2025年4月29日，星期二，第1236期

结合以色列、土耳其纷纷插手本轮印巴关系紧张，凸显首先是特朗普政府要面对“若爆发全面冲突或将外溢至中东方向’”之不可预测风险

【媒体报道】

4月28日，俄罗斯外交部表示，俄罗斯外交部副部长鲁登科和巴基斯坦驻俄罗斯大使穆罕默德·哈立德·贾马利就印度和巴基斯坦的紧张局势升级问题进行讨论，俄方呼吁双方和平解决分歧。

【讨论纪要】

●在巨大利益驱使下，在投机心态的强烈作用下，在美国的威逼利诱下与特朗普政府共谋，至少强力推动了本轮巴以关系紧张

我们注意到，4月29日，巴基斯坦国防部长赫瓦贾·阿西夫向媒体表示，按照印度对不久前克什米尔恐袭事件的政治言辞，当前印巴紧张局势有可能升级。

在我们的观察与评估中，巴基斯坦当局，尤其是印度当局对于造成本轮印巴关系紧张的原因很清楚。印度当局，也就是莫迪政府甚至直接参与到本轮危机的制造过程中。

类似特朗普政府，莫迪政府也处于内外交困之中。对内，社会矛盾、宗教矛盾、民族矛盾尖锐化导致政权不稳。对外，孟加拉、尼泊尔与印度渐行渐远，美国在关税问题上对印度施压，意图将其打造成“反华关税同盟”的标杆。

在美国副总统万斯访问印度后（注：万斯在印度整整待了4天，有充分的时间在印度进行活动），在给予印度诸如关税减免、减少制裁、增加投资、加快相关产业链进一步转入，尤其是许诺承认印度对整个克什米尔的主权（注：这对莫迪政府刺激较大）等好处后，尤其是对莫迪小集团大肆行贿后，莫迪政府在巨大利益的驱使下，出于一己私利，对外妄图强化印度在平衡中国问题上的分量，加大印度在中东地区的影响力，迫使巴基斯坦在克什米尔问题上进一步妥协、让步；对内转移舆论关注焦点，缓和社会、民族、宗教矛盾，巩固政权，最终，在强烈投机心态的作用下，同意与特朗普政府共谋，策划，至少大幅推动了本轮印巴关系的持续紧张。

●这或是对国际社会可以讨论“‘巴基斯坦通道’断了又如何？”的前提条件

在上文中，我们也提到了，巴基斯坦当局也知道事情的原委，既然如此，国际社会关注的，首先是巴基斯坦当局能不能顶住。类似的情况还有，在伊朗强调，保留铀浓缩技术是伊朗在伊核问题谈判中的“红线”后，面对美、以施加的强大压力，伊朗当局能不能顶住。原则只有一条，想要他助，首先自助。

值得一提的是，印度也在密切关注巴基斯坦的战略态度。莫迪小集团要得利，印度也要得利，于是，便把压力压给巴基斯坦，压给国际社会。

在印度看来，如果事情闹大了，自有“大个子顶着”，南亚全面混乱对美国，对西方，尤其是金融维稳问题上有何影响，那是美国人需要操心的事情。

如果巴基斯坦顶不住，国内的抵抗派能不能压住投降派，印度就有了额外收益。比如，巴基斯坦选择在克什米尔问题上对印度进一步妥协、让步；如果巴基斯坦这次再度坚决顶住，印度也不是不能接受。也就是往后撤一步，对美国也算有所交代。

在国际社会看来，事态现在还在发展，既然巴基斯坦开始军事反击，国际社会就给予支持你。但在政治上，国际社会的态度会表现得较为缓和，强调，反恐和调查。因为巴基斯坦当局在能否顶住的问题上，还没有做到让特朗普政府感到危险巨大而不得不收手。万一巴基斯坦当局和伊朗当局一样，最终选择妥协，国际社会一旦在政治上做了明确表态，岂不是把自己“装进去了”？可以肯定，如果巴基斯坦当局真如伊朗当局那样，最终选择妥协，则国际社会一定会脱身（注：中国和巴基斯坦没有中朝或俄朝那种军事同盟关系）。这或是对国际社会可以讨论“‘巴基斯坦通道’断了又如何？”的前提条件。

