东方时事 | 贯日翻译 | 郑叔翻译 | Certificate Translation |

第1189期

原文出处: 衍射 2025年2月26日

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/R2sZufFqvPEOeYZI-z0QfQ

Issue 1189

Original: Diffraction Feb.26,2025

 

2025年2月26日,星期三,第1189期

美国因无法首先缓和对华关系而被迫首先缓和对俄关系产生的负面效应逐步显现

【媒体报道】

2月25日,在美国总统特朗普称俄罗斯对欧洲维和部队部署在乌克兰持开放态度后,克里姆林宫25日在被问及如何评价这一说法时让记者参考早些时候的一份声明,该声明称莫斯科无法接受这样的举动。报道称,俄罗斯曾多次表示反对北约在乌克兰部署地面部队。俄外长谢尔盖·拉夫罗夫上周表示,莫斯科将把这种做法视为对俄罗斯主权的“直接威胁”。当被问及特朗普的言论时,克里姆林宫发言人德米特里·佩斯科夫没有公开反驳美国总统,但实际上重申了俄罗斯反对该想法的立场。

【讨论纪要】

●对于本就各怀鬼胎的俄美关系来说,时间一长,必然生变

2月25日,在美国总统特朗普称俄罗斯对欧洲维和部队部署在乌克兰持开放态度后,克里姆林宫25日在被问及如何评价这一说法时让记者参考早些时候的一份声明,该声明称莫斯科无法接受这样的举动。

俄方的否认比较及时,从中大家也不难看出美国总统特朗普这个人的行事风格,阴险狡诈,信口雌黄。

如果所谓的“欧洲维和部队”在美国的保护下进入乌克兰,本质等同于北约公开、成建制进入乌克兰。即便这期间乌克兰当局“承诺”放弃武装,那也意味着持续三年且尚未结束的对乌特别军事行动将以彻底失败告终。

通过上面我们讨论的细节大家不难看出,美俄之间想要重建战略互信,尤其是基于传统安全层面并非易事。近日,俄罗斯总统新闻秘书佩斯科夫在回应记者提问时就明确表示,俄方对于美国代表的信任仍需“走很长一段路”。更何况,方方面面早已注意到“美国内部恶斗”的“没有最激烈,只有更激烈”,俄罗斯作为世界性大国自然不会轻易放过这个机会。经过3年的俄乌战争,1年半的本轮巴以冲突以及阿萨德政权倾覆后的叙利亚再乱,尤其在“中东国家争取国家独立和民族解放运动”之相关进程在国际社会的大力推动下已经启动的背景下去观察,无论是在乌克兰问题上,中东问题上,以及西太问题上,亦或是在全球范围内,美国早已不再是以前的美国了。

当然,俄罗斯也不再是以前的俄罗斯了。所以,俄罗斯即便有意和美国靠近,即便在非传统安全层面,俄、美双方都会不自觉地“回头去看”——中国在哪儿。所以,即便是稀土合作也没有那么容易。从“技术角度”看,相应的稀土提炼技术以及产业加工规模(直接涉及产品竞争力)都要画一个大大的问号。而在“非技术角度”,操作不好是很可能引起中国“处理”俄罗斯之心的。

特朗普政府也清楚,在所谓“稀土合作”的问题上能与俄罗斯走多远无法确定,毕竟其中涉及中国的利益。所以,特朗普拉拢俄罗斯的一个主要意图就在于推动实质性瓦解中俄战略互信。当然,在现阶段,这也首先要服务于“美国内政”。

熟悉东方时事解读的朋友们都知道,俄罗斯“阿富汗政策小九九”有两个层面:一方面借西方之力遏制中国;另一方面借中国之力抵御欧美。所以,俄罗斯“阿富汗政策小九九”美国能利用,国际社会也能利用。所以,国际社会的应对措施不过于一个字:熬!对于本就各怀鬼胎的俄美关系来说,时间一长,必然生变。这也是我们说俄罗斯欲借“乌克兰重建”拉动自己经济转型几乎不可能实现的主要原因之一。站在俄罗斯之外去观察俄罗斯“阿富汗政策小九九”,很大程度上限制了俄罗斯的发展潜力,不得不说,这是一个悲剧。

