2025年3月3日，星期一，第1193期

为什么说目前阶段，俄罗斯谋求重启“北溪-2”天然气管道项目并非明智之举？

【媒体报道】

3月2日，据报道，俄罗斯总统普京的一名盟友一直在策划在美国投资者的支持下重启通往欧洲的“北溪2号”天然气管道，这一曾经不可想象的举动显示出特朗普希望与莫斯科修好的程度有多大。促成这笔协议的努力是前东德国家安全部（史塔西，东德秘密警察，国家安全局）官员马蒂亚斯·沃宁的想法，他在2023年之前一直是“北溪2号”母公司的负责人。沃宁的计划包括通过美国商人接触特朗普团队，这是他通过秘密渠道促成俄乌冲突结束、同时加深美俄经济联系的努力的一部分。

【讨论纪要】

●一场并不难识别的美欧“双簧”，就这样当着俄罗斯的面“鸣锣开戏”了

3月1日，英国首相府发言人表示，英国首相斯塔默当天下午在唐宁街10号首相府会见乌克兰总统泽连斯基。双方就乌克兰及欧洲面临的挑战、协调乌克兰与伙伴国家间关系、加强乌地位、以公正和平的方式结束战争的步骤以及对乌安全保障等内容进行了全面交流。

在上次的回顾中，我们详细讨论了美乌总统白宫“剧烈争吵”这一热点话题。究其本质，套用东方值班员的话说就是：这种再深入一层，甚至几层的骗局，又遭遇到美国资本代言的西方资本内部恶斗的新情况，稍不注意，就有可能“演戏”而“成真”、深入成为“实质性的公开争吵”。如果形势最后果然到了这一步，全球形势的焦点，恐怕就会立刻切换成“代言西方资本的美国资本内部恶斗日益激化”与“欧、或美爆发全面金融危机的危险日益升高”之间的极其危险之“互为因果”的因果关系，如果从这个角度去观察与评估问题，那么，美国总统与乌克兰总统在白宫上演的“剧烈争吵”，与俄罗斯的“果然又重生梦想”，到底，谁是真？谁是假？更或是“假做真来真亦假、真做假来假也真”，最终，真与假，对与错，只能由时间、或最终事实来确定。

值得一提的是，在上次回顾中我们也给出了一种乌克兰局势后续发展的可能性评估，那就是不排除美、欧、俄各自后退一步以换取在乌克兰问题上阶段性各取所需的可能性。

据最新报道，乌克兰总统泽连斯基在白宫与美国总统特朗普“大吵一架”后，一口气飞到了伦敦。在伦敦，泽连斯基被英国首相斯塔默等一众欧洲政要盛赞为“抗俄英雄”。英国更是毅然从老大哥——美国，手中接过“援乌大旗”，向乌克兰提供22.6亿英镑贷款，并承诺用冻结俄罗斯资产还贷，强化乌国防能力。与此同时，英国首相斯塔默劝泽连斯基重返白宫与特朗普“和好”，而欧洲与北约的领导人也纷纷施压。

在我们看来，英国的举动有些滑稽，而欧洲政要也将与美国之间的“双簧”演到极致。先不说22.6亿英镑对于俄乌战争也好，亦或是乌克兰重建也罢，都是杯水车薪，就算“资金”足够，欧洲国家恐怕也没有相应的战略物资供给乌克兰。如果网络传言中所谓泽连斯基和特朗普“激烈争吵”的背后是在乌克兰问题上与美国不对付的欧盟全力支持的，那么多欧洲政要又为什么要劝泽连斯基和特朗普“和好”呢？而天下谁不知道，乌克兰能挺到今天，战略物资，尤其是武器装备，军事体系都是美国提供的。

有趣的是，为了强化欧盟支持乌克兰的决心，法国总统马克龙罕见表态称他已准备好开始讨论欧洲的核威慑问题，法国可以帮助保护其他欧盟国家。在我们的观察中，法国的核武器虽然是法国自己的，但枚核弹头数量恐怕非常有限，这与法国综合国力密切相关。置于英国的核武器，本质上是美国的核武器。

