙利亚一片混乱，美国不应该参与其中，这不是美国的战斗，不要介入。而今天，已经成为美国总统的特朗普，其对外政策似乎并未向此前我们所评估的那样，更倾向于回归相对远离于2024年11月5日的拜登政府，而是更倾向于“回归他自己”。这是为什么呢？这恐怕首先与“拜登们”与“特朗普们”在1月20日之前“没谈好”，两届美国政府的“交班”仍处于“血雨腥风”之中，远没有“尘埃落定”密切相关。至少目前阶段是这样的。

这意味着特朗普政府的对外政策更倾向于回归1月20日之前的“当选总统特朗普”，或11月5日之前的“候选总统特朗普”，甚至会变得比11月5日之前的特朗普“更加特朗普”。对此，有网友调侃道，恐怕特朗普已经成为美国历史上“最没有安全感”的当选总统。

值得一提的是，这种现象不仅体现在当前美国的叙利亚政策上，也体现在当前美国的巴勒斯坦政策上。

2月6日，特朗普重申了美国“接管”加沙的计划，并称在当地居民已经迁走并定居在其他地方后，加沙“将在战斗结束时，由以色列移交给美国”。与此同时，以色列官员宣布让军方制订计划，允许巴勒斯坦人“自愿离开”加沙地带。

在伊朗当局对外政策仍运行在“投降主义”路线的背景下，特朗普摆出一副随时让内塔尼亚胡小集团以获得“大胜”的姿态，以此尽量争取内塔尼亚胡小集团背后美国内部的“关键少数”的政治支持。为此，特朗普不惜牺牲美国国家长远利益，甚至美国资本利益。从这一点看，特朗普和拜登还真是同道中人，甚至今天的特朗普政府干得比临下台时的拜登政府更激进。特朗普政府正在动用一切外交资源满足小集团的一己私利。

特朗普政府在一系列中东问题上的倒行逆施自然遭到包括沙特等海湾阿拉伯国家在内的一众中东国家的坚决反对，而这恰恰正中特朗普下怀——既然这些国家反对，那就在中东问题上听从特朗普政府的安排，否则美国就退出，就将你们丢给以色列好了。

在我们的观察与评估中，特朗普政府为了“更好的内斗”，恐怕是有将南海问题，甚至台湾问题作为和中国讨价还价之筹码使用之相关计划的（这是我们的核心利益，我们不会和美国谈，真正可以谈的是南海问题）。此外，俄罗斯眼中的乌克兰问题，欧盟眼中的叙利亚问题，恐怕同样会被特朗普政府为了“更好的内斗”而作为筹码被抛出。甚至尹锡悦这枚已经被“半废弃”的“棋子”，作为此前特朗普对朝鲜示好但吃了“闭门羹”的另一面，也就是大棒的一面被再次启用。

但不管怎样，大家不难看出，特朗普第二任期的美国全球战略已出现明显的收缩迹象，尽管这种“战略收缩”被特朗普政府描绘为“远交近攻，合纵连横”，但因绝对实力和相对实力下滑严重，尤其是“内耗”的不断增加而被迫“战略收缩”的意味似乎越来越浓。

●如果特朗普访华想谈谈菲律宾法理领土范围问题，我们乐见！

我们注意到，近日有关菲律宾众议院正式对副总统莎拉·杜特尔特提出弹劾的新闻报道。这首先是美国被迫“战略收缩”意味似乎越来越浓背景下的菲律宾内部政治斗争恶化的具体表现。有趣的是，几天前，也就是2月3日，中国人民解放军南部战区组织海空兵力经巴西兰海峡赴远海开展演训。对此，美国方面则表现得相对低调。

早在2024年2月9日，时任中国外交部发言人汪文斌在外交部例行记者会上，回答了有关黄岩岛的问题。汪文斌表示，黄岩岛是中国的固有领土，中国对这座岛屿以及附近海域的主权是无可争辩的，中国也正在持续、和平以及有效地对黄岩岛行使主权和管辖权。