值得一提的是，近日，巴基斯坦防长罕见抱怨称，几十年来我们都在帮西方干“脏活”。显然，巴基斯坦当局在强调“我们”（注：至少包括亲美派）是美国的盟友，而现在，特朗普政府什么都不顾，直接把“屎盆子”扣在我们头上，将我们出卖得这么干净，换了谁能咽得下这口气？对此，我们想说的是，美国前国务卿基辛格早已露骨表示过：做美国的敌人很危险，做美国的盟友更危险。巴基斯坦防长难道是今天才知道美帝真实嘴脸的吗？如果早有耳闻，还抱怨什么？

●莫迪政府之所以这样做，首先就是想要让投机效果发挥到极致，只要想方设法成为“圣雄甘地第二”，谁还能动莫迪政权分毫？

有一点可以肯定，莫迪政府是知道美帝真实嘴脸的，2017年“洞朗事件”中，时任印度海军司令也曾类似巴基斯坦防长那样抱怨过：美日印澳，所谓“民主菱形”在军事上毫无意义。

也许有的网友会问，既然莫迪政府对美国人有所了解，那印度为什么表现得如此激进？一下子这么狠的手段，甚至连“水武器”都用上了。

在我们看来，莫迪政府之所以这样做，首先一条就是想要让投机效果发挥到极致。除了巴基斯坦当局一旦被压垮，在克什米尔问题上印度能占据上风之外，也是最重要的，莫迪就成了“印度的民族英雄”，尼赫鲁第二，圣雄甘地第二，如此一来，莫迪政权就可以得到极大巩固。此外，在外交层面，更可威慑尼泊尔，孟加拉，不要与中国走得太近。

讨论到这里，顺便插一句，印度这个国家，夜郎自大。自身能力十分有限，但政治野心却很大，尽可能打掉印度这种投机心态或是当年中国通过对印自卫反击战教训印度的原因之一。有资料显示，印度对中国领土觊觎已久，其不仅想要吞并青藏，甚至想要染指西安。

值得注意的是，近日，中俄就本轮印巴关系紧张，分别发表各自立场。总体上，基调都是中立，但中国更偏向巴基斯坦一些，俄罗斯则更偏向印度一些。看上去似乎双方有些默契，为以后事态发展留下进一步应对的操作空间。俄罗斯在观察巴基斯坦当局如何应对，也在观察中国如何应对。更何况，目前波斯湾之所以风云变幻，伊朗当局承压巨大也与本轮印巴关系紧张密切相关，至少从现在看，伊朗当局对于“巴基斯坦通道”的不稳是忌惮的（注：巴基斯坦内部有较强的亲美势力，也有较强的亲中势力，很可能因此陷入内乱）。

最新消息，伊朗最大港口阿巴斯港爆炸事件发生后，伊朗官方的表态倾向已经逐渐明了，尽管伊朗官方强调，原因仍待查，但表示或与集装箱内存储化学品有关。

显然，伊朗当局又怂了，所以，中、俄是不会为其说话的。接下来看巴基斯坦当局怂不怂。尽管巴基斯坦人民和中国人民的友情深厚，真心期待两国开展更为务实有效的合作，但鉴于巴基斯坦国内西方影响力不容小觑，巴基斯坦也在“落水捞人”名单之列。