综上所述，欧盟在军事上就是“侏儒”般的存在，需要美国的保护。而在英国背后的美国显然也愿意为欧盟提供核保护。由此也不难看出，所谓“欧美争吵”至少在当前阶段是在“演戏”，当然，如果西方操作不好，或受到外界的强烈干扰，“演戏”而“成真”、深入成为“实质性的公开争吵”是有可能的。

●乌克兰“一台戏”，（美、欧、俄）全靠拼演技！

此外，在网络传闻中所谓泽连斯基和特朗普“激烈争吵”的背后是在乌克兰问题上与美国不对付的欧盟全力支持的背后，大家不要忘记一件事。那就是在特朗普成功当选美国总统后，代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益中的一部分，比如，“拜登们之索罗斯们”是已经“逃离”美国来到了欧洲重新“安营扎寨”了的。所以，某种意义上说，美乌总统“激烈争吵”的本质是，已经“逃离”美国来到欧洲的，以及正计划“逃离”美国来到欧洲的，仍代言西方资本利益的，美国资本利益中的“一部分人”在支持欧洲利益（包括欧洲国家利益和欧洲资本利益）对抗仍代言西方资本利益的，美国资本利益中的“另一部分人”，比如，“特朗普们之马斯克们”。在东方时事解读的观察与评估中，这是代言西方资本利益的，美国资本利益内部恶斗不断的一种外溢表现。外溢方向，在美国国内已经触及西方资本利益的核心资产——美军的掌控权问题；在美国外部已经触及美国资本利益的“七大姑，八大姨”们，也就是欧洲利益。

值得一提的是，在英国首相斯塔默也宣称准备用核武器保护欧洲国家的背后，是支持欧洲利益的代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益中的“一部分人”认为斯塔默可以这样说，也就是说“美国愿意为欧洲提供核保护”。这也是上一段我们强调，代言西方资本利益的，美国资本利益内部恶斗对内已经外溢到触及西方资本利益的核心资产——美军的掌控权问题的具体表现。

或者说得更清楚一点，“拜登们之索罗斯们”借英国首相斯塔默之口对“特朗普们之马斯克们”公开喊话，不要认为你当了总统就能只手遮天，我们对美国军队的影响力比你想象中的要强得多！这恐怕是东方值班员强调，如果西方操作不好，欧美“演戏”而“成真”、深入成为“实质性的公开争吵”是有可能的之原因所在。而与其说“欧美公开争吵”倒不如说代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益中的两拨人内斗到了“公开掀桌子”的地步。如果是这样，那么国际局势恐怕将迎来自2012年美国驻利比亚大使被“定点清除”后第二件堪比1991年苏联解体的重大历史事件。

2012年9月11日，时任美国驻利比亚大使的克里斯托弗·史蒂文森在班加西领事馆遇刺身亡，距今已经过去了超过12个年头。那一次事件标志着代言西方资本利益的美国资本利益游离到美国平台之外，欧美平台之间，以所谓“中间人”的角色，有效调和欧美资本利益之间的矛盾（虽然很难调和，但只要条件允许还是可以调和，甚至有效调和），并有效缓和欧美国家利益之间的矛盾（本质上不可调和，只能缓和，最多有效缓和），并以此为基础达成欧美之间“叙利亚利益和利比亚利益的交换”，并形成欧美利益“初步合流”，导致已经开始的，基于国际社会的三个主要成员“中、欧、俄”轮番消遣美国全球战略之“重中之重”的中东利益的“第四次排列组合”被有效打断。从而确定了对国际社会（此时的欧盟已经不再是国际社会的核心成员）危害极大的“微调后的中东战略”。这一战略有“两条主线”：