发言人特别指出，菲律宾的领土范围是由一系列国际条约确定的，包括1898年的《美西和平条约》、1900年的《美西关于菲律宾外围岛屿割让的条约》，以及1930年的《关于划定英属北婆罗洲与美属菲律宾之间的边界条约》。而黄岩岛从来都不在菲律宾的领土范围之内。菲律宾现在以所谓距离近的说法，主张对黄岩岛的主权；或者拿所谓专属经济区主张主权以及管辖权，全都不符合国际法。

可以说，所谓“菲律宾领土问题”，究其本质是西方殖民主义的历史遗留问题。说到底，菲律宾在此前很长的一段时间，压根就不是一个主权国家（民国政府划定11段线，包括后来的9段线的时候，菲律宾还不是个主权国家）。显然，这次中国人民解放军南部战区组织海空兵力经巴西兰海峡赴远海开展演训，瞄准的就是这一点，也就是瞄准菲律宾法理领土范围问题，甚至按照相关条约规定，菲方称巴拉望岛也并完全属于菲律宾，其西部一部分已经在“东经118度以东，北纬20度以南”之菲律宾法理领土范围之外。在我们看来，如果特朗普访华想要和中国谈什么，南海问题不妨纳入其中，不妨谈谈菲律宾法理领土范围问题。有趣的是，1898年的《美西和平条约》、1900年的《美西关于菲律宾外围岛屿割让的条约》，以及1930年的《关于划定英属北婆罗洲与美属菲律宾之间的边界条约》均与美国有关，对菲律宾法理领土范围问题，美国恐怕还真的无法回避。

从这次南部战区巡航巴西兰海峡美方基本保持沉默的情况来看，如果美国继续这样沉默下去，恐怕距离“重演”美国当年和西班牙在加勒比海“一战成名”的一幕真的就不远了，这或是引发菲律宾内部政治斗争短期内迅速尖锐化的一个主要原因。问题在于，比菲律宾国力不知道强多少的日本，在琉球问题上想要“死守”都毫无胜算可言，何况菲律宾在类似巴拉望岛、黄岩岛、仁爱礁等地的非法主权要求？此外，如果“根据地”在棉兰老岛的杜特尔特（菲律宾现任副总统的父亲，菲律宾前总统）宣布独立并脱离菲律宾，试问，今天的美国可还有实力加以干预？特朗普政府不妨猜猜，如果“独立”后的杜特尔特向中国“求援”，中国会否响应？

有趣的是，据称，这次中国人民解放军南部战区组织海空兵力经巴西兰海峡赴远海开展演训的过程中，055大驱106舰（延安舰），以4节的“龟速”缓慢通过巴西兰海峡，接受菲方“检阅”。在我们看来，这一举动就是震慑菲方，包括菲律宾的政客、菲律宾的反华势力，尤其是菲律宾社会，让菲方充分感受什么是“汉军威武”！同时也是警告菲律宾小马科斯政府，不要有任何非分之想，你的“主子”美国，在关键时刻是靠不住的！

●继DeepSeek之后，中国在打击美国的金融，尤其是融资计划方面挥出的又一记重拳

除了南海问题外，美国释放撤军叙利亚的消息，无论真假，对欧盟来说都算是个好消息。欧洲虽然不希望美国立刻从叙利亚全面撤军，但毕竟还有沙特和以色列可以去平衡土耳其，所以，欧盟在总体上乐见美国人撤离叙利亚。而同样出自特朗普政府之口的或提议冻结当前战线的乌克兰和平计划对俄罗斯来说当然也是个机会。似乎方方面面都看明白了，特朗普政府表面上张牙舞爪，气势汹汹，而实际上却在收缩，为了不断升级的“内斗”而不得不收缩！

如果特朗普政府继续在南海问题上保持低调，甚至真的在乌克兰问题上冻结了战线，这或意味着特朗普政府在对外政策上已经什么也顾不上了，因为此时此刻的美国“内斗”恐怕已经再度白热化，甚至不排除美国爆发“内战”的可能性。值得一提的是，特朗普在非传统安全层面一切为了赚钱与对外政策的最新变化之间并不冲突，甚至在“Deepseek效应”的猛烈冲击下，特朗普政府比之以往更加急迫地想要获取中国的某种默许。