●中国尽管在外交层面表达了中立的立场，但不希望看到巴基斯坦遭受失败，尤其是军事上的失败

有网友会问，巴基斯坦当局到底如何应对才算正确？国际社会在军事层面会给巴基斯坦什么样的支持。

对于巴基斯坦当局，我们给出的具体建议是，既然印度当局挑衅在前，甚至动用“水武器”这种反人类手段，巴基斯坦的出路只有一个：坚决打回去！

近日，有欧媒报道称，中国“运-20”向巴基斯坦紧急运送一批“PL-15”空空导弹，可有效压制印军机群。

在我们的观察与评估中，尽管这一新闻报道仍有待进一步证实，但可能性是有的。首先，真实存在的基本条件是满足的，毕竟巴基斯坦军方已进行军事反击。何况，帮助巴基斯坦军方在军事上占据优势，有利于中国军贸进一步走向世界，所以，中国尽管在外交层面表达了中立的立场，但不希望看到巴基斯坦遭受失败，尤其是军事上的失败。这些消息出现在72小时内，反应还是蛮迅速的。

值得一提的是，这次提供的“PL-15”导弹，极可能是PLA自用的版本（区别于“PL-15E”），射程至少200公里。其使用的“双脉冲”固体发动机性能优于欧洲自用的“流星”空空导弹（注：印度空军装备了一批法国“阵风”战机），其使用冲压发动机，在某特殊飞行阶段的技术指标与进气量密切相关，比如，仰角太大机动性能等，会受到较大影响。此外，“歼10-CE”使用的雷达要比“阵风”“SU-30MKI”使用的雷达拥有更远的探测距离。

此外，巴基斯坦陆军也装备了中国制造的远火系统、自行榴弹炮、卡车炮、红旗-9以及VT4主战坦克等（注：数量也许不占优势，但质量很高）。相比之下，印度装备的“T-90”系列主战坦克、K9自行榴弹炮等并不适合高原作战，何况现在作战的王者不再是坦克，而是无人机，比如，“飞龙-60A”无人机（注：可以放在火箭炮中发射，且有相当一段的制空停留时间）。不难想象的是，中国制造的远火系统搭配类似“飞龙-60A”这样的无人机，会对印度的坦克大军造成何等毁伤效果。更何况，在“A射B导”模式下，真正对印度军事目标进行打击的未必是巴基斯坦军方。

●以色列、土耳其纷纷插手本轮印巴关系紧张，特朗普政府要面对“若爆发全面冲突或将外溢至中东方向’”之不可预测风险

有趣的是，有传闻称，域外地区国家也纷纷插手南亚事务。以色列将武器送到了印度，而土耳其向巴基斯坦提供军事援助。

在我们看来，这两个中东国家此时插手南亚事务，意在浑水摸鱼。当然，混的是南亚的谁，摸的是中东的鱼。印度的一些武器系统是以色列提供的，而巴基斯坦在土耳其口中则被称为“穆斯林兄弟”。显然，这是南亚问题向中东外溢的迹象。而首先考验的则是美国。要知道，围绕叙利亚局势后续发展，以色列和土耳其之间的关系并不和谐。此外，或因为巴基斯坦提供经济援助，另一个中东地区大国——沙特，很有可能也会卷入其中。

也就是说，结合以色列、土耳其纷纷插手本轮印巴关系紧张综合观察，凸显的首先是特朗普政府要面对“若爆发全面冲突或将外溢至中东方向’”之不可预测风险。所以，特朗普政府你小心了，小心回旋镖打到自己的头上，毕竟美西方在印度涉足很深，小心由印巴全面冲突引爆系统性金融危机（注：中国可以据守青藏高原，守住国门，谁能奈PLA如何？当然，对国际社会的影响则是“巴基斯坦通道”就此中断。问题在于，这种危机一旦爆发，比如，印巴爆发全面冲突，或爆发巴基斯坦内乱，其会向另一个方向——中东，外溢。这就是美国，欧盟，印度，伊朗，以色列，沙特，土耳其能不能承受的问题）。

值得一提的是，内塔尼亚胡小集团是最极端，最自私的一帮人，唯恐天下不乱。除了坑特朗普政府之外，也将印度置于伊斯兰世界的敌对面上。这也是我们在本轮印巴冲突紧张的第一时间警告莫迪政府小心玩火自焚的一个层面。

