2025年4月1日，星期二，第1215期

结合美乌矿产协议新文本内容,小谈特朗普为何突然对普京感到生气和愤怒？

【媒体报道】

3月30日，某美国媒体节目主持人称，美国总统特朗普在接受其电话采访时说，当俄罗斯总统普京“批评乌克兰总统泽连斯基领导地位的可信度时”，他感到“生气和愤怒”。特朗普称，如果他认为俄罗斯在阻止他结束战争的努力，他“将对所有俄罗斯石油征收25%至50%的二级关税——如果没有停火，这些关税可能会在一个月内开始征收”。特朗普还称，他计划在新的一周再次与普京通话。

●再次提醒俄方，即便在乌克兰问题上也不要将欧美关系视为“绝对对立”

在开始本期回顾之前，对上期回顾中提到的美乌提名沙特做俄乌停火“监督国”这一话题做一些补充。

客观地说，沙特对于监督国这个身份还是很受用的，而对此头衔垂涎已久的还有土耳其。但美国出于对欧盟不遗余力扩大自己在中东影响力的忌惮，将土耳其晾在了一边。显然，此举对土耳其和沙特之间的关系产生了某种微妙影响，用“挑拨”形容也不为过。这或是美国提名沙特做俄乌停火“监督国”的小心思。

值得一提的是，目前阶段，乌克兰泽连斯基政府背后更多体现出的是欧盟的某些利益诉求。所以，在乌克兰和美国一道提名沙特做俄乌停火“监督国”的背后，某种意义上说是欧盟和美国一道提名沙特做俄乌停火“监督国”。显然，欧美都清楚，未来想要在中东问题上，比如，叙利亚局势后续发展，进一步达到各自的利益诉求都不能得罪沙特，都要讨好沙特。所以，欧美算是在这样一个阶段性问题上合作了一把。如果是这样，俄罗斯的中东利益诉求又被置于何地呢？这是我们提醒俄罗斯决策层，即便在乌克兰问题上也不要将欧美关系视为“绝对对立”的主要原因所在。好在，到目前为止，我们暂未看到俄罗斯再一次上当。

【讨论纪要】

●萨克斯口中的美国决策层的所谓精英人士，傲慢且死板，并以匪夷所思的固定眼光去看待快速发展的世界

在继续展开讨论之前，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

3月30日，某美国媒体节目主持人称，美国总统特朗普在接受其电话采访时说，当俄罗斯总统普京“批评乌克兰总统泽连斯基领导地位的可信度时”，他感到“生气和愤怒”。

中国坚持原则导致美国两拨人马访华失败，而美国的傲慢、强横则遭遇中国的犀利反击。中美关系不仅没有得到进一步改善，反而变得更加紧张。看到这一幕的俄罗斯，在乌克兰问题上的要价自然是水涨船高。

所谓“水涨船高”，指的是在中美关系最新变化的基础上，俄罗斯就乌克兰问题向特朗普政府提出了新的利益诉求，那就是公开质疑，甚至认为，乌克兰泽连斯基政府是非法的。换言之，暗示美国，为了以后俄美之间合作得更加愉快，需要将这个非法的乌克兰政府挪开。或者更干脆一点说，俄方需要乌克兰有一个亲俄政权。

3月28日，我们注意到华盛顿向基辅发出了一份最新提案，不仅恢复了之前在谈判中已经取消的财政条款，还进一步加大了美国的控制权，其权力覆盖范围远远超过了上个月特朗普和泽连斯基原定在白宫签署的初步合作框架，同时仍然不包括基辅一直要求的任何安全保障承诺。

三名乌克兰现任和前任官员证实了这份长达55页的新草案内容。新草案恢复了特朗普最初的要求，即乌克兰应向美国偿还自冲突爆发以来基辅获得的数十亿美元军事和财政援助，乌克兰必须将自然资源项目以及港口和能源管道等相关基础设施收入的一半，投入由美国控制的一项投资基金。按照美方的说法，该基金的利润将重新投资于乌克兰的自然资源项目。新增加的内容明确了这些利润的分配份额，华盛顿将要求获得基金的所有利润，直到基辅偿还至少相当于美国在战争期间提供的援助的资金，外加4%的年利息。美国还将保留对乌克兰能源新项目的“优先购买权”，以及否决乌克兰向第三国出售资源的权力。在协议生效的第一年，乌克兰将被禁止向第三方提供任何条件优厚于美国的投资项目。

