大家好，今天犀哥这篇文章，主要来聊聊如今的欧洲。现在欧洲的日子不好过，大家有目共睹，经济涨 不动、产业竞争力往下滑，内部还老闹分歧，在全球格局里越来越被动。 欧洲指从别人身上找缺点，从来看不到自己的毛病 而这时，意大利前总理德拉吉语出惊人，他居然把欧洲衰落的锅，全扣在了中国头上，声称"世界秩序 如今已经名存实亡"，还说中国加入世贸后，西方跟中国做生意，才导致全球秩序乱套、西方贸易缩 水，他为什么这么说？ 西方政客总爱把自己的麻烦推给别人，本质上就是没本事解决内部问题。 中欧做生意从来都是互相成就的 还有个关键问题，德拉吉压根没提，美国的单边主义，才是破坏全球秩序、拖累欧洲的罪魁祸首。 另外，在数字经济、新能源这些新赛道上，欧洲反应太慢，创新跟不上，慢慢就被别人甩在了后面，再 加上内部市场没整合好，资源没法好好利用，这些才是真正拖垮欧洲的原因。 美国天天拿着贸易制裁当武器，不让世贸组织好好干活，一门心思搞"美国优先"，到处搞保护主义、挑 事对立，不光把全球贸易秩序搅乱了，还逼着欧洲卷入地缘博弈，欧洲的利益早就被美国薅了不少羊 毛。 要搞清楚欧洲为啥不行，首先得抛开"怪别人"的偏见，好好看看自己身上的毛病，欧洲早 ...

【何亚东】: 【CGTN记者】: 各位记者朋友： 大家下午好，欢迎参加商务部例行新闻发布会。今天我没有需要向大家通报的信息。下面我愿意回答记 者朋友提出的问题。 下面请提问。 【第一财经记者】: 我们注意到，2026年"共享大市场出口中国"首场活动昨天在北京举行，这体现了中国重视进口，推动进 出口平衡发展的积极努力。能否简要介绍一下相关活动，以及中国下一步将采取哪些措施主动扩大进 口？ 【何亚东】: 中国一直高度重视扩大进口工作。习近平总书记多次强调，要扩大自各国优质产品和服务的进口。商务 部积极落实党中央、国务院决策部署，推动进口规模持续增长、来源更加多元。2025年，中国进口规模 达18.5万亿元，连续17年成为全球第二大进口市场。中国自130多个国家和地区的进口实现增长，已成 为近80个国家的主要出口目的地。 在当前经济全球化遭遇逆流，单边主义、保护主义抬头的大背景下，举办"出口中国"系列活动，是中方 积极扩大自主开放、推动全球开放合作的主动作为。2026年，我们将组织超百场形式多样的进口促进活 动。在工作中，我们将强化"出口中国"与"购在中国"的联动，搭建更多进口商品促消费场景，让优质进 口产品和服务 ...

韩国执政党共同民主党政策委员会议长韩贞爱近日召开记者会，就美国拟单边上调韩国输美商品关税一 事作出回应，对美方违背双方共识的做法表达遗憾。1月31日，韩国产业通商部长官金正官结束访美关 税磋商后表示，双方核心分歧仍未弥合，后续将通过视频会议持续磋商。 美方单边加税举措，引发韩国媒体的广泛关注和批评。《韩民族日报》发表社论指出，韩美协议中未明 确《对美投资特别法案》的通过期限，该法案提交国会仅两个多月，韩国国会始终按正常程序推进，并 未公开表示反对。美方在未与韩方事先沟通的情况下单方面背弃协议，其做法在外交层面令人难以理 解，其单边主义倾向与随意毁约的行为，已受到国际社会的广泛关注。 美国总统特朗普1月26日通过社交媒体发布声明，以韩国国会未批准美韩贸易协议为由，宣布将韩国输 美汽车、木材、药品等商品关税从15%上调至25%。据韩联社报道，韩国总统府1月27日上午召开对美 贸易现状会议，专题研究应对举措，并审查《对美投资特别法案》的推进情况。总统府发言人姜由桢在 书面简报中表示，韩国政府将审慎研判美方举措的背景与意图。 2025年7月，美韩达成贸易协议框架。根据美方披露的协议内容，韩方需履行三项核心义务：输美产 ...