●俄罗斯显然吃定了特朗普政府到现在为止仍未能有效处理中美关系这一点

需要补充的是，近日，俄罗斯在必要时也可向朝鲜提供军事援助。

在我们看来，俄方这一表态，既在呼应东北亚方向的朝鲜半岛局势，也在呼应南亚方向的印巴局势。对俄罗斯来说，毕竟乌克兰还在打仗，中东还未有效重返，特朗普所谓对俄罗斯的妥协、让步，基本停留在嘴上。所以，尽管俄罗斯仍心怀阿富汗小九九不放，但也要基本服从大局。

既然朝俄军事同盟有效，中朝友好互助条约也有效，那么日韩就要想好了，美日、美韩军事同盟是不是真的有效，何况朝鲜还有核武。显然，国际社会这是在变相鼓励日韩反抗美国，至少在关税政策上反抗美国。而俄罗斯则顺道在乌克兰问题向美国开出更高要求。

俄罗斯很清楚，面对本轮印巴关系紧张，中国只要不犯错，特朗普基本上就讨不到任何好处。说到根本，美国回头还是要来求俄罗斯的，谁让中美关系不但没有搞定，反而越闹越僵呢？

●尽管我们追求“河渡人”，但中国必须给这些国家做出表率

对于特朗普和“特朗普们”来说，讨好内塔尼亚胡小集团，有利于自己内斗就可以。而特朗普的敌人们，如“拜登们”也是这样想的，不顾一切给特朗普挖坑，丝毫不利于美国国家利益，甚至代言西方资本利益的美国资本的整体利益，乃至整个西方的整体利益。这是此前我们多次提及美国内部有丰厚的“土木堡之变”土壤的主要原因所在。

中国是一个大国，做好自己非常重要。非传统安全层面顶住了美国，2016年的南海对峙、2017年的“洞朗事件”，我们在传统安全层面我们也顶住了。这次，特朗普政府卷土重来，将非传统安全层面的那种“摊牌式战略讹诈”，或者说伴随战略进攻的战略讹诈外溢到传统安全层面。

此前，我们说，在中国周边地区，从战略风险从高到低排序是，南海，包括南亚；朝鲜半岛；台湾问题。值得强调的是，之所以南海没有出大事，就在于PLA在南海非常犀利。近日，央视曝中美航母激烈对峙：歼15对战F18不落下风。照片看PLA是主动的，位于其背后的有利阵位。歼15是中国航母的舰载机，后者是美国航母的舰载机，所以，中美航母战斗群在南海对峙（注：彼此在对方攻击范围之内）或是真的。

最后需要补充的是，巴丹岛和郑和岛，本次在南海方向与美菲你来我往的较量中也有所涉及，这意味着，必要时刻，这两个岛屿都在“以岛换岛”的范围内，根据国际法，他们都不是菲律宾的合法领土。尽管我们追求“河渡人”为最优战略选项，但中国必须给这些国家做出表率。如上文所述，这对日韩，伊朗，巴基斯坦都是一种鼓励——基于各自核心利益，该干什么就干什么。菲律宾是东盟成员国，但是，如果局势发展到中国必须开启最低经济内循环，以东盟为例，恐怕只能跟着中国走。

声明：具体内容如有出入，请以“东方时事解读”音频为准。

Tuesday, Apri. 29, 2025, Issue No. 1236

As Israel and Turkey have separately intervened in the current escalation of tensions between India and Pakistan, it underscores that the Trump administration, first and foremost, must confront the unpredictable risks of a potential spillover into the Middle East should a full-scale conflict erupt.

[Media Coverage]

On April 28th, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov and Muhammad Khalid Jamali, the Pakistani Ambassador to Russia, held discussions on the escalating tensions between India and Pakistan, with the Russian side urging both parties to resolve their differences peacefully.

【Discussion Summary】

● Driven by immense interests, fueled by a strong speculative mindset, coerced and lured by the United States into colluding with the Trump administration, there has been, at the very least, a significant push towards exacerbating the current tensions between India and Pakistan.