大家不难发现，上述所谓美国向乌克兰发出的新提案可谓似曾相识，我们在《辛丑条约》《北京条约》中就曾见过这样的极尽屈辱的条款。按照这份乌克兰收到美国新的矿产协议文本，乌克兰将变为美国的殖民地。而就是这样一个极尽屈辱的协议，泽连斯基政府居然同意签署。对于这样一个泽连斯基，美国当然有理由保护他。问题在于，特朗普和“特朗普们”在这份协议中有大量的好处，而普京则要求挪开准备签署这份协议的泽连斯基政权，特朗普怎能不感到生气和愤怒？

也许俄罗斯现在看懂了，泽连斯基和特朗普在白宫大吵一架就是在演戏。目的就是骗取俄罗斯尽早签订乌克兰停火协议。俄罗斯前脚签署协议，特朗普后脚就会揣着这份协议直飞北京。

值得一提的是，美国著名经济学家杰弗里·萨克斯在近日的一次讲话中提到了美国决策层的决策方式。萨克斯称这些人并不聪明，我和他们打交道超过40年了，他们只会自言自语，他们不和任何人交流。他们在非合作博弈论中玩博弈论，你不用和另一方交流，你只需要制定自己的策略。

不难看出，萨克斯口中的美国决策层的所谓精英人士，傲慢且死板，并以匪夷所思的固定眼光去看待快速发展的世界。更重要的是，他们显然忽视了中国智慧，中国原则，以及中国捍卫自己底线、原则的能力，尤其是动用能力的决心。

●特朗普政府对伊朗进行军事冒险的风险极大

3月31日，我们注意到，有关“伊朗各地的导弹已装入发射架，一旦美国采取升级行动，导弹随时可以发射”的新闻报道。

此前，我们提到过特朗普因上过纽约军事学院的细节，与特朗普对朝鲜半岛军事态势类似，想必特朗普也对当前中东地区的军事态势有所基本认知。在我们看来，中东地区的军事态势应与西太方向一并观察。近段时间，随着中国大陆在台湾周边地区开展“人狠话不多式”军事演习（军事演习越来越密集，强度越来越高，但媒体报道越来越低调）以展示随时收台之能力，尤其是决心，以及对菲律宾小马克斯政府的严厉警告，西太局势骤然再度紧张，大有“或今晚‘西太安全框架’就因中国大陆收复台湾而崩塌”之势。这一点恐怕伊朗也看在眼里。

对伊朗来说，既然选择投降之路不通，美国人又咄咄逼人，欺人太甚，那就索性重归强硬路线。

在我们看来，特朗普政府对伊朗进行军事冒险的风险极大。如果波斯湾真的乱了，可以说，也是叙利亚再乱外溢效应的一种具体表现，只不过方向指向波斯湾。波斯湾的稳定对特朗普政府是如此的重要，在当前美国股市因“中国因素”猛烈冲击本就一蹶不振的情况下，如果波斯湾真的乱了，自然对中国会产生较大影响，但由于中国经济以实体制造为主，所以这种冲击效应是有一个反射弧的，是有一个过程的，也许1到2个月，也许会更长，但对美国金融市场的影响则以秒来计划，用“秒崩”形容毫不为过。一旦如此，类似“中东最暴力破局”或“中东全面破局”带来的结果，恐怕后续发展都将指向全球政治、经济、金融等各个层面的全面大洗牌。

此外，特朗普政府对伊朗进行军事冒险的另一个风险是，尽管特朗普政府对俄罗斯在乌克兰问题上做出如此大幅度的让步（至少表面看是这样，特朗普政府近乎以“投降”的姿态在缓和美俄关系），但毕竟美俄关系有效缓和的目的尚未达到。这就意味着中俄仍有可能实质性联手，稳定中亚，安定南亚，并有效重启上合。而一旦真的如此，伊朗往后一退，全面依托上合，成为中俄在中东方向的战略支点并将与美国博弈的前线一把推到叙利亚，此时的美国又能奈伊朗如何？面对全面依靠上合重返中东的俄罗斯和伊朗，特朗普政府又能如何？