其一，“初始目标”针对伊朗，其间涵盖印度、巴西等主要南方经济体，“最后目标”直指俄罗斯，尤其是中国的“金融防火墙”的搭建进程。值得一提的是，由于国际社会的正确、积极应对，不断注入“变量”，甚至“动量”，导致以上计划在执行过程中完全“脱稿”，以至于西方不得不“N步并1步”。结果就是，伊朗问题还未解决，西方就忙不迭将后面的几个主要步骤“强行合并”在一起，尤其是在特朗普第一任期的时候通过发动“中美贸易战”而触及中国。也正因此，西方在“水淹南方”的问题上虽然做出了一些动作，但效果却与“原计划”大相径庭，存在本质差距；

其二，“西方资本的复杂转进”进程。由于“西方资本的复杂转进”进程与“金融防火墙”的搭建进程，二者之间是相互依托，相互促进的关系，所以，当“金融防火墙”的搭建进程完全“荒腔走板”后，“西方资本的复杂转进”进程自然执行的也是“歪歪扭扭”。当然，这个进程也在推进，比如，“英国脱欧”。有意思的是，尽管事态尚未演化到“英国分裂后再回归欧盟”的地步，但英国回归欧盟的迹象却愈发明显，英国似乎也变得更加积极。英国现在更多的是和欧盟在一起混，而非美国。所以我们也就看到了，英国首相斯塔默和一众欧洲政要在泽连斯基背后“摇旗呐喊”的一幕。

需要提醒俄罗斯决策层的是，这是美国借欧盟之力变相对俄罗斯在乌克兰政策上施压的具体表现。同时也是欧盟借美国之力，意图向乌克兰派遣“维和部队”，进而确保在瓜分乌克兰的过程中自己也能分到一杯羹。如此看，欧美目前所谓的“争吵”更大程度上不是“双簧”又是什么？

●表面上已经在“公开争吵”的欧美、还得将“公开争吵”往表面之下再深入一层、甚至几层，才有可能再次行骗成功

在继续展开讨论前，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

3月2日，美国总统国家安全事务助理华尔兹向媒体表示，美国希望能够促成俄罗斯和乌克兰达成持久和平，但是不清楚乌克兰总统泽连斯基是否准备好进行真诚的谈判。在被问及美国是否希望泽连斯基辞职时，华尔兹称，美国需要的是一名能够与美国和俄罗斯打交道，并最终结束俄乌冲突的乌克兰领导人，如果泽连斯基的个人动机或政治动机明显与结束俄乌冲突背道而驰，那么这是一个很严重的问题。

在我们看来，特朗普政府已经公开提出了所谓“各退一步”的方案。特朗普政府显然对俄罗斯传递以下信号：乌克兰不听我的，欧盟也不听我的，如果俄罗斯不签，那美国也管不了了，俄乌战争只能继续（至于俄罗斯想要借美国之力“有效重返”叙利亚就更别提了）。问题在于，由于俄美关系已经缓和，尤其是俄罗斯在对华关系上已经疏远，现在一句话说俄乌战争要继续，甚至大打、特打，俄罗斯此前所做的一切外交调整岂不是“搬起石头砸了自己的脚”？

当然，都是搞政治的，也都是江湖上老油条，普京也不是一点后手没留，这不，俄罗斯联邦安全会议秘书绍伊古不是访华了吗？而且得到中国国家最高领导人的接见。而这对于正在演“双簧”的美欧而言自然不是什么好消息，起码意味着他们要演得更卖力才行，套用值班员的话说就是：表面上已经在“公开争吵”的欧美、还得将“公开争吵”往表面之下再深入一层、甚至几层，才有可能再次行骗成功。

●俄罗斯谋求重启“北溪-2”天然气管道项目并非明智之举

在本次回顾的最后，我们来关注“北溪-2”天然气管道是否可能重启这个话题。在展开讨论之前，我们来看一则新闻报道。

3月2日，据报道，俄罗斯总统普京的一名盟友一直在策划在美国投资者的支持下重启通往欧洲的“北溪2号”天然气管道，这一曾经不可想象的举动显示出特朗普希望与莫斯科修好的程度有多大。促成这笔协议的努力是前东德国家安全部（史塔西，东德秘密警察，国家安全局）官员马蒂亚斯·沃宁的想法，他在2023年之前一直是“北溪2号”母公司的负责人。沃宁的计划包括通过美国商人接触特朗普团队，这是他通过秘密渠道促成俄乌冲突结束、同时加深美俄经济联系的努力的一部分。