2月4日，市场监管总局网站公布消息，美国谷歌公司因涉嫌违反《中华人民共和国反垄断法》，被市场监管总局依法立案调查。

这或意味着中国的鸿蒙操作系统已经成功。很多应用已经完成重写。此外，被调查的还有苹果和英特尔。这显然是中国在软、硬件方面均已取得重大突破的一种宣示——中国不怕和美国脱钩断链，即便是美国引以为傲的半导体芯片产业和应用软件层面。中国对特朗普政府传递的信号很明确：如果在传统安全层面因为内斗对中国让步，中国笑纳。但如果在非传统安全层面美帝打算继续“龇牙”，仍试图从实力的角度出发和中国讲话，那我们就打碎牙齿让你和血吞！这显然是继DeepSeek之后，中国在打击美国的金融，尤其是融资计划方面挥出的又一记重拳。

Thursday, February 6, 2025, Issue No. 1172

● On the Impeachment of the Philippine Vice President and the Signal Sent by the Chinese Naval Fleet's Passage Through the Basilan Strait

[Media Coverage]

On February 3rd, the Southern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army organized naval and air forces to conduct training exercises in the distant seas via the Basilan Strait. The relevant actions were carried out safely, normatively, and professionally, fully complying with international law and international practice. The Philippine side's slander and hype of the normal passage of the Chinese naval fleet severely damaged the normal navigation rights of other countries, including China.

On February 5th, the Philippine House of Representatives formally initiated an impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte. A total of 215 congressmen signed the impeachment complaint against Sara. According to relevant regulations in the Philippines, the House of Representatives needs the signatures of one-third of its members, or 102 congressmen, to submit the impeachment complaint against Sara to the Senate for trial.

Sara Duterte is reportedly the first vice president in Philippine history to be impeached by the House of Representatives.

【Discussion Summary】

● The So-Called "US Withdrawal Plan from Syria" is Essentially Political Coercion Against Middle Eastern Countries, Including Gulf Arab States

In our previous discussion, we mentioned the rumor about the disappearance of a US "B-2" strategic bomber in the South China Sea. Although this remains speculative to date, its logical rationale exists. During the Spring Festival, both China and the US have taken actions based on the strategy of "forming alliances and dividing enemies, befriending distant states while attacking nearby ones," whether in traditional or non-traditional security realms.

Before continuing our discussion, let's look at a news report:

On February 5th, two US Defense Department officials stated that the US Defense Department is formulating a plan to withdraw all US troops from Syria. The officials said that US President Trump and officials close to him have recently expressed interest in withdrawing troops from Syria, prompting Pentagon officials to begin drafting plans for a full withdrawal within 30, 60, or 90 days.

Despite the Pentagon officials starting to draft a plan to withdraw all US troops from Syria, in our observation and assessment, the so-called "US withdrawal plan from Syria" can be aptly described with one word: hesitant.

In our observation and assessment, the true purpose of the Trump administration's posture is not to withdraw from Syria but to coerce some Middle Eastern countries into further cooperating with the US to maintain basic stability in the Middle East and primarily use it for "internal strife." It's worth mentioning that during Trump's first presidential term in 2019, he used the pretext of "returning wartime operational control to South Korea" (i.e., posing a gesture of preparing to withdraw US troops from South Korea and abandoning the country) to make exorbitant demands on South Korea, seeking up to $5 billion in military fees, which was already five times what South Korea was paying at the time for US troop stationing.

It's not hard to imagine that if the US really withdraws from Syria, Turkey will immediately gain a foothold in Syria, which will inevitably have a significant impact on Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries' influence in Syria, posing a strategic pressure on them. The message from the Trump administration is clear: if Middle Eastern countries, including Gulf Arab states, do not cooperate with the US on Middle Eastern issues, the US will simply "wash its hands" and leave.

● The Trump Administration is Using All Diplomatic Resources to Prioritize the Selfish Interests of a Small Group

On December 8th, 2024, when he was still the President-elect, Trump expressed his views on the Syrian issue, stating that Syria is in chaos, and the US should not be involved, as it is not America's fight and should not intervene. Today, as the US President, Trump's foreign policy does not seem to be leaning towards a relative distance from the Biden administration as of November 5th, 2024, as we previously assessed, but rather towards "returning to himself." Why is this? This is likely firstly related to the fact that the "Bidens" and the "Trumps" did not "reach an agreement" before January 20th, and the transition between the two US governments is still in a "bloody" state, far from "settled." At least, this is the case at the current stage.

This means that the Trump administration's foreign policy is more inclined to return to the "President-elect Trump" before January 20th or the "Candidate Trump" before November 5th and may even become "more Trump-like" than the Trump before November 5th. Some netizens joke that Trump has probably become the "most insecure" President-elect in US history.

It's worth noting that this phenomenon is not only reflected in the current US policy on Syria but also in its policy on Palestine.

On February 6th, Trump reiterated the US plan to "take over" Gaza and said that after the local residents have moved and settled elsewhere, Gaza "will be handed over to the US by Israel at the end of the fighting." Meanwhile, Israeli officials announced that they would ask the military to develop a plan to allow Palestinians to "voluntarily leave" the Gaza Strip.

Against the backdrop of the Iranian authorities' foreign policy still following a "capitulationist" approach, Trump is posing as if he is ready to allow the Netanyahu group to achieve a "great victory," thereby trying to win the political support of the "critical few" within the US who back the Netanyahu group. To this end, Trump is willing to sacrifice the long-term interests of the US and even US capital interests. From this perspective, Trump and Biden are indeed cut from the same cloth, and the current Trump administration is even more aggressive than the Biden administration was towards the end of its term. The Trump administration is using all diplomatic resources to satisfy the selfish interests of a small group.

The Trump administration's retrogressive actions on a series of Middle Eastern issues have naturally met with resolute opposition from a host of Middle Eastern countries, including Gulf Arab states, which happens to play into Trump's hands – since these countries oppose it, they should follow the Trump administration's arrangements on Middle Eastern issues, otherwise, the US will withdraw and leave them to Israel.

In our observation and assessment, the Trump administration, for the sake of "better internal strife," may have plans to use the South China Sea issue, or even the Taiwan issue, as bargaining chips in negotiations with China (these are our core interests, and we will not negotiate with the US on them; what can be negotiated is the South China Sea issue). Furthermore, the Ukrainian issue from Russia's perspective and the Syrian issue from the EU's perspective may also be thrown out as bargaining chips by the Trump administration for "better internal strife." Even Yoon Seok-youl, this "half-abandoned" "pawn," may be reused as the stick to complement Trump's previous olive branch to North Korea, which was met with a "closed door."

In any case, it is evident that the global strategy of the US under Trump's second term has shown clear signs of contraction. Although this "strategic contraction" is portrayed by the Trump administration as "forming alliances and dividing enemies, befriending distant states while attacking nearby ones," it increasingly seems to be a forced "strategic contraction" due to the severe decline in both absolute and relative strength, especially the increasing "internal consumption."

●If Trump Visits China to Discuss the Legal Territorial Scope of the Philippines, We Welcome It!

We have noticed recent news reports about the formal impeachment proceedings initiated against Vice President Sara Duterte in the Philippine House of Representatives. This is firstly a manifestation of the deterioration of internal political struggles in the Philippines against the backdrop of an increasingly evident "strategic retraction" by the United States. Interestingly, just a few days ago, on February 3rd, the Southern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army organized naval and air forces to conduct training exercises in distant waters via the Basilan Strait. In response, the US remained relatively low-key.

On February 9th, 2024, then-spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Wang Wenbin, responded to questions about the Huangyan Island during a regular press conference. Wang Wenbin stated that Huangyan Island is China's inherent territory, and China's sovereignty over the island and its adjacent waters is indisputable. China is also continuously, peacefully, and effectively exercising sovereignty and jurisdiction over Huangyan Island.

The spokesperson specifically pointed out that the territorial scope of the Philippines is determined by a series of international treaties, including the 1898 Treaty of Paris between the United States and Spain, the 1900 Treaty of Washington concerning the Cession of Outlying Islands of the Philippines, and the 1930 Treaty between Great Britain and the United States defining the boundary between British North Borneo and the Philippine Islands. Huangyan Island has never been within the territorial scope of the Philippines. The Philippines' current claims to sovereignty over Huangyan Island based on proximity or exclusive economic zone assertions are all inconsistent with international law.

It can be said that the so-called "Philippine territorial issue" is essentially a historical legacy of Western colonialism. Ultimately, for a long time, the Philippines was not a sovereign nation (when the Republic of China government delineated the 11-dashed line, and later the 9-dashed line, the Philippines was not yet a sovereign nation). Obviously, the recent training exercises conducted by the Southern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army in distant waters via the Basilan Strait are aimed at this point, namely the legal territorial scope of the Philippines. According to relevant treaties, even Palawan Island is not entirely within the legal territorial scope of the Philippines, with a western portion lying outside the "east of 118° longitude and south of 20° latitude." In our view, if Trump visits China and wants to discuss anything with China, the South China Sea issue should be included, and the legal territorial scope of the Philippines can be discussed. Interestingly, the 1898 Treaty of Paris, the 1900 Treaty of Washington, and the 1930 treaty defining the boundary between British North Borneo and the Philippine Islands are all related to the United States. The US may indeed find it difficult to avoid discussing the legal territorial scope of the Philippines.

Judging from the US's basic silence regarding the Southern Theater Command's cruise through the Basilan Strait, if the US continues to remain silent, it may not be long before a situation similar to the US's "rise to fame" through war with Spain in the Caribbean is "repeated," which could be a major reason for the rapid intensification of internal political struggles in the Philippines. The question is, how can the Philippines, whose national strength is far inferior to that of Japan, have any chance of "holding on" to its illegal sovereignty claims over places like Palawan Island, Huangyan Island, and Ren'ai Reef? Furthermore, if Duterte (the father of the current Vice President of the Philippines and former President of the Philippines) based in Mindanao declares independence and secedes from the Philippines, can the US today still intervene? The Trump administration may want to guess: if the "independent" Duterte seeks "assistance" from China, will China respond?

Interestingly, it is said that during the recent training exercises conducted by the Southern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army in distant waters via the Basilan Strait, the Type 055 destroyer Yanan (hull number 106) slowly passed through the Basilan Strait at a speed of 4 knots, allowing the Philippine side to "inspect" it. In our view, this move is intended to deter the Philippines, including Filipino politicians, anti-China forces in the Philippines, and especially Filipino society, making them fully aware of what "the might of the Han army" is! It is also a warning to the Marcos Jr. administration in the Philippines not to harbor any wild ambitions, as their "master" the US cannot be relied upon in critical moments!

●After DeepSeek, China Lands Another Heavy Blow in Striking Against US Finance, Especially Its Financing Plans

In addition to the South China Sea issue, the news of the US withdrawing troops from Syria, whether true or false, is good news for the European Union. Although Europe does not want the US to completely withdraw from Syria immediately, Saudi Arabia and Israel can still balance Turkey, so the EU generally welcomes the departure of the Americans from Syria. Similarly, the Ukrainian peace plan proposed by the Trump administration to freeze the current front lines is certainly an opportunity for Russia. It seems that all parties have understood that the Trump administration, despite its aggressive posture, is actually retracting due to escalating "internal strife"!

If the Trump administration continues to maintain a low profile on the South China Sea issue and even freezes the front lines in the Ukraine issue, this may indicate that the Trump administration can no longer afford to focus on foreign policy, as the "internal strife" in the US may have intensified once again, and there is even a possibility of a "civil war" breaking out in the US. It is worth mentioning that Trump's focus on making money in the realm of non-traditional security does not conflict with the latest changes in foreign policy. In fact, under the fierce impact of the "DeepSeek effect," the Trump administration is even more eager to obtain some kind of tacit approval from China.

On February 4th, the State Administration for Market Regulation announced that Google Inc. of the United States had been formally investigated by the administration for allegedly violating the Anti-Monopoly Law of the People's Republic of China.

This may indicate the success of China's HarmonyOS operating system, with many applications already rewritten. Apple and Intel were also investigated. This is clearly a declaration of China's significant breakthroughs in both software and hardware – China is not afraid of decoupling from the US, even in the semiconductor chip industry and application software, which the US is proud of. The message China is sending to the Trump administration is clear: if concessions are made to China in traditional security due to internal strife, China will gratefully accept them. However, if the US intends to continue "baring its teeth" in non-traditional security and still tries to speak to China from a position of strength, then China will shatter those teeth and make the US swallow them with blood! This is clearly another heavy blow landed by China in striking against US finance, especially its financing plans, after DeepSeek.

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