●再谈，不论是对外还是对内，特朗普想要玩“合纵连横”，前提都是处理好对华关系

在继续展开讨论之前，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

3月30日，据媒体报道，美国总统特朗普或计划5月中旬访问沙特阿拉伯。

尽管伊朗当局的对外政策前一阶段前所未有地运行在“投降主义”路线之上，但碍于内斗因素必须对以色列内塔尼亚胡政权的支持，以及对以沙特为首的海湾阿拉伯国家在中东事务中日益增加的影响力，特朗普政府虽有心，但却没有胆量接受伊朗的投降。于是迫不得已只能寻求改善与沙特为首的海湾阿拉伯国家之间的关系。问题是，此前被美国前总统拜登骂为“贱民”的沙特似乎早已认定跟着中国才有明天。而沙特为首的海湾阿拉伯国家的背后就是中国。

对特朗普政府来说，讽刺尴尬的一幕再次上演：第一，由于和中国搞不好关系，特朗普政府就很难处理好其他对外关系，包括与沙特之间的关系；第二，在“第一”的基础上，各方，包括欧盟、俄罗斯、沙特、土耳其、伊朗等各方都会抓住这一千载难逢的机会从美国手中淘换自己最急需的利益，将自己的利益最大化；第三，由于美国内部恶斗愈演愈烈，特朗普政府又不得不去继续支持以色列内塔尼亚胡政府，而这与美国不能得罪沙特，寻求改善与沙特为首的海湾阿拉伯国家之间的关系是前后矛盾的。而无法进一步改善与沙特为首的海湾阿拉伯国家之间的关系也就变相等同于无法改善与中国之间的关系。或者说，为了维持美国中东政策的基本稳定，恐怕特朗普政府对中国会更加有求于人。但改善中美关系的前提却是，必须满足中国提出的条件，比如，从落地执行的角度将“太平洋足够大容得下中美两国”落在实处。显然，对美国而言这又是一个恶性循环。

值得一提的是，早在2个月前的1月22日，我们从“合纵连横，远交近攻”的角度讨论中美关系的时候就已经做出相关评估，特朗普政府不论是对外还是对内，想要把“合纵连横，远交近攻”玩起来，前提都是处理好对华关系。上述讨论显然是对我们2个月前给出的这一评估的最好验证。这也凸显此前东方时事解读有关中国不急于直接介入叙利亚局势后续发展，而是借沙特间接发挥影响力的评估完全正确。

●最后需要补充的是，特朗普政府对外政策的全面被动必然严重影响美国内斗

在本次回顾的最后，我们再来看一则新闻报道。

3月30日，法国总统马克龙在社交媒体发文说，他当天与以色列总理内塔尼亚胡通话，呼吁以色列停止对加沙地带的袭击并重返停火。

大约在10天前，3月18日，联合国安理会举行巴以问题公开会。中国常驻联合国代表傅聪在会上表示，中方对来之不易的停火局面被破坏感到遗憾，对以色列在加沙再次挑起战火表示严重关切，并予以强烈谴责。

欧洲眼中的乌克兰利益，包括允许欧洲在乌克兰驻军。对此，特朗普政府只能通过损害俄罗斯的利益加以平衡，同时用欧洲要求驻军这一点威逼俄罗斯就范。但问题在于，欧洲要求的并不是一定在乌克兰驻军，而是要参与刮飞乌克兰利益。或者，如果这条路暂时行不通，就先在中东方向下手。其中，欧盟卡准了美国再次于中国碰壁这个机会，有意借中国对沙特施加影响力，帮助其挤入中东。

最后需要补充的是，特朗普政府对外政策的全面被动必然严重影响美国内斗。因此，不排除特朗普政府提前访问沙特的可能性。最后，提醒大家密切关注土耳其局势的后续发展，不排除美国在极难处理土耳其乱局后续发展的问题上，寻既然我利用不上就彻底搞乱土耳其的可能性。如果是这样，这就是叙利亚再乱的后续外溢到了土耳其，而这极可能导致“中东全面大乱”。

声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

Tuesday, April 1, 2025, Issue No. 1215

Combining the new text content of the US-Ukraine mining agreement,A brief discussion on why Trump suddenly felt angry and furious towards Putin?