●特朗普要在对华、对欧、对俄关系的大多数缓和关系,才有可能赢得“内斗”,其中,对华关系是“必选项”

在继续展开讨论之前,我们再来看一则新闻报道。

2月25日,在惠灵顿元宵节活动上,一名新西兰记者咄咄逼人地问道:“中国军舰为何突然出现在新西兰家门口?”中国驻新西兰大使王小龙看出了这个记者的不怀好意,所以并没有陷入“自证环节”,而是反将一军:“你们怎么不说说新西兰军舰为何靠近中国台湾海岸呢?”这名新西兰记者顿时哑口无言。

2月26日,055遵义舰、054A衡阳舰和903“微山湖”号补给舰前出澳大利亚、新西兰所在南太平洋地区,怼在澳大利亚最大城市悉尼的门口“开枪开炮”。有趣的是,最先披露这件事的反而是新西兰媒体。

在我们看来,这次中国“抓机会”可谓抓得恰逢其时。一举将“美澳军事同盟”和“美新军事同盟”一刀劈开。即便是澳大利亚和新西兰两国之间,也是各怀心事,各有盘算。而最令人感到意外的是,美国到目前为止,对中国舰队前出澳大利亚和新西兰一事三缄其口。美国因无法首先缓和对华关系而被迫首先缓和对俄关系产生的负面效应逐步显现。特朗普知道,对目下的美国来说,应对这件事既无能力,更是时机不对。

一个讽刺性极强的困局摆在特朗普面前——因特朗普政府无法做到首先缓和对华关系,只能被迫先缓和对俄关系。然而,在特朗普用一种近乎“投降”的姿态缓和对俄关系的同时,在欧盟,尤其是中国看来,既然你对俄罗斯都“跪”成这样,那你回头再去试图缓和欧美关系,尤其是中美关系的时候,欧盟,尤其是中国是必然要给特朗普政府“留新作业”,在我们看来,这次中国舰队直插“第三岛链”就有这层意思——提醒特朗普政府,现实情况是,南海问题我们都没兴趣谈了,要谈就谈西大问题!

中国已经成为特朗普政府能否顺利执行“攘外必先安内”政策的关键中的关键。这有点类似“第三轮排列组合”。有趣的是,“第一轮排列组合”以美俄之争为主线,典型代表事件是格鲁吉亚战争。“第二轮排列组合”以美欧之争为主线,典型代表事件是欧债危机。“第三轮排列组合”以中美之争为主线,典型代表事件是泰国之乱。今天的特朗普政府尽管对首先“妥善处理”中美关系有所认知,但冥冥之中却只能按照俄美、欧美、中美的顺序处理,这是历史的巧合吗?

不排除普京当时和特朗普谈“欧洲维和部队进入乌克兰”这个问题的时候没有明确表态的可能性。如果真是这样,普京倒是给特朗普挖了个“坑”。

问题在于,“美国内部恶斗”不等人!“特朗普们”能卖国,“拜登们”更可以!“特朗普们”不方便说的,“拜登们”方便!“美国内部恶斗”越激烈,特朗普政府对内越被动,对外就越软弱。在这样一个背景下,再加上特朗普本性狡诈,信口雌黄,上了普京的当也就不足为奇了。

●叙利亚问题让特朗普政府处理起来举步维艰。这一切还都要拜刚刚下台1个多月的拜登政府所赐

在绝不错过“抓机会”的问题上,除了中、美、欧、俄这类世界性的大国或国际组织外,一些地区性国家,比如,以色列,同样如此。

我们注意到2月25日,以色列在联合国大会上投票反对乌克兰问题的反俄决议,因为以色列认为,支持美国当前为和平解决冲突所做的努力非常重要的新闻报道。

俄罗斯想要“有效重返”叙利亚,阻碍第一个就是欧盟。既然如此,俄罗斯就需要在中东地区寻求可以对抗欧盟的“帮手”,对此,恐怕以色列有意为之。以色列也可以借俄罗斯为支点进一步要求特朗普政府给予更多支持。