可以肯定的是，这一消息对俄罗斯而言是具有很强吸引力的。如果“北溪-2”天然气管道得以恢复，那么俄罗斯和欧盟之间的经济也将得以重新联系在一起。那将意味着西方（美国和欧盟）对俄罗斯做出“重大让步”。

值得注意的是，由于“北溪-2”天然气管道是俄罗斯向欧洲输送廉价能源的能源管线，在东方时事解读的观察与评估中，在这一消息突然被媒体炒得沸沸扬扬的背后，似乎看到了“逃离”美国来到欧洲“安营扎寨”的“拜登们之索罗斯们”的影子。

大家知道，特朗普上台以来，对于发展新能源汽车产业基本持消极态度，尽管马斯克是特朗普最亲密的“战友”。显然，特朗普摆出一副非常重视传统能源的姿态。或者说，这次将特朗普抬入白宫的“有功人员”中，美国传统能源的既得利益集团发挥了重要作用。

也许有的网友会问，不是外界盛传，俄罗斯认为炸毁“北溪-2”天然气管道的就是美国拜登政府所为（到目前为止仍然不能排除俄罗斯将其炸毁的可能性），为什么现在想要恢复“北溪-2”天然气管道的还是他们？其实这个问题并不难解答，一句话：此一时，彼亦是也！

当时的拜登政府为了给美国传统军工复合体输送利益，满足美国传统能源既得利益集团向欧洲贩卖高价天然气的诉求，炸毁“北溪-2”天然气管道项目，并一手策动俄乌战争的爆发。此外，在政治方面，要彻底拆掉俄欧的经济联系，否则无法推动俄乌战争的爆发。

后来，拜登政府为了赢得美国总统大选，开始在国内支持新能源车产业的发展并大力推动LGBT（意识形态）。而现在“拜登们之索罗斯们”出于美国内部恶斗开始重新推动“北溪-2”天然气管道项目的恢复。

不难想象的是，一旦“北溪-2”天然气管道真的恢复，恐怕特朗普政府对于美国传统能源的既得利益集团是交不了差的。所以，要特朗普政府难堪，甚至要特朗普阵营内部生乱，甚至分崩离析的是特朗普和“特朗普们”的冤家对头们，其中就包括“拜登们之索罗斯们”。

当然，围绕“北溪-2”天然气管道是否恢复的话题也是美国内部恶斗外溢的具体表现之一。对此，提醒俄罗斯决策层应该有深刻认识。也许俄罗斯的决策层认为这是利用美国内部恶斗日趋激烈将所谓“俄罗斯利益最大化”的绝佳机会，但这也许会导致特朗普和“特朗普们”在美国内部恶斗中处于劣势，而处于劣势的特朗普和“特朗普们”恐怕就不会像现在这样对俄罗斯“一躬到底”了。

在我们看来，俄罗斯此时此刻谋求重启“北溪-2”天然气管道项目并非明智之举。首先一条就是美国内部恶斗具有极大不确定性，无论是持续时间，还是谁能胜出，还是随时可能失控，以及可能的外溢方向。比如说，拜登政府能炸毁“北溪-2”天然气管道，难道特朗普政府就不能也将其炸毁吗？如果此时此刻俄罗斯已经在“北溪-2”天然气管道的恢复工程上做了实质性投入，岂不是要全部打了水漂？

当然，俄罗斯可想要借此减轻对中国的依赖，这是“阿富汗政策小九九”泛滥的一面。但这样一个俄罗斯，恐怕想要指望国际社会给予更多的战略策应就很难了。因为在国际社会眼中，俄罗斯始终无法分清谁是朋友谁是敌人。

最后需要提醒俄罗斯的是，对特朗普政府而言，如果最终不能促使俄罗斯签订乌克兰和平协议，那就索性让俄乌战争继续延续下去，这样对美国传统军工复合体而言，也算是一个交代。而特朗普政府想要维持美国传统能源利既得利益集团的支持，一定会千方百计破坏“北溪-2”天然气管道的重建，甚至导致“北溪-2”天然气管道第二次被炸毁。让俄乌战争继续延续下去对特朗普政府来说并不是一件什么难事，只要让乌克兰重新获得核武器，乌克兰问题对俄罗斯而言就将永无宁日。

声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

Monday, March 3, 2025, Issue No. 1193

Why is it not a wise move for Russia to seek to restart the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project at this stage?