[Media Coverage]

On March 30, a host of an American media program said that US President Trump said in a phone interview with him that he felt "angry and furious" when Russian President Putin "criticized the credibility of Ukrainian President Zelensky's leadership position". Trump said that if he thought Russia was preventing his efforts to end the war, he would "impose a 25% to 50% secondary tariff on all Russian oil - these tariffs may start within a month if there is no ceasefire". Trump also said that he plans to talk to Putin again in the new week.

【Discussion Summary】

● Remind the Russian side again not to regard the EU-US relationship as "absolutely opposite" even on the Ukraine issue

Before starting this issue's review, let's make some supplements to the topic mentioned in the previous review that the US and Ukraine nominated Saudi Arabia as the "supervisory country" for the Russia-Ukraine ceasefire.

Objectively speaking, Saudi Arabia is quite receptive to the status of the supervisory country, and Turkey has long coveted this title. However, out of its wariness of the EU's unremitting efforts to expand its influence in the Middle East, the US left Turkey aside. Obviously, this move has had some subtle impact on the relationship between Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and it is not an exaggeration to describe it as "sowing discord". This may be the ulterior motive of the US in nominating Saudi Arabia as the "supervisory country" for the Russia-Ukraine ceasefire.

It is worth mentioning that at the current stage, the Zelensky government in Ukraine more reflects certain interests of the EU. So, behind Ukraine and the US jointly nominating Saudi Arabia as the "supervisory country" for the Russia-Ukraine ceasefire, in a sense, it is the EU and the US jointly nominating Saudi Arabia as such. Obviously, both the EU and the US are aware that in future Middle East issues, such as the subsequent development of the Syrian situation, they cannot afford to offend Saudi Arabia and need to please it if they want to further achieve their respective interests. So, the EU and the US have cooperated on such a phased issue. If so, where are Russia's interests in the Middle East placed? This is the main reason why we remind the Russian decision-makers not to regard the EU-US relationship as "absolutely opposite" even on the Ukraine issue. Fortunately, so far, we have not seen Russia being deceived again.

● The so-called elite figures in the US decision-making layer mentioned by Sachs are arrogant and rigid, and look at the rapidly developing world with an inconceivable fixed perspective

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

On March 30, a host of an American media program said that US President Trump said in a phone interview with him that he felt "angry and furious" when Russian President Putin "criticized the credibility of Ukrainian President Zelensky's leadership position".

China's adherence to principles led to the failure of two groups of Americans' visits to China, while the arrogance and coercion of the US encountered China's sharp counterattacks. The Sino-US relationship has not only failed to improve further but has become even more tense. Seeing this scene, Russia naturally raised its asking price on the Ukraine issue.

The so-called "raising the asking price" means that based on the latest changes in Sino-US relations, Russia has put forward new interest demands on the Ukraine issue to the Trump administration, that is, openly questioning and even believing that the Zelensky government in Ukraine is illegal. In other words, it implies to the US that in order to have a more pleasant cooperation with Russia in the future, this illegal Ukrainian government needs to be removed. Or to put it more bluntly, Russia needs a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine.

On March 28, we noticed that Washington issued a new proposal to Kyiv, which not only restored the financial terms that had been cancelled in previous negotiations but also further increased US control. Its scope of power far exceeds the initial cooperation framework that Trump and Zelensky originally planned to sign at the White House last month. At the same time, it still does not include any security guarantee commitments that Kyiv has always demanded.

Three current and former Ukrainian officials confirmed the content of this 55-page new draft. The new draft restores Trump's original requirement that Ukraine should repay the US billions of dollars in military and financial aid received by Kyiv since the outbreak of the conflict. Ukraine must invest half of the revenue from natural resource projects and related infrastructure such as ports and energy pipelines into an investment fund controlled by the US. According to the US side, the profits of this fund will be reinvested in Ukraine's natural resource projects. The newly added content clarifies the distribution ratio of these profits. Washington will demand all the profits of the fund until Kyiv repays at least the funds equivalent to the aid provided by the US during the war, plus an annual interest of 4%. The US will also retain the "right of first purchase" for new energy projects in Ukraine and the right to veto Ukraine's sale of resources to third countries. In the first year of the agreement coming into effect, Ukraine will be prohibited from providing any investment projects with more favorable conditions than those in the US to third parties.

