2025.06. 23 本文字数：1549，阅读时长大约2分钟 作者 | 第一财经 潘寅茹 原定于7月1日在华盛顿举行的日美"2+2"会谈被推迟了，且日美双方尚未明确下一次会议的时间。 日本外务省强调，在中东地区局势不断升级的当下，协调召开"2+2"会议已无可能。当地时间21日夜 间，美国针对伊朗的福尔道、纳坦兹和伊斯法罕三处核设施发动袭击。此后，美国防长赫格塞思一直 忙于就美国在以伊冲突中的立场进行解释。 作为美国在亚太地区的盟友，日本政府一直将与美国的"2+2"会谈视为"高度优先事项"。对于"2+2"会 谈的推迟，日本国内的一些分析认为，以伊冲突只是日方要求延期举行"2+2"会谈的表面原因，美国 政府此前不断要求日方增加国防开支是一个不可忽视的因素。 特朗普政府不断要求日方增加国防开支（来源：新华社资料图） 防务开支分歧 美国五角大楼发言人21日曾公开表示，特朗普政府要求包括日本在内的亚洲盟友将国内生产总值 （GDP）的5%用于国防预算，对日本的要求则是将比例从目前的1.4%提高至3.5%。本周，北约峰 会将举行，预计美国总统特朗普将在会上对欧洲盟友的国防开支提出相同的要求。 其实，主张"美国优先"的特朗 ...

美国政府此前不断要求日方增加国防开支，被认为是导致日美"2+2"会谈推迟的因素之一。 美国五角大楼发言人21日曾公开表示，特朗普政府要求包括日本在内的亚洲盟友将国内生产总值 （GDP）的5%用于国防预算，对日本的要求则是将比例从目前的1.4%提高至3.5%。本周，北约峰会将举 行，预计美国总统特朗普将在会上对欧洲盟友的国防开支提出相同的要求。 其实，主张"美国优先"的特朗普早在第一个任期内就抱怨盟友在防务领域一直"占美国便宜"、"搭顺风 车"，要求盟友提高防务费用。 对于近来美方不断要求日本提高防务开支的呼声，日本首相石破茂曾回应道，日本的防卫费由日本决 定，而不是根据其他国家说了什么来决定的。 日本外务省强调，在中东地区局势不断升级的当下，协调召开"2+2"会议已无可能。当地时间21日夜间， 美国针对伊朗的福尔道、纳坦兹和伊斯法罕三处核设施发动袭击。此后，美国防长赫格塞思一直忙于就 美国在以伊冲突中的立场进行解释。 作为美国在亚太地区的盟友，日本政府一直将与美国的"2+2"会谈视为"高度优先事项"。对于"2+2"会谈 的推迟，日本国内的一些分析认为，以伊冲突只是日方要求延期举行"2+2"会谈的表面原因，美国 ...

美国突然空袭伊朗三处核设施后，自称属于总统特朗普"让美国再次伟大(MAGA)"支持者阵营的联邦众 议员托马斯.梅西22日谴责特朗普绕过国会授权、军事介入中东地区冲突，暗示此举违背竞选承诺、不 符合"美国优先"。特朗普回应说：梅西不属于MAGA阵营，MAGA不想要他。(新华社) ...

特朗普的立场已悄然转变——从政府表态"这不涉及伊朗政权更迭"，到暗示"或许最终会政权更迭"。 当世界各国领导人紧急呼吁外交解决时，特朗普在当地时间周日却抛出德黑兰政权更迭的可能性，此时 距美军空袭伊朗三大核设施引发中东冲突急剧升级的担忧还不到24小时。 在袭击前几天，使用美国军队和武器轰炸伊朗的想法已使特朗普的MAGA阵营分裂，前福克斯新闻主 持人塔克·卡尔森（Tucker Carlson）、参议员兰德·保罗（Rand Paul）、众议员托马斯·马西（Thomas Massie）和马乔里·泰勒·格林（Marjorie Taylor Greene）与参议员特德·克鲁兹（Ted Cruz ）和格雷厄姆等 共和党鹰派对峙。 马西已与民主党人共同发起立法，禁止总统在未获得国会批准的情况下对伊朗采取进一步军事行动。他 公开批评众议院议长约翰逊没有给众议院时间就是否授权美国卷入另一场战争进行辩论和投票。 对于特朗普和共和党人来说，随着2026年中期选举日益成为焦点，对伊朗的打击带来了更大的风险。 "如果现伊朗政权无法'让伊朗再次伟大'，为什么不进行政权更迭？"特朗普在其社交媒体发文称。此 前，他的政府高级官员们整天都在强 ...

Group 1 - The U.S. has imposed unprecedented tariffs on six categories of Chinese goods, with rates reaching as high as 1157%, indicating a significant escalation in trade tensions [1][5][9] - Specific products affected include electric tricycles, slag buckets, plywood, and brake drums, with tariffs ranging from 294% to 1157% [5][9] - The strategy appears to be a targeted approach rather than a broad-based attack, aiming to minimize domestic backlash while applying pressure on specific sectors [7][9] Group 2 - The political context reveals that President Trump's approval ratings have dropped to 39%, prompting a need to shift blame for economic issues onto China [11][13] - The timing of the tariff announcement, shortly after a diplomatic meeting, suggests a calculated move to strengthen negotiation leverage while maintaining a tough stance [13][24] - The U.S. is facing a paradox where it relies heavily on Chinese rare earth materials for military and technological applications, complicating the tariff strategy [15][21] Group 3 - Chinese companies are adapting quickly to the tariffs by shifting export markets and investing in product upgrades, demonstrating resilience against U.S. trade policies [26][28] - The ongoing trade conflict has led to increased costs for U.S. infrastructure projects, ultimately impacting American consumers [26][28] - The upcoming negotiations are expected to be challenging, with China maintaining a firm stance on its conditions for cooperation, particularly regarding rare earth materials [28][30]