[Media Coverage]

On March 2, it was reported that an ally of Russian President Putin has been plotting to restart the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline to Europe with the support of American investors, a once unimaginable move that shows how much Donald Trump hopes to mend ties with Moscow. The effort to broker this deal is the brainchild of Matthias Warning, a former officer of the Ministry for State Security of the German Democratic Republic (Stasi), who served as the head of Nord Stream 2's parent company until 2023. Warning's plan includes reaching out to the Trump team through American businessmen as part of his effort to facilitate an end to the Russia-Ukraine conflict through secret channels while deepening US-Russia economic ties.

【Discussion Summary】

●A not-so-subtle "duet" between the US and Europe has started playing out in front of Russia.

On March 1, a spokesperson for the British Prime Minister's Office stated that Prime Minister Starmer met with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy at 10 Downing Street. They discussed the challenges faced by Ukraine and Europe, coordinating relations between Ukraine and partner countries, strengthening Ukraine's position, steps to end the war in a just and peaceful manner, and security guarantees for Ukraine.

In the previous review, we discussed in detail the hot topic of the "heated argument" between the US and Ukrainian presidents at the White House. Essentially, to paraphrase an Eastern saying, this is a deception that goes several layers deep and has encountered new situations of internal strife within Western capital represented by American capital. With slight carelessness, it could "turn into reality" from "acting" and escalate into "substantial public disputes." If the situation ultimately reaches this point, the focus of the global situation may immediately shift to an extremely dangerous "cause-and-effect" relationship between "the intensifying internal strife within American capital, which represents Western capital," and "the increasing risk of a comprehensive financial crisis in Europe or even the US." From this perspective, when observing and assessing the issue, it becomes unclear whether the "heated argument" staged by the US and Ukrainian presidents at the White House and Russia's "revived dreams" are real or fake. Or perhaps it's a case of "fake becoming real and real becoming fake," where ultimately, truth and falsehood, right and wrong, can only be determined by time or ultimate facts.

It's worth mentioning that in the previous review, we also provided an assessment of possible subsequent developments in the situation in Ukraine, which is that it cannot be ruled out that the US, Europe, and Russia may each take a step back to achieve their respective goals in the Ukrainian issue at this stage.

According to the latest reports, after Ukrainian President Zelenskyy had a "heated argument" with US President Trump at the White House, he flew to London in one go. In London, Zelenskyy was praised as an "anti-Russian hero" by British Prime Minister Starmer and other European leaders. Britain even resolutely took over the "flag of supporting Ukraine" from its big brother, the US, providing a loan of GBP 2.26 billion to Ukraine and committing to using frozen Russian assets to repay the loan and strengthen Ukraine's defense capabilities. At the same time, British Prime Minister Starmer advised Zelenskyy to return to the White House and "make up" with Trump, while European and NATO leaders also exerted pressure.

In our view, Britain's actions are somewhat ridiculous, and European leaders have taken the "duet" with the US to the extreme. Firstly, GBP 2.26 billion is a drop in the ocean for both the Russia-Ukraine war and Ukraine's reconstruction. Even if there were "enough funds," European countries probably do not have the corresponding strategic materials to supply to Ukraine. If the so-called "heated argument" between Zelenskyy and Trump, as rumored online, was supported by the EU, which is at odds with the US on the Ukrainian issue, then why did so many European leaders advise Zelenskyy to "make up" with Trump? And everyone knows that the strategic materials, especially weapons and equipment, and the military system provided by the US, have been the backbone of Ukraine's resistance to this day.