We observed that on April 29th, Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif indicated to the media that, given India's political rhetoric surrounding the recent terrorist attack in Kashmir, the current Indo-Pakistani tensions risk escalation.

From our observations and assessments, it is evident that the Pakistani authorities, and particularly the Indian authorities, are acutely aware of the root causes of the current Indo-Pakistani tensions. The Indian administration, namely the Modi government, has even been directly implicated in orchestrating this crisis.

Similar to the Trump administration, the Modi government finds itself entangled in both domestic and external predicaments. Domestically, acute social, religious, and ethnic contradictions threaten political stability. Externally, Bangladesh and Nepal are increasingly distancing themselves from India, while the United States exerts tariff pressures on India, aiming to mold it into a paragon of an "anti-China tariff coalition."

Following the visit of U.S. Vice President Vance to India (note: Vance spent a full four days in India, affording him ample time for engagement), and after extending various incentives to India—such as tariff concessions, reduced sanctions, increased investments, expedited relocation of relevant industrial chains, and notably, the promise to recognize India's sovereignty over the entirety of Kashmir (note: a significant provocation for the Modi government)—coupled with substantial bribery directed at Modi's inner circle, the Modi government, lured by colossal benefits and motivated by self-interest, sought externally to amplify India's role in counterbalancing China and augment its influence in the Middle East, coercing Pakistan into further concessions on the Kashmir issue. Internally, it aimed to divert public attention, alleviate social, ethnic, and religious tensions, and consolidate its grip on power. Ultimately, under the influence of a rampant speculative mindset, the Modi government acquiesced to collude with the Trump administration, plotting, or at the very least, significantly propelling the persistent escalation of tensions in Indo-Pakistani relations.

● This might serve as a precondition for the international community to contemplate discussing scenarios like "What if the 'Pakistani corridor' is severed?"

As we've previously mentioned, the Pakistani authorities are also privy to the underlying causes of the situation. Given this, the international community's primary concern lies in whether the Pakistani authorities can withstand the pressure. A parallel situation can be observed in Iran's stance, where it insists on retaining uranium enrichment technology as a "red line" in nuclear negotiations, despite formidable pressures from the United States and Israel. The cardinal principle remains: to seek external assistance, one must first help oneself. Notably, India is also keenly observing Pakistan's strategic posture. The Modi clique seeks personal gains, as does India as a whole, hence the transfer of pressure onto Pakistan and the international community.

From India's perspective, if the situation spirals out of control, it's the "big guys" who will bear the brunt. The ramifications of a full-blown South Asian turmoil on the United States and the West, particularly in terms of financial stability, are a matter for the Americans to fret over.

Should Pakistan falter, and domestic resistance factions fail to rein in the surrender-minded elements, India stands to gain additional advantages. For instance, Pakistan might opt for further concessions or compromises on the Kashmir issue. Conversely, if Pakistan resolutely withstands the pressure this time, India may find itself compelled to retreat a step, offering some semblance of accountability to the United States.

In the eyes of the international community, as the situation continues to unfold, and given that Pakistan has initiated military countermeasures, support is extended. However, politically, the international community's stance remains relatively restrained, emphasizing counterterrorism and investigations. This is because the Pakistani authorities have not yet reached a point where the Trump administration perceives a sufficiently grave threat to warrant a retreat. In the event that the Pakistani authorities, akin to their Iranian counterparts, ultimately choose to compromise, and the international community makes explicit political declarations, they might inadvertently "entangle themselves." It is certain that if the Pakistani authorities were to capitulate as the Iranian authorities did, the international community would undoubtedly disengage (note: China and Pakistan do not share a military alliance akin to that between China and North Korea or Russia and North Korea). This might serve as a precondition for the international community to contemplate discussing scenarios like "What if the 'Pakistani corridor' is severed?"