对欧盟来说,如果要继续深度介入叙利亚局势后续发展,就必须站在以色列的对立面上。否则很难获得诸如埃及、沙特等重要中东国家的支持。特朗普政府支持以色列就很难处理好和沙特的关系,又由于欧盟要寻求埃及、沙特等中东国家的支持,特朗普政府就相当于间接无法处理好和欧洲之间的关系。

就算特朗普能够暂时处理欧美关系,那又将如何面对同样急切“有效重返叙利亚”的俄罗斯呢?如果美国支持俄罗斯“有效重返叙利亚”,那就又无形中得罪了在叙利亚,乃至中东地区存在的或明、或暗,且为数不少的俄罗斯的地缘政治对手,比如,欧盟。如此,刚刚处理好的欧美关系也就再次变得“不好了”。

从上述讨论中大家不难看出,对于特朗普政府而言,仅仅是一个叙利亚问题,其复杂性就恐怖如斯,让其处理起来举步维艰。而这一切还都要拜刚刚下台1个多月的拜登政府所赐。

●重提“MH370事件”也不过是中美关系可能改善的“万里长征第一步”

最后我们就俄美关系缓和背景下,中俄关系何去何从这个大家比较关心的话题做一些补充。总的来说,处理中俄关系要客观、冷静和务实。

有消息显示,俄罗斯总统普京身边的一些“值得信赖的人”,在俄美关系开始缓和后,在中俄关系如何定位、定性的问题上出现了“180度大转弯”的现象。在我们看来,这种现象在俄罗斯社会,尤其在俄罗斯“社会上层”普遍存在,对中国的提防之心可谓根深蒂固。这说明,其一,俄罗斯根本没有吸取明斯克协议被骗的经验教训;其二,俄罗斯决策层的确在盘算在中美之间到底是否要选边,如何选边,何时选边。所以,特朗普在这个时候缓和对俄关系还是有操作空间的。这也是在俄美关系刚刚有所缓和后,特朗普政府重提“MH370事件”的主要契机之一。

当年,美国指使北约悍然制造“MH370事件”,意图诱导俄罗斯对外政策,尤其是对华政策向中俄战略互信实质性瓦解的方向迅速演进。当时俄罗斯一个是不敢,另一个是“胃口很大”(中东时间陷阱外溢到乌克兰俄罗斯已经吃了亏,这也是阿富汗政策小九九“借中国之力抵御美欧”这一面在起作用),并未做出美国人预期中的那种对外政策调整。如今,美国重提“MH370事件”,将测试目标变为中国。在我们的观察与评估中,不排除为了在“美国内部恶斗”中不落下风,特朗普政府将重提“MH370事件”作为缓和对华关系的“敲门砖”——实在不行,就给中国一个交代!

不过,问题恐怕远没有特朗普想象中的那么简单。由于“MH370事件”牵扯“MH17事件”,如果特朗普政府真的打算“实在不行,就给中国一个交代”,那么“MH17事件”是否也要给俄罗斯一个交代?如果不给,那么在俄罗斯眼中,美国的这一行为就会被立刻解读为,中美关系有所缓和后,拉着欧盟施压俄罗斯。那么,在中美关系改善是特朗普政府在对华、对欧、对俄关系必须“大多数”缓和且对华关系缓和是“必选项”,才有可能赢得内斗的情况下,又打算如何平衡再度“按起了葫芦瓢起来”的欧盟和俄罗斯?如果平衡了美欧关系,美俄关系,但却忘记了“勾选”中美关系缓和这一“必选项”,那么特朗普政府这一番平衡操作又有什么意义?也许中国早就看出了这是一步死棋,在特朗普政府本就没有诚意,试图在南海问题上怂恿菲律宾对抗中国,在台湾问题上唆使澳新挑衅中国的情况下,就是不给特朗普政府率先缓和中美关系的操作空间,逼着其只能去缓和俄美关系。结果就是“一处被动,处处被动”。