Interestingly, to reinforce the EU's commitment to supporting Ukraine, French President Macron made a rare statement indicating that he is ready to discuss Europe's nuclear deterrence issue, with France offering to help protect other EU countries. In our observation, although France's nuclear weapons belong to France, the number of nuclear warheads is likely very limited, which is closely related to France's overall national strength. As for Britain's nuclear weapons, they are essentially American nuclear weapons.

In summary, the EU is a "dwarf" in military terms and needs the protection of the United States. And the United States, standing behind Britain, is clearly willing to provide nuclear protection to the EU. It is not difficult to see from this that the so-called "Euro-American quarrel" is at least, at this stage, a "charade". Of course, if the West mishandles the situation or is strongly interfered with from the outside, the "charade" could become "real" and escalate into "substantive public quarrels".

●Ukraine is a "stage", (the US, Europe, and Russia) all rely on acting skills!

Furthermore, amid rumors online of an alleged heated argument between Zelenskyy and Trump, we must not forget one thing. That is, after Trump was successfully elected as President of the United States, a portion of the US capital interests that represent Western capital interests, such as the "Bidens and Soroses", had already "fled" the United States and "set up camp" in Europe. Therefore, in a sense, the essence of the alleged "heated argument" between the US and Ukrainian presidents is that some of the US capital interests that have "fled" to Europe, as well as those planning to "flee" to Europe, still representing Western capital interests, are supporting European interests (including European national interests and European capital interests) against another portion of the US capital interests that still represent Western capital interests, such as the "Trumps and Musks". In the observation and assessment of East Asia Current Affairs Interpretation, this is an outward manifestation of the ongoing internal strife within the US capital interests that represent Western capital interests. The spillover direction has already touched upon the core asset of Western capital interests within the United States - the control of the US military; and outside the United States, it has touched upon the "aunts and uncles" of US capital interests, namely European interests.

It is worth mentioning that behind British Prime Minister Starmer's claim that he is prepared to use nuclear weapons to protect European countries, is the belief among some of the US capital interests that represent Western capital interests and support European interests that Starmer can say so, meaning that "the United States is willing to provide nuclear protection to Europe". This is also a specific manifestation of what we emphasized in the previous paragraph: the internal strife within the US capital interests that represent Western capital interests has spilled over to touch upon the core asset of Western capital interests - the control of the US military.

Or to put it more clearly, the "Bidens and Soroses" are using British Prime Minister Starmer's mouth to publicly send a message to the "Trumps and Musks": don't think that just because you are the president, you can call all the shots. Our influence over the US military is much stronger than you think! This is probably why the East Asia duty officer emphasizes that if the West mishandles the situation, there is a possibility that the "Euro-American charade" could become "real" and escalate into "substantive public quarrels". Rather than saying that "Euro-America is publicly quarreling", it would be more accurate to say that two groups within the US capital interests that represent Western capital interests have fought to the point of "publicly flipping the table". If this is the case, then the international situation may be heading towards the second major historical event comparable to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, since the targeted killing of the US ambassador to Libya in 2012.

On September 11, 2012, Christopher Stevens, the then US ambassador to Libya, was assassinated at the consulate in Benghazi. More than 12 years have passed since that incident. That event marked the detachment of US capital interests that represent Western capital interests from the US platform, and between the European and American platforms, they played the role of a so-called "mediator" to effectively mediate conflicts between European and American capital interests (although difficult to mediate, it can still be mediated, or even effectively mediated, if conditions permit) and effectively ease conflicts between European and American national interests (essentially irreconcilable, only able to be eased, or at most effectively eased), and on this basis, reached an "exchange of Syrian and Libyan interests" between Europe and America, and formed a "preliminary convergence" of European and American interests, leading to the effective interruption of the "fourth rearrangement" of Middle Eastern interests, which had already begun and was based on the three main members of the international community - China, Europe, and Russia - taking turns to toy with the "top priority" of US global strategy. This determined the "revised Middle East strategy" that is highly harmful to the international community (at this time, the EU is no longer a core member of the international community). This strategy has "two main lines":