来源：央视新闻客户端 美国总统特朗普20日说，北约国家军费开支必须达到占国内生产总值（GDP）5%的标准，但美国除 外。 特朗普当天被问及北约军费开支的问题时告诉媒体记者："我们（美国）长时间支持北约。 在许多情况 下，我们几乎承担百分之百的开支。所以，我认为我们不应该（军费占GDP比重达到5%），但北约国 家绝对应该达到。" "点名"西班牙和加拿大 特朗普把西班牙和加拿大作为北约国家中军费开支"不达标"的"典型"。 "西班牙一直出得非常少……我 认为西班牙必须跟其他国家出得一样多。"特朗普说。 西班牙首相桑切斯19日致函北约秘书长吕特，拒绝将西班牙军费开支增至占GDP的5%，认为这一目 标"不仅不合理，而且会适得其反"。西班牙此前承诺，在不影响任何社会项目开支的情况下，将军费开 支提高到占GDP的2%。但要达到占比5%这一新目标，意味着西班牙每年军费开支需要再增加800亿欧 元。 根据北约年度报告，加拿大去年的国防开支大约占其国内生产总值的1.45%。加拿大总理卡尼曾承诺到 2030年将这一占比提高到2%的北约标准。 至于加拿大，特朗普称："他们一直在说：'美国会免费保护我们，所以为什么我们要出钱？'"他补 ...

Group 1 - President Trump stated that NATO countries should increase their military spending to 5% of GDP, excluding the United States [1][3] - Trump criticized Spain and Canada for not meeting military spending targets, claiming Spain spends very little and Canada relies on the U.S. for protection [3] - The U.S. military spending was approximately 3.4% of GDP last year [3] Group 2 - Spanish Prime Minister Sanchez rejected the 5% military spending target, calling it unreasonable and stating that it would require an additional €80 billion annually [5] - Canada’s defense spending was about 1.45% of GDP last year, with a commitment to reach 2% by 2030 [5]

智通财经6月21日电，据新华社报道，美国总统特朗普20日说，北约国家军费开支必须达到占国内生产 总值（GDP）5%的标准，但美国除外。特朗普当天被问及北约军费开支的问题时告诉媒体记者："我们 （美国）长时间支持北约。在许多情况下，我们几乎承担百分之百的开支。所以，我认为我们不应该 （军费占GDP比重达到5%），但北约国家绝对应该达到。"特朗普奉行"美国优先"政策，认定美国长期 遭盟友"占便宜"。他要求北约国家把军费开支占GDP2%的当前目标提升至5%，遭到一些国家反对。美 国去年军费开支占GDP大约3.4%。 特朗普称北约国家军费须达到国内生产总值5% 但美国除外 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the internal dynamics of the Trump administration regarding the potential military action against Iran, highlighting the marginalization of key figures like Defense Secretary Mark Esper and National Intelligence Director John Ratcliffe in the decision-making process [1][2][5]. Group 1: Key Figures and Their Roles - Trump is relying more on a small group of experienced advisors rather than prominent figures like Esper and Ratcliffe during the critical decision-making period regarding Iran [2][4]. - The core decision-making team includes Vice President Mike Pence, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe [2][4]. - Esper and Ratcliffe's spokespersons deny their exclusion, but reports indicate that they are not playing significant roles in the current discussions [2][10]. Group 2: Internal Conflicts and Dynamics - There are visible rifts within Trump's "MAGA" coalition, with some supporters advocating for unconditional support of Israel against Iran, while others argue that intervention contradicts the "America First" principle [1][7]. - The article notes that Trump's fluctuating stance on military action against Iran has created confusion, with critics pointing out the lack of a consistent strategy [5][6]. - Tensions have arisen due to past controversies involving Ratcliffe, leading to a perception of his diminished influence in the administration [6][7]. Group 3: Military Action Considerations - The article outlines the potential consequences of U.S. military action against Iran, including the risk of escalating conflict in the Middle East and retaliatory actions against U.S. military bases [4][5]. - The Trump administration is reportedly considering the use of unique U.S. weaponry to target Iran's nuclear facilities, with ongoing Israeli airstrikes already having occurred [4][10]. - The Pentagon's chief spokesperson refutes claims of Esper being sidelined, asserting that he remains actively involved in discussions with Trump [10][11].

Group 1 - The article discusses the contrasting views on Iran's nuclear capabilities, highlighting Trump's belief that Iran is close to developing a nuclear weapon, while others argue there is no credible evidence supporting this claim [1][2][3] - Critics of potential military intervention reference the historical context of the Iraq War, emphasizing the need for careful consideration before engaging in another conflict in the Middle East [1][4] - The article notes the division among American voters regarding overseas military intervention, contrasting the post-9/11 unity with the current skepticism [4][5] Group 2 - The influence of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on U.S. foreign policy decisions regarding Iran is mentioned, raising concerns about the motivations behind military action [4] - The article highlights the tension within Trump's support base, with some accusing him of abandoning the "America First" principle in favor of a more interventionist approach [5] - The discussion includes the historical consistency of Trump's stance on Iran, suggesting that his current position aligns with his long-held views against Iran obtaining nuclear weapons [5]