It is not difficult to find that the above-mentioned new proposal issued by the US to Ukraine seems familiar. We have seen such extremely humiliating terms in the "Boxer Protocol" and the "Treaty of Beijing". According to this new mining agreement text received by Ukraine from the US, Ukraine will become a colony of the US. And for such an extremely humiliating agreement, the Zelensky government actually agreed to sign it. Naturally, the US has reasons to protect him. The problem is that Trump and the "Trump camp" have a lot of benefits in this agreement, while Putin demands the removal of the Zelensky regime that is about to sign this agreement. How can Trump not feel angry and furious?

It is worth mentioning that Jeffrey Sachs, a famous American economist, mentioned the decision-making method of the US decision-making layer in a recent speech. Sachs said that these people are not smart. I have been dealing with them for more than 40 years. They just talk to themselves and don't communicate with anyone. They play game theory in non-cooperative game theory. You don't need to communicate with the other party. You just need to formulate your own strategy.

It is not difficult to see that the so-called elite figures in the US decision-making layer mentioned by Sachs are arrogant and rigid, and look at the rapidly developing world with an inconceivable fixed perspective. More importantly, they obviously ignore Chinese wisdom, Chinese principles, as well as China's ability to defend its bottom line and principles, especially the determination to use such capabilities.

● The Trump administration's military adventure against Iran carries extremely high risks

On March 31, we noted a news report saying that "missiles across Iran have been loaded onto launchers and can be launched at any time once the US takes escalatory actions".

Previously, we mentioned details about Trump's attendance at the New York Military Academy. Similar to the military situation on the Korean Peninsula, it is assumed that Trump also has a basic understanding of the current military situation in the Middle East. In our view, the military situation in the Middle East should be observed in conjunction with that in the Western Pacific. Recently, as the Chinese mainland has carried out "low-profile but powerful" military exercises around Taiwan (the military exercises are becoming more frequent and intense, but the media coverage is becoming more low-key) to demonstrate its ability and determination to recover Taiwan at any time, especially the severe warning to the Filipino government of Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the situation in the Western Pacific has suddenly become tense again. It seems that the "Western Pacific security framework" may collapse tonight due to China's recovery of Taiwan. Iran must have noticed this as well.

For Iran, since the path of surrender is not viable and the Americans are being so aggressive and overbearing, it might as well return to a tough stance.

In our view, the Trump administration's military adventure against Iran carries extremely high risks. If the Persian Gulf really descends into chaos, it can be said that it is also a specific manifestation of the spillover effect of the renewed chaos in Syria, only with the direction pointing to the Persian Gulf. The stability of the Persian Gulf is so important to the Trump administration. Given that the US stock market has already been severely hit by the "China factor" and is in a sorry state, if the Persian Gulf really descends into chaos, it will naturally have a significant impact on China. However, since China's economy is mainly based on manufacturing, the impact will have a time lag. It may take one or two months or even longer. But the impact on the US financial market will be instantaneous, and it is no exaggeration to describe it as a "collapse in seconds". Once this happens, the consequences of a situation like a "most violent breakthrough in the Middle East" or a "comprehensive breakdown in the Middle East" are likely to lead to a complete reshuffle in all aspects of global politics, economy, and finance.

In addition, another risk of the Trump administration's military adventure against Iran is that although the Trump administration has made such significant concessions to Russia on the Ukraine issue (at least it seems so on the surface, with the Trump administration almost adopting a "surrender" stance to ease US-Russia relations), the effective easing of US-Russia relations has not yet been achieved. This means that China and Russia are still likely to form a substantive alliance to stabilize Central Asia, ensure stability in South Asia, and effectively restart the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Once this happens, if Iran retreats and fully relies on the SCO, becoming a strategic fulcrum for China and Russia in the Middle East and pushing the front line of the game with the US all the way to Syria, what can the US do to Iran then? What can the Trump administration do in the face of Russia and Iran that have fully relied on the SCO to return to the Middle East?