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around the U.S. unilaterally raising tariffs on South Korean goods, which has led to disappointment from South Korea's ruling Democratic Party [1][2] - The U.S. plans to increase tariffs on South Korean exports such as automobiles, timber, and pharmaceuticals from 15% to 25%, citing the lack of approval of the U.S.-Korea trade agreement by the South Korean National Assembly [1][2] - South Korea's government is assessing the implications of the U.S. actions and is committed to ongoing negotiations through video conferences [1][2] Group 2 - The trade agreement framework established in July 2025 requires South Korea to meet three core obligations, including a $350 billion investment in the U.S. and a $100 billion procurement of energy products [2] - There is significant domestic criticism in South Korea regarding the trade agreement, particularly concerning the unilateral tariff increase by the U.S. without prior consultation [2][3] - Experts suggest that the U.S. is using tariffs as a tool to pressure allies into increasing investments, which could undermine the existing international order [3]

Core Viewpoint - The EU-India free trade agreement, described as the "mother of all agreements," emerged after 20 years of stalled negotiations, catalyzed by Trump's trade policies, which inadvertently strengthened India's position in the global economic landscape [1][4][8] Economic Impact - The agreement covers a quarter of global GDP and a third of global trade, impacting 2 billion people and restructuring nearly 30% of global economic activities [1][3] - The EU is expected to save €4 billion annually in tariff costs, while India's exports to the EU are projected to double, benefiting companies like Volkswagen and BMW [3][4] - India will reduce its automotive tariffs from 110% to 10%, opening its market to European car manufacturers, while the EU will provide favorable terms for India's labor-intensive products like textiles and jewelry [1][4] Strategic Significance - The agreement signifies a shift away from US-dominated trade orders, allowing emerging markets and developed economies to find new cooperative models [4][6] - It serves as a strategic declaration against unilateralism, showcasing that collaborative efforts can create value even in the face of hegemonic pressures [1][4][8] - The partnership between the EU and India reflects a mutual understanding that unity is essential to withstand external pressures, particularly from the US [3][6] Political Context - Trump's trade policies, aimed at isolating China and pressuring the EU, backfired by pushing India and the EU closer together, highlighting the limitations of unilateral approaches [4][6][8] - The agreement represents a strategic move for both parties to assert their independence from US influence, with India seeking to establish itself as a leader among developing nations [6][8]

Group 1 - The world is increasingly perceived to be sliding into a "rule-less" era, with concerns about the erosion of international order and the rise of unilateralism and hegemony [1][2][3] - The transatlantic relationship between the US and Europe is experiencing significant strain, with mutual trust at a historical low, as highlighted by the US's aggressive foreign policy actions [1][2] - The current geopolitical landscape reflects a deep-seated crisis, with hegemonic powers undermining international law and order, leading to a chaotic global environment [2][3] Group 2 - The post-World War II international order, while not perfect, has been crucial for maintaining global peace and promoting trade; however, recent shifts in policy by key nations threaten this stability [3][4] - Economic cooperation is being weaponized, with geopolitical tensions disrupting global supply chains and trade, leading to a fragmented economic landscape [4][5] - The decline of multilateralism is evident as major powers withdraw from international agreements, jeopardizing the effectiveness of global governance institutions [4][6] Group 3 - The unpredictability of the current global environment poses significant risks, as nations struggle to protect their interests in a landscape where rules are disregarded [5][6] - There is a growing recognition that returning to the previous international order is unlikely, necessitating a collective response to the challenges posed by hegemonic actions [6][7] - The need for unity and cooperation among nations is emphasized as essential to countering the threats of hegemony and ensuring a stable international order [7]