It is worth mentioning that recently, Pakistan's Defense Minister has made rare complaints, stating that for decades, they have been doing the West's "dirty work." Clearly, the Pakistani authorities are underscoring that "we" (at least including the pro-U.S. factions) have been allies of the United States, yet now, the Trump administration is indiscriminately heaping blame on them, selling them out so thoroughly. Who could possibly swallow such indignity? In response, we might say that former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had already bluntly stated: being an enemy of the United States is perilous, but being an ally is even more so. Did the Pakistani Defense Minister only come to realize the true nature of the American hegemony today? If such insights were already known, why the complaints?

● The primary motive behind the Modi government's actions is to maximize the effects of its speculative strategies. By striving to position itself as the "next Mahatma Gandhi," who could dare to challenge the Modi regime's stability?

One thing is certain: the Modi government is well aware of the true nature of American hegemony. During the 2017 Doklam standoff, the then-Indian Navy Chief had also expressed grievances akin to those recently voiced by Pakistan's Defense Minister, stating that the so-called "Quad" (comprising the United States, Japan, India, and Australia) held no military significance.

Some netizens might wonder, given the Modi government's understanding of the Americans, why has India adopted such an aggressive stance, resorting to even "water weaponry" in its tactics?

From our perspective, the Modi government's primary objective is to maximize the returns on its speculative gambles. Beyond the potential upper hand India could gain over Pakistan in the Kashmir issue if the Pakistani authorities were to collapse, the most crucial aspect is that Modi would be hailed as "India's national hero," the successor to Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi. This would significantly solidify the Modi regime. Additionally, on the diplomatic front, it would serve as a deterrent to Nepal and Bangladesh, dissuading them from aligning too closely with China.

At this juncture, it's worth noting that India, as a nation, often exhibits a sense of overconfidence and hubris. Despite its limited capabilities, it harbors significant political ambitions. Eradicating India's speculative mindset was perhaps one of the reasons China sought to teach India a lesson through the 1962 Sino-Indian War. Historical records indicate that India has long harbored territorial ambitions against China, not only eyeing the annexation of Tibet but also coveting Xi'an.

It is noteworthy that recently, both China and Russia have articulated their respective positions on the current escalation of Indo-Pakistani tensions. Overall, both countries have maintained a neutral stance, albeit with China leaning slightly more towards Pakistan and Russia showing a marginal preference for India. This seems to suggest a tacit understanding between the two, leaving room for further maneuverability in response to future developments. Russia is observing how the Pakistani authorities will respond, as well as monitoring China's approach. Moreover, the current geopolitical turbulence in the Persian Gulf and the immense pressure on the Iranian authorities are intricately linked to the ongoing Indo-Pakistani tensions. At least for now, it appears that the Iranian authorities are wary of the instability of the "Pakistani corridor" (note: Pakistan has strong pro-U.S. factions as well as significant pro-China elements, potentially leading to internal strife).

In the latest development, following the explosion at Iran's largest port, Bandar Abbas, Iranian officials' statements have gradually clarified their stance. Although they emphasize that the cause remains under investigation, they suggest it might be linked to chemicals stored in containers.

Evidently, the Iranian authorities have once again demonstrated a lack of resolve. Consequently, neither China nor Russia will come to their defense. The next question is whether the Pakistani authorities will also falter. Despite the profound friendship between the Pakistani and Chinese peoples and the genuine anticipation for more pragmatic and effective cooperation between the two countries, given the considerable Western influence within Pakistan, it is also on the list of countries that might "fish in troubled waters."

● Despite maintaining a neutral stance diplomatically, China does not wish to see Pakistan suffer defeat, especially a military one.

Some netizens might inquire: What constitutes an appropriate response from the Pakistani authorities? And what kind of military support can the international community offer to Pakistan?

Our specific advice to the Pakistani authorities is as follows: Given that the Indian authorities initiated the provocation and even resorted to anti-humanitarian means like "water weaponry," Pakistan's only viable path forward is to fight back resolutely!

Recently, European media outlets have reported that China has urgently transported a batch of "PL-15" air-to-air missiles to Pakistan via "Yun-20" transport aircraft, capable of effectively suppressing Indian air formations.