● Once again, whether in foreign or domestic affairs, Trump's attempt at "alliance and encirclement" requires handling relations with China well first

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

On March 30, according to media reports, US President Trump may plan to visit Saudi Arabia in mid-May.

Although the Iranian authorities' foreign policy has been operating on the "surrenderist" line to an unprecedented extent in the previous stage, due to internal strife and the need to support the Netanyahu government in Israel, as well as the increasing influence of Gulf Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia in Middle East affairs, although the Trump administration has the intention, it doesn't have the courage to accept Iran's surrender. As a result, it has no choice but to seek to improve relations with Gulf Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia. The problem is that Saudi Arabia, which was previously called a "pariah" by former US President Biden, seems to have long believed that following China is the way forward. And behind the Gulf Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia is China.

For the Trump administration, an ironic and embarrassing scene has unfolded again: First, due to the inability to maintain good relations with China, it is very difficult for the Trump administration to handle other foreign relations, including those with Saudi Arabia; Second, on top of the first point, all parties, including the EU, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, etc., will seize this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to extract their most urgently needed interests from the US and maximize their own interests; Third, due to the intensifying internal strife in the US, the Trump administration has to continue to support the Netanyahu government in Israel, which is contradictory to the need not to offend Saudi Arabia and seek to improve relations with Gulf Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia. And the inability to further improve relations with Gulf Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia is tantamount to being unable to improve relations with China. Or rather, in order to maintain the basic stability of US Middle East policy, the Trump administration may have to rely more on China. But the prerequisite for improving US-China relations is to meet the conditions put forward by China, such as implementing in practice the principle that "the Pacific is big enough to accommodate both China and the United States" from the perspective of implementation. Obviously, this is another vicious cycle for the US.

It is worth mentioning that as early as January 22, two months ago, when we discussed Sino-US relations from the perspective of "alliance and encirclement, befriending distant countries while attacking neighboring ones", we had already made relevant assessments. Whether in foreign or domestic affairs, if the Trump administration wants to play the game of "alliance and encirclement, befriending distant countries while attacking neighboring ones", the prerequisite is to handle relations with China well. The above discussion is clearly the best verification of our assessment two months ago. This also highlights that the previous assessment by Oriental Current Affairs Commentary that China is not in a hurry to directly intervene in the subsequent development of the Syrian situation but will indirectly exert influence through Saudi Arabia is completely correct.

● Finally, it should be added that the Trump administration's overall passivity in foreign policy will surely have a serious impact on US internal strife

At the end of this review, let's take a look at another news report.

On March 30, French President Macron posted on social media that he had a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu that day, calling on Israel to stop attacks on the Gaza Strip and return to a ceasefire.

About 10 days ago, on March 18, the United Nations Security Council held an open meeting on the Palestinian-Israeli issue. Fu Cong, China's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, said at the meeting that China regrets that the hard-won ceasefire situation has been undermined and expresses serious concern and strong condemnation over Israel's reigniting of war in Gaza.

What Europe sees as Ukraine's interests includes allowing European troops to be stationed in Ukraine. In response, the Trump administration can only balance this by harming Russia's interests and at the same time using Europe's demand for troop deployment to coerce Russia into submission. But the problem is that what Europe wants is not necessarily to station troops in Ukraine but to participate in reaping Ukraine's benefits. Or, if this path is temporarily unfeasible, then start with the Middle East direction first. Among them, the EU has seized the opportunity for the US to hit a wall with China again and intends to use China's influence on Saudi Arabia to help it squeeze into the Middle East.

Finally, it should be added that the Trump administration's overall passivity in foreign policy will surely have a serious impact on US internal strife. Therefore, it is not excluded that the Trump administration may visit Saudi Arabia ahead of schedule. Finally, everyone is reminded to closely follow the subsequent development of the Turkish situation. It is not excluded that the US may completely mess up Turkey in the extremely difficult situation of handling the subsequent development of the Turkish chaos. If so, this would be the spillover of the renewed chaos in Syria to Turkey, which is very likely to lead to a "comprehensive chaos in the Middle East".

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