转自：法治日报 □ 本报记者 赵阳 当地时间1月27日，美国退出《巴黎协定》的程序正式生效，这个历史累计碳排放占全 球20%的国家，成为唯一一个两次退出该协定的国度。从2017年在特朗普首个任期内首次"退群"，到 2021年拜登政府时期仓促重返，再到2025年再度官宣退出，美国围绕《巴黎协定》上演的退出"戏码"， 早已超越气候政策本身的争议，沦为一场暴露"美国优先"霸权逻辑的政治闹剧，其"合则用、不合则 弃"的单边行径，正给全球气候治理带来难以愈合的创伤。 美国的"退群"决定，从来不是基于科学判断 的理性选择，而是国内政治利益算计的必然结果。2025年特朗普政府重启"退群"程序，背后清晰可见共 和党与化石能源行业的利益绑定——2024年总统选举中，化石能源巨头为特朗普阵营注入巨额政治献 金，而且传统能源行业的数百万从业者构成了其核心选票基本盘。这种"选票与金主绑定"的政治生态， 让美国政府毫不犹豫地将全人类的气候福祉让位于短期政治利益。 更值得警惕的是，美国的"退群"行 为具有明确的选择性标准。在特朗普扬言退出的66个国际组织及协定中，31个隶属于联合国框架，且多 集中在公共卫生、气候治理等"不能体现硬实力" ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article discusses the significance of UK Prime Minister Starmer's visit to Japan shortly after his trip to China, emphasizing the economic ties between the UK and both countries, with China being the UK's largest trading partner in Asia at over $100 billion and Japan as the second at several hundred billion [2] - The article highlights the potential discussions between Starmer and Japanese Prime Minister Kishi regarding China policy, indicating a shift in diplomatic narratives between the UK and Japan compared to those with China [3][4] - The article notes that Starmer's political alignment as a center-left Labour Party member may lead to less ideological resonance with the right-leaning Kishi, suggesting that their interactions are more about national interests than shared values [4][5] Group 2 - The collaboration between Japan and the UK on defense matters, particularly in the joint development of next-generation fighter jets, is confirmed, indicating a strategic partnership in military technology [7] - The article outlines Japan's desire for "normalization" in its defense posture, aiming to reduce reliance on the US and enhance its own defense capabilities, which may lead to increased military cooperation with the UK [8] - Historical ties between Japan and the UK are emphasized, noting that Japan has historically viewed the UK as a mentor in military modernization, which may influence current defense collaborations [9][10]

Group 1 - European countries have realized that their focus on China was misplaced, as the real threat came from the United States, which has imposed taxes and sought to dominate resources in Europe [3][29] - In response to this realization, European nations are now turning towards China for cooperation [4][30] - Recent visits from foreign leaders, including those from Canada and the UK, indicate a shift in diplomatic relations, despite past tensions [6][35] Group 2 - Canada has faced backlash in China due to its involvement in the Meng Wanzhou incident and the imposition of high tariffs on Chinese goods, which has severely damaged its image [7][33] - The UK has also strained relations with China through various political maneuvers, but recent diplomatic engagements suggest a potential thaw in relations [8][34] - Both Canada and the UK are now seeking to improve ties with China, with Canada planning to significantly reduce tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles [10][37] Group 3 - China's leadership emphasizes a consistent stance of openness and cooperation, stating that it has never initiated conflict or threatened other nations, contrasting with the actions of some Western countries [14][42] - The Chinese government advocates for a multilateral approach to international relations, urging major powers to adhere to principles of equality and cooperation [15][43] - The recent diplomatic engagements reflect a broader trend of improving relations between China and several countries, as leaders recognize the importance of collaboration over confrontation [18][49]

1月26日，特朗普发文通知李在明，他要对韩国商品加税了。 韩国汽车、木材等输美产品，面临的关税将从原本的15%，增加到25%。 理由很粗暴，说是韩国国会还没有批准落实此前美韩达成的贸易协议。 根据此前敲定的贸易协议，李在明政府要想美国在半导体、汽车等领域放韩国一马，就需要对美投资3500亿美元。 当时美韩商定，只要韩国兑现承诺，汽车输美关税可以降到15%。 而现在特朗普加税的决定，意味着李在明上台之后在美国那边付出的努力全都白费，一朝回到解放前。 无独有偶，这两天被特朗普威胁加税的还有加拿大。 特朗普说，他可能要对加拿大征收100%的商品关税。 为啥呢？因为加拿大在靠近中国。 特朗普警告称，只要加拿大和中国达成了自由贸易协定，这100%的关税就加定了。 美国又来加关税了，25%到100%，各有各的标准，但有一个共同点，那就是都来过中国并且达成了合作，特朗普的目的已经呼之欲出了。 不仅如此，中国可能也会面临"惩罚"。 这种赤裸裸的威胁，我们已经见怪不怪，那特朗普在这个时候对盟友重拳出击，到底是为啥呢？难道是新一轮"关税战"又要开始了？ 原因其实很简单。 第一，对盟友杀鸡儆猴。 最近这段时间，美国跟盟友的关系很差 ...