In our observations and assessments, while this news report remains to be further corroborated, the possibility is not unfounded. Firstly, the fundamental conditions for such an action are in place, especially considering that the Pakistani military has already launched military countermeasures. Moreover, aiding the Pakistani military in gaining a military edge is conducive to further expanding China's military trade on the global stage. Therefore, despite expressing a neutral stance diplomatically, China does not wish to see Pakistan suffer defeat, particularly a military one. The emergence of such news within 72 hours indicates a relatively swift response.

It is worth mentioning that the "PL-15" missiles provided this time are highly likely to be the version used by the People's Liberation Army (PLA) itself (as opposed to the "PL-15E" export variant), with a range of at least 200 kilometers. The "dual-pulse" solid motor employed in these missiles outperforms the European "Meteor" air-to-air missiles (note: The Indian Air Force has equipped itself with a batch of French "Rafale" fighters). The "Meteor" missiles utilize ramjets, whose technical performance during specific flight phases is closely tied to intake air volume. For instance, excessive pitch angles can significantly impact maneuverability. Additionally, the radar system integrated into the "J-10CE" fighters boasts a longer detection range compared to those installed in the "Rafale" and "SU-30MKI" fighters operated by India.

Furthermore, the Pakistani Army is equipped with Chinese-made long-range rocket systems, self-propelled howitzers, truck-mounted artillery, HQ-9 air defense systems, and VT4 main battle tanks (note: While the quantity may not be overwhelming, the quality is exceptional). In contrast, the Indian military's "T-90" series main battle tanks and K9 self-propelled howitzers are ill-suited for high-altitude warfare. Moreover, the reigning kings of modern warfare are no longer tanks but drones, such as the "Feilong-60A" drone (note: It can be launched from rocket artillery and has a considerable airborne endurance time). It is not difficult to imagine the devastating impact that Chinese-made long-range rocket systems, coupled with drones like the "Feilong-60A," could inflict on India's tank formations. Furthermore, under the "A-shoots, B-guides" mode, it may not necessarily be the Pakistani military that carries out strikes against Indian military targets.

● Both Israel and Turkey have intervened in the current escalation of Indo-Pakistani tensions, presenting the Trump administration with the unpredictable risk that "a full-blown conflict could spill over into the Middle East."

Interestingly, there are rumors circulating that countries outside the region are also meddling in South Asian affairs. Israel has reportedly delivered weapons to India, while Turkey has extended military assistance to Pakistan.

In our view, these two Middle Eastern countries are capitalizing on the current chaos in South Asia to further their own interests in the Middle East. While India relies on weapon systems supplied by Israel, Pakistan is hailed as a "Muslim brother" by Turkey. This is clearly indicative of the spillover of South Asian issues into the Middle East, with the United States being the first to face the consequences. It's worth noting that Israel and Turkey have had strained relations amid the ongoing developments in Syria. Moreover, given Pakistan's potential provision of economic aid, another major Middle Eastern powerhouse, Saudi Arabia, might also be drawn into the fray.

In other words, when considering the combined interventions of Israel and Turkey in the current Indo-Pakistani tensions, it becomes evident that the Trump administration is confronted with the unpredictable risk that "a full-scale conflict could potentially spill over into the Middle East." Therefore, the Trump administration should exercise caution to avoid being caught in the crossfire. After all, the United States and Western powers have deep involvement in India, and a systemic financial crisis could be triggered by an all-out Indo-Pakistani conflict (note: China can safeguard its borders by relying on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, and there's little that can be done to the PLA. However, for the international community, the consequence would be the disruption of the "Pakistani corridor." The crux of the matter is that once such a crisis erupts—be it a full-blown Indo-Pakistani conflict or internal strife in Pakistan—it could spill over into another direction: the Middle East. The question then becomes whether the United States, the European Union, India, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey can withstand such repercussions).