中国肩负人类社会发展希望,推动“一带一路”倡议逐渐落实并在全球铺开,中国反而不会像其他国家那样“追杀美国”。所以,某种意义上说,对特朗普政府来说,反而中国是最好打交道的,但特朗普政府能做到“当断则断”吗?其中自然有其自身原因,也有其所在的代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益和中国等南方国家之间不可调和矛盾的原因。当然,正所谓“退一步海阔天空”,也许特朗普退到一个合适的位置,或能做出必要选择,至于如何退,退到哪里,退的过程中是否出现“意外”,那就要看特朗普自己的“造化”了。在我们看来,这个过程并不容易,除非代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益中的不同层级的利益集团同时认识到,有必要形成“中东全面破局”,并“复杂转进”加入“一带一路”倡议(前提是接受“基因改造”),否则,“美国内部恶斗”恐难终止。

最后需要补充的是,日本一定会紧盯“美国内部恶斗”的具体进程并盘算自己的出路究竟在何方。而一旦“中东全面破局”变为现实,那日本就难逃“三家分晋”的下场。当然,这里指的并不是要“瓜分”日本的领土,而是目前模式下的日本经济将不复存在。

声明:具体内容如有出入,请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

 

Wednesday, February 26, 2025, Issue No. 1189

The negative effects of the U.S. being forced to ease relations with Russia due to its inability to first ease relations with China are gradually becoming apparent.

[Media Coverage]

On February 25, after U.S. President Trump claimed that Russia was open to the deployment of European peacekeeping forces in Ukraine, the Kremlin referred reporters to an earlier statement, which asserted that Moscow cannot accept such actions. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated last week that Moscow would view such actions as a "direct threat" to its sovereignty. When asked about Trump’s remarks, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov did not openly refute the U.S. President but reaffirmed Russia’s opposition to the idea.

【Discussion Summary】

● For the inherently suspicious U.S.-Russia relationship, changes are inevitable over time.

On February 25, in response to Trump’s claim about Russia’s openness to European peacekeeping forces in Ukraine, the Kremlin referred to an earlier statement rejecting such actions. Russia’s denial was prompt, revealing Trump’s cunning and deceitful approach. The deployment of "European peacekeeping forces" under U.S. protection would essentially mean a formal NATO presence in Ukraine, leading to a complete failure of Russia’s ongoing special military operation. This highlights the difficulty in rebuilding strategic trust between the U.S. and Russia, especially in traditional security areas.

Kremlin spokesperson Peskov stated that restoring trust with the U.S. would require significant effort, reflecting the deep-seated mistrust between the two nations. The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, the Israel-Hamas conflict, and the unstable situation in Syria after the fall of the Assad regime further complicate the geopolitical landscape. The U.S. is no longer the dominant power it once was, and Russia, too, has undergone significant changes, making cooperation challenging.

Even if Russia is willing to cooperate with the U.S., both sides will inevitably "look back" to see where China stands. This makes cooperation, even in non-traditional security areas like rare earth minerals, difficult. From a "technical perspective," there are significant questions about the refining technology and industrial scale of such cooperation. From a "non-technical perspective," mishandling the situation could provoke China to take action against Russia.

The Trump administration is aware that the extent of cooperation with Russia on rare earth minerals is uncertain, as it involves China’s interests. Therefore, Trump’s primary goal in courting Russia is to drive a wedge between China and Russia. However, at this stage, this effort is primarily aimed at serving U.S. domestic politics.

Those familiar with East Wind Current Affairs know that Russia’s "Afghanistan policy" has two layers: using Western forces to contain China and using China’s strength to resist Europe and the U.S. This policy can be exploited by both the U.S. and the international community. The international community’s response can be summarized in one word: endure. For the inherently suspicious U.S.-Russia relationship, time will inevitably lead to changes. This is one of the main reasons why Russia’s attempt to use "Ukraine’s reconstruction" to drive its economic transformation is almost impossible. Looking at Russia’s "Afghanistan policy" from the outside, it significantly limits Russia’s development potential, which is undoubtedly a tragedy.

● Trump must ease tensions in most of the U.S. relationships with China, Europe, and Russia, with China being a "must."

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

On February 25, during a Lantern Festival event in Wellington, a New Zealand journalist aggressively asked, "Why have Chinese warships suddenly appeared near New Zealand’s doorstep?" Chinese Ambassador to New Zealand Wang Xiaolong, recognizing the journalist’s ill intentions, did not engage in self-defense but instead countered: "Why don’t you talk about why New Zealand’s warships are approaching the coast of Taiwan, China?" The journalist was left speechless.

