地处北美西北角的美国阿拉斯加州，与俄罗斯的远东疆域之间仅隔一个白令海峡。 1853年，俄罗斯与奥斯曼爆发了这两大帝国自16世纪以来的第十次绞杀，因为这场战争中最长和最重要的战役在克里米亚半岛进行，史称"克里米亚战 争"。当时，英法两国权衡利弊后，决定站队已经式微的奥斯曼，以抵挡沙俄在欧陆继续做大。 与眼下的俄乌冲突一样，当年的那次兵戎相见，一打就是三年，耗尽了沙皇的国库，并以俄方失败告终；而英国则趁势加强了在北美的扩张，特别是英属 哥伦比亚（今加拿大西部大省），直接威胁到人烟稀少、易攻难守的俄属阿拉斯加。 为了争取美国牵制英国，沙皇亚历山大二世出于地缘政治考虑，于1867年以700万美元外加20万美元手续费（相当于每英亩2美分）的价格将阿拉斯加"贱 卖"给美国。 美国用于支付阿拉斯加的720万美元支票 158年后的今天，热衷做交易的特朗普作为当年"买方"美国的代表，在此设宴款待一直希望恢复昔日"卖方"俄罗斯荣耀的普京总统，商讨如何结束一场因 俄罗斯2014年收复克里米亚而引发的俄乌冲突。 这是一次多么具有反讽和象征意味的历史循环？ 对普京而言，阿拉斯加是一块刻在俄罗斯历史记忆中的旧疤，当年失去这块地藏丰富的土 ...

Core Viewpoint - The likelihood of an immediate ceasefire consensus between Russia and the U.S. is low due to significant differences in their core positions, although conditions for serious peace negotiations have become more favorable compared to 6-12 months ago [1][5][7]. Group 1: Meeting Context - The upcoming one-on-one meeting between Presidents Putin and Trump in Anchorage, Alaska, is the first face-to-face encounter since June 2021, with expectations of discussing the Ukraine crisis and potential long-term solutions [3]. - Trump has expressed a belief that an agreement could be reached, estimating a 25% chance of failure in the meeting [3][4]. - The U.S. has lowered expectations ahead of the meeting, indicating a more cautious approach [4]. Group 2: Negotiation Dynamics - There is a fundamental divide in core positions between the two sides, making breakthroughs unlikely [7]. - The U.S. has not yet exerted sufficient pressure to change the situation significantly, despite a recent shift in its stance towards Russia [10]. - Russia's official comments remain limited and vague, with Putin viewing the meeting as an opportunity to achieve multiple objectives, including economic ties [11]. Group 3: Factors Influencing Negotiations - Three key factors have shifted to create a more favorable environment for negotiations: enhanced European defense capabilities and U.S. support, changing public opinion in both Ukraine and Russia favoring negotiations, and challenges facing the Russian economy