It is also worth mentioning that the Netanyahu clique represents the most extremist and self-serving faction, hell-bent on fomenting chaos. Apart from undermining the Trump administration, they have also placed India in direct opposition to the Islamic world. This is one aspect of why we warned the Modi government at the outset of the current Indo-Pakistani tensions against playing with fire and risking self-immolation.

● It is evident that Russia has taken advantage of the fact that the Trump administration has thus far failed to effectively manage U.S.-China relations.

It should be noted that recently, Russia has also signaled its willingness to provide military assistance to North Korea if necessary.

In our view, this statement from Russia serves as a dual response: one to the situation on the Korean Peninsula in Northeast Asia and the other to the Indo-Pakistani tensions in South Asia. For Russia, with the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and its yet-to-be-fully-realized return to the Middle East, the purported concessions and compromises from Trump towards Russia have largely remained rhetorical. Therefore, while Russia may still harbor its own interests in Afghanistan, it must largely conform to the broader geopolitical landscape.

Given the effectiveness of the Russia-North Korea military alliance and the continued validity of the China-North Korea Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, Japan and South Korea should reconsider the true efficacy of their military alliances with the United States, especially considering North Korea's nuclear capabilities. Clearly, the international community is implicitly encouraging Japan and South Korea to resist U.S. influence, at least in terms of tariff policies. Meanwhile, Russia is leveraging this opportunity to make higher demands of the United States regarding the Ukrainian issue.

Russia is well aware that in the face of the current Indo-Pakistani tensions, as long as China does not make any missteps, Trump will gain little advantage. Ultimately, the United States will likely have to turn to Russia for assistance, especially given the deteriorating U.S.-China relations that have yet to be resolved and instead continue to sour.

● While we advocate for the strategy of "letting the river carry people" (a metaphorical expression meaning allowing situations to evolve naturally to our advantage), China must also set an exemplary standard for other nations.

For Trump and those like him, currying favor with the Netanyahu clique serves their domestic political rivalries. Similarly, Trump's adversaries, such as those aligned with "Biden's camp," are also fixated on undermining him at any cost, disregarding the broader national interests of the United States, let alone the collective interests of Western capital and the West as a whole. This is the primary reason we have repeatedly highlighted the fertile ground for internal strife akin to the "Tumu Crisis" (a historical event in China symbolizing internal discord leading to external vulnerability) within the United States.

As a major power, it is crucial for China to focus on its own development and conduct. We have successfully withstood U.S. pressures on non-traditional security fronts, as evidenced by the South China Sea standoff in 2016 and the Doklam incident in 2017. Now, with the Trump administration's resurgence, it is escalating its "strategic bluffing," which was previously confined to non-traditional security domains, into the realm of traditional security.

Previously, we ranked the strategic risks around China's periphery from highest to lowest as follows: the South China Sea, including South Asia; the Korean Peninsula; and the Taiwan issue. It is worth emphasizing that the absence of a major incident in the South China Sea is attributable to the PLA's formidable presence there. Recently, CCTV revealed intense confrontations between Chinese and U.S. aircraft carriers: J-15 fighters held their own against F-18s. Photographic evidence suggests that the PLA was in an active and advantageous position. The J-15 is China's carrier-based fighter, pitted against its U.S. counterpart, indicating that a direct confrontation between Chinese and U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups in the South China Sea (within each other's attack ranges) may indeed be a reality.

Lastly, it should be noted that Batan Island and Zhenghe Island have also been implicated in the recent back-and-forth exchanges between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea. This implies that, if necessary, these islands could be part of a "land-for-island" swap, as they are not legally Philippine territories under international law. While we aspire to the optimal strategic choice of "letting the river carry people," China must also lead by example for other nations. As mentioned earlier, this serves as an encouragement for Japan, South Korea, Iran, and Pakistan to pursue their core interests without hesitation. The Philippines is a member of ASEAN, but if the situation deteriorates to the point where China must initiate a minimal economic self-sufficiency cycle, ASEAN, exemplified by the Philippines, would likely have no choice but to align with China.

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