Firstly, the "initial goal" is aimed at Iran, covering major southern economies such as India and Brazil, and the "ultimate goal" is directed at Russia, especially the process of building China's "financial firewall". It is worth mentioning that due to the correct and proactive response of the international community, continuously introducing "variables" and even "momentum", the above plan completely "went off script", forcing the West to "combine multiple steps into one". As a result, before the Iran issue was resolved, the West hastily "forcibly merged" several subsequent key steps together, especially during Trump's first term when it touched upon China by initiating the "China-US trade war". Because of this, although the West has made some moves on the issue of "flooding the South", the effect is fundamentally different from the "original plan", with essential gaps.

Secondly, the process of the "complex transfer of Western capital". Since the process of the "complex transfer of Western capital" and the process of building the "financial firewall" are mutually reliant and promote each other, when the process of building the "financial firewall" completely "went off key", the process of the "complex transfer of Western capital" naturally proceeded in a "crooked manner". Of course, this process is also advancing, such as "Brexit". Interestingly, although the situation has not yet evolved to the point where "Britain splits and then rejoins the EU", the signs of Britain rejoining the EU are becoming increasingly apparent, and Britain seems to be becoming more active. Britain is now more involved with the EU than with the United States. Therefore, we see the scene where British Prime Minister Starmer and a group of European politicians are "waving the flag and cheering" behind Zelenskyy.

It should be reminded to the Russian decision-makers that this is a specific manifestation of the United States exerting pressure on Russia's policy in Ukraine through the power of the EU. At the same time, it is also the EU's attempt to send "peacekeeping forces" to Ukraine with the help of the United States, in order to ensure that it can get a share of the pie in the process of dividing Ukraine. So, to what extent is the so-called "quarrel" between Europe and America not a "duet"?

● Europe and the US, ostensibly "publicly quarreling," must deepen their "public quarrel" to another level, or even several levels beneath the surface, to potentially deceive successfully again.

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

On March 2nd, US President's National Security Advisor Waltz told the media that the United States hopes to facilitate a lasting peace between Russia and Ukraine, but it is unclear whether Ukrainian President Zelenskyy is ready to engage in sincere negotiations. When asked whether the US wants Zelenskyy to resign, Waltz said that the US needs a Ukrainian leader who can engage with both the US and Russia and ultimately end the Russia-Ukraine conflict. If Zelenskyy's personal or political motives clearly run counter to ending the Russia-Ukraine conflict, then this is a serious problem.

In our view, the Trump administration has publicly proposed a so-called "step back" plan. The Trump administration is clearly sending a signal to Russia: Ukraine doesn't listen to me, nor does the EU. If Russia doesn't sign, then the US can't do anything about it, and the Russia-Ukraine war will have to continue (let alone Russia's hope of using US power to "effectively return" to Syria). The issue is that due to the easing of Russo-American relations, especially as Russia has distanced itself from its relationship with China, now just saying that the Russia-Ukraine war will continue, or even escalate significantly, wouldn't all the diplomatic adjustments Russia has made up to now be "shooting itself in the foot"?

Of course, they are all politicians and old hands in the political arena, and Putin is not without some backup plans. Isn't it the case that Russia's Secretary of the Security Council Shoigu visited China and was received by China's top leader? And this is obviously not good news for the US and Europe, who are performing a "duet." To paraphrase the duty officer, Europe and the US, ostensibly "publicly quarreling," must deepen their "public quarrel" to another level, or even several levels beneath the surface, to potentially deceive successfully again.

● Russia's pursuit of restarting the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project is not a wise move.

At the end of this review, let's focus on the topic of whether the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline may be restarted. Before delving into the discussion, let's look at a news report.