On February 26, the Chinese Navy’s Type 055 destroyer Zunyi, Type 054A frigate Hengyang, and the Weishanhu supply ship appeared in the South Pacific near Australia and New Zealand, conducting live-fire exercises near Sydney, Australia’s largest city. Interestingly, it was the New Zealand media that first reported this incident.

In our view, China’s timing in "seizing the opportunity" was impeccable. It effectively split the "U.S.-Australia military alliance" and the "U.S.-New Zealand military alliance." Even between Australia and New Zealand, there are hidden tensions and competing interests. Surprisingly, the U.S. has remained silent about the Chinese fleet’s presence near Australia and New Zealand. The negative effects of the U.S. being forced to first ease relations with Russia due to its inability to ease relations with China are gradually becoming apparent. Trump knows that the U.S. currently lacks the ability and the right timing to respond to this situation.

A highly ironic dilemma now faces Trump: because the Trump administration cannot first ease relations with China, it is forced to first ease relations with Russia. However, while Trump adopts a near "surrender" posture in easing relations with Russia, the EU, and especially China, will inevitably "assign new homework" to the Trump administration when he tries to ease U.S.-EU and U.S.-China relations. In our view, the Chinese fleet’s penetration into the "third island chain" serves as a reminder to the Trump administration that the reality is: we are no longer interested in discussing the South China Sea issue; if you want to talk, let’s talk about the Western Pacific issue!

China has become the key to whether the Trump administration can successfully execute its "secure the homeland first" policy. This is somewhat similar to the "third round of realignment." Interestingly, the "first round of realignment" was marked by U.S.-Russia rivalry, with the Georgia War as a typical example. The "second round" was characterized by U.S.-Europe tensions, exemplified by the European debt crisis. The "third round" is defined by U.S.-China competition, with the Thai political crisis as a representative event. Today, while the Trump administration recognizes the need to "properly handle" U.S.-China relations first, it seems destined to follow the order of U.S.-Russia, U.S.-EU, and U.S.-China relations. Is this a historical coincidence?

It is possible that Putin did not explicitly state his position when discussing with Trump the issue of "European peacekeeping forces entering Ukraine." If so, Putin may have set a trap for Trump.

The problem is that the "fierce internal U.S. strife" waits for no one! The "Trump faction" can sell out the country, and the "Biden faction" can do so even more! What the "Trump faction" cannot say, the "Biden faction" can! The more intense the internal U.S. strife, the more passive the Trump administration becomes domestically and the weaker it appears internationally. Against this backdrop, combined with Trump’s inherently cunning and deceitful nature, it is no surprise that he fell into Putin’s trap.

● The Syrian issue makes it extremely difficult for the Trump administration to act. All of this can be attributed to the Biden administration, which stepped down just over a month ago.

In the matter of seizing opportunities, some regional countries, such as Israel, are just as active as major global powers or international organizations like China, the U.S., Europe, and Russia.

On February 25, Israel voted against a U.N. resolution condemning Russia over the Ukraine issue, arguing that supporting the U.S.’s current efforts to peacefully resolve the conflict is very important.

For Russia to "effectively return" to Syria, the primary obstacle is the EU. Therefore, Russia needs to find a "partner" in the Middle East to counter the EU, and Israel seems willing to play this role. Israel can also use Russia as leverage to demand more support from the Trump administration.

For the EU, if it wants to continue to deeply intervene in the Syrian situation, it must stand in opposition to Israel. Otherwise, it will be difficult to gain the support of key Middle Eastern countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. If the Trump administration supports Israel, it will struggle to maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia. Since the EU seeks support from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and other Middle Eastern countries, the Trump administration indirectly cannot maintain good relations with Europe.

Even if Trump can temporarily manage U.S.-EU relations, how will he deal with Russia, which is equally eager to "effectively return" to Syria? If the U.S. supports Russia’s "effective return" to Syria, it will inadvertently offend Russia’s geopolitical rivals in Syria and the broader Middle East, such as the EU. Thus, the recently repaired U.S.-EU relations would once again deteriorate.

From the above discussion, it is clear that for the Trump administration, the Syrian issue alone is incredibly complex and difficult to handle. All of this can be attributed to the Biden administration, which stepped down just over a month ago.

