当特朗普上周末派遣美国轰炸机袭击伊朗核设施时，他押注此举既能帮助盟友以色列瘫痪德黑兰核计 划，又能恪守避免卷入长期战争的承诺。 尽管特朗普的声明燃起中东地区的和平希望，但以色列未立即确认协议。以军周二凌晨侦测到伊朗发射 导弹，以色列贝尔谢巴市一栋建筑遭袭致4人死亡。特朗普随即强调停火"已生效"，并警告双方勿违 约。 伊朗外长阿巴斯·阿拉格奇（Abbas Araqchi）称，除非以方停止攻击，否则不会停火。但特朗普及其团 队仍将此视为"以实力求和平"的里程碑——此前特朗普认可以色列"伊朗接近拥核"的评估，而美国情报 机构今年初曾表示伊朗未制造核武器，且消息源称该判断未变。 伊朗克制的回应 在特朗普宣布伊以停火前的数小时，伊朗向驻卡塔尔美军基地发射导弹报复，没有造成人员伤亡，而美 方官员称伊方回应"克制以避免升级"。 特朗普呼吁与以色列和伊朗举行会谈。一名白宫高级官员表示，只要伊朗不发动新的袭击，以色列就同 意停火。这位不愿透露姓名的官员说，伊朗暗示不会再发动袭击。 他透露，特朗普直接与以色列总理 内塔尼亚胡通话了，副总统JD·万斯、国务卿马尔科·鲁比奥（Marco Rubio）及特使史蒂夫·维特科夫 （Stev ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent military actions and subsequent ceasefire announcement between Israel and Iran highlight the complexities of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, particularly under President Trump's administration, which aims to balance military intervention with diplomatic negotiations [1][2][5]. Group 1: Military Actions and Ceasefire - President Trump ordered airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, aiming to weaken Iran's nuclear program and support Israel [1]. - Following the airstrikes, Trump announced a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Iran, although the specifics of the agreement remain unclear [2]. - Iran's response included missile strikes on a U.S. military base in Qatar, indicating a calculated approach to avoid escalating the conflict further [4]. Group 2: Diplomatic Efforts and Challenges - Trump emphasized the need for dialogue between Israel and Iran, with reports suggesting that Iran is willing to accept a ceasefire due to its weakened state following Israeli attacks [4][5]. - Experts express skepticism about the sustainability of the ceasefire and the potential for future negotiations regarding Iran's nuclear program and enriched uranium stockpiles [2][6]. - The situation remains precarious, with concerns that Iran may retaliate by targeting U.S. interests in the region if the ceasefire fails [6]. Group 3: Political Implications - Trump's military actions and subsequent diplomatic efforts are seen as a gamble that could either stabilize the region or lead to further conflict, impacting his political standing domestically [5][6]. - The administration's approach aims to appease both interventionist and non-interventionist factions within the Republican Party while addressing criticisms from Democratic lawmakers [6].