On March 2nd, it was reported that an ally of Russian President Putin has been planning to restart the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline to Europe with the support of American investors, a once unimaginable move that shows how much Trump wants to mend ties with Moscow. The effort to broker this deal is the brainchild of Matthias Warnig, a former officer in the East German Ministry for State Security (Stasi), who was the head of the Nord Stream 2 parent company until 2023. Warnig's plan includes reaching out to the Trump team through American businessmen as part of his effort to secretly broker an end to the Russia-Ukraine conflict while deepening US-Russia economic ties.

It is certain that this news is very attractive to Russia. If the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline is restored, then the economy between Russia and the EU will also be reconnected. That would mean that the West (the US and the EU) has made "significant concessions" to Russia.

It's worth noting that since the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline is an energy pipeline for Russia to supply cheap energy to Europe, in the observations and assessments of East Asia Times Interpretation, behind the sudden media frenzy over this news, we seem to see the shadow of "Soros and his ilk of Biden" who have "fled" the US and "set up camp" in Europe.

As we all know, since taking office, Trump has basically taken a negative stance towards developing the new energy vehicle industry, despite Musk being Trump's closest "ally." Clearly, Trump has adopted a posture of attaching great importance to traditional energy. Or rather, among those who "contributed" to lifting Trump into the White House, the vested interests of the US traditional energy sector played a significant role.

Some netizens may ask, isn't it widely rumored that Russia believes it was the Biden administration that blew up the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline (and the possibility of Russia blowing it up itself cannot be ruled out so far), so why are they now seeking to restore it? Actually, this question is not difficult to answer: different times, different circumstances!

At that time, the Biden administration blew up the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project and orchestrated the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war in order to benefit the US traditional military-industrial complex and satisfy the demands of the US traditional energy vested interests to sell high-priced natural gas to Europe. In addition, politically, it was necessary to completely dismantle the economic ties between Russia and Europe; otherwise, it would be impossible to push for the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war.

Later, to win the US presidential election, the Biden administration began to support the development of the new energy vehicle industry domestically and vigorously promote LGBT (ideology). And now, due to the intense internal strife in the US, "Soros and his ilk of Biden" are promoting the restoration of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project.

It's not hard to imagine that if the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline is really restored, it would be difficult for the Trump administration to answer to the US traditional energy vested interests. Therefore, to embarrass the Trump administration, or even cause chaos and disintegration within the Trump camp, are the sworn enemies of Trump and "those of Trump," including "Soros and his ilk of Biden."

Of course, the debate over whether to restore the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline is also a manifestation of the spillover of intense internal strife in the US. Regarding this, we remind Russia's decision-makers to have a profound understanding. Perhaps Russia's decision-makers see this as a golden opportunity to maximize so-called "Russian interests" by taking advantage of the increasingly intense internal strife in the US, but this may put Trump and "those of Trump" at a disadvantage in the internal strife in the US, and a Trump and "those of Trump" at a disadvantage may not "bow down to Russia" as they do now.

In our view, Russia's pursuit of restarting the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project at this moment is not a wise move. The first reason is that the internal strife in the US is highly uncertain, whether in terms of duration, who will win, the possibility of it getting out of control at any time, or the potential direction of spillover. For example, if the Biden administration could blow up the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline, couldn't the Trump administration also blow it up? If Russia has already made substantial investments in the restoration project of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline at this moment, won't all of them be wasted?

Of course, Russia may want to reduce its dependence on China, which is an aspect of the prevalence of the "Afghanistan policy gimmick." But such a Russia will probably find it difficult to expect more strategic support from the international community. Because in the eyes of the international community, Russia has always been unable to distinguish between friends and enemies.

Finally, it needs to be reminded to Russia that for the Trump administration, if it ultimately cannot prompt Russia to sign a peace agreement with Ukraine, it will simply let the Russia-Ukraine war continue. This would also be an explanation to the US traditional military-industrial complex. And to maintain the support of the US traditional energy vested interests, the Trump administration will surely do everything possible to sabotage the reconstruction of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline, or even cause it to be blown up a second time. It's not difficult for the Trump administration to let the Russia-Ukraine war continue; it just needs to allow Ukraine to regain nuclear weapons, and the Ukrainian issue will never be resolved for Russia.

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