● Revisiting the "MH370 incident" is only the first step in the long journey toward possible improvement in U.S.-China relations.

Finally, we will address the future of China-Russia relations amid the easing of U.S.-Russia tensions, a topic of great concern to many. Overall, handling China-Russia relations requires objectivity, calmness, and pragmatism.

There are reports that some of Russian President Putin’s "trusted advisors" have done a "180-degree turn" in their assessment of China-Russia relations after the easing of U.S.-Russia ties. In our view, this phenomenon is widespread in Russian society, especially among the "elite," and reflects deep-rooted distrust of China. This indicates, first, that Russia has not learned from the lessons of being deceived by the Minsk agreements, and second, that Russia’s decision-makers are indeed considering whether, how, and when to choose sides between China and the U.S. Therefore, Trump’s current efforts to ease relations with Russia still have some room for maneuver. This is also one of the main reasons why the Trump administration revisited the "MH370 incident" after the easing of U.S.-Russia relations.

In the past, the U.S. instigated NATO to brazenly orchestrate the "MH370 incident" to induce Russia’s foreign policy, especially its China policy, to rapidly move toward the substantive disintegration of China-Russia strategic mutual trust. At the time, Russia was both unwilling and had "appetite" (having already suffered losses from the Middle East time trap spilling over into Ukraine, which reflects the "Afghanistan policy" of using China’s strength to resist Europe and the U.S.) and did not make the foreign policy adjustments the U.S. had hoped for. Today, by revisiting the "MH370 incident," the U.S. has shifted its testing target to China. In our observation and assessment, it is not impossible that the Trump administration, in order to avoid losing ground in the "fierce internal U.S. strife," is using the "MH370 incident" as a "stepping stone" to ease U.S.-China relations—essentially saying, "If all else fails, we’ll give China an explanation!"

However, the issue is far more complicated than Trump imagines. Since the "MH370 incident" is linked to the "MH17 incident," if the Trump administration truly intends to "give China an explanation," then it must also address the "MH17 incident" for Russia. If it does not, Russia will immediately interpret the U.S.’s actions as an attempt to use the EU to pressure Russia after easing tensions with China. In a scenario where U.S.-China relations must improve for Trump to win the internal U.S. political struggle, how will the U.S. balance the EU and Russia? If the U.S. manages to balance U.S.-EU and U.S.-Russia relations but fails to "check the box" for improving U.S.-China relations, what is the point of this balancing act? Perhaps China has long seen this as a dead end. In the absence of sincerity from the Trump administration, which has been inciting the Philippines to confront China in the South China Sea and urging Australia and New Zealand to provoke China on the Taiwan issue, China has denied the Trump administration the opportunity to first ease U.S.-China relations, forcing it to focus on easing U.S.-Russia relations instead. The result is "passive in one area, passive everywhere."

China, as a nation that shoulders the hope of human development and promotes the gradual implementation and global expansion of the "Belt and Road" initiative, does not "chase after" the U.S. like other countries. In a sense, for the Trump administration, China is actually the easiest to deal with. But can the Trump administration make the decisive move? The obstacles lie both in its own internal reasons and in the irreconcilable contradictions between the U.S. capitalist interests it represents and China and other Southern countries. Of course, as the saying goes, "Stepping back can lead to broader horizons." Perhaps if Trump steps back to a suitable position, he may make the necessary choices. As for how to step back, where to step back, and whether "accidents" will occur during the process, that will depend on Trump’s own "fate." In our view, this process is not easy unless the various interest groups within the U.S. capitalist class simultaneously recognize the need to achieve a "comprehensive Middle East breakthrough" and "complexly transition" into the "Belt and Road" initiative (on the condition of accepting "genetic transformation"). Otherwise, the "fierce internal U.S. strife" will be difficult to end.

Finally, it is worth noting that Japan will undoubtedly closely monitor the specific progress of the "fierce internal U.S. strife" and calculate its own way out. Once the "comprehensive Middle East breakthrough" becomes a reality, Japan will inevitably face the fate of being "divided among three families." Of course, this does not mean that Japan’s territory will be divided, but rather that the current model of Japan’s economy will cease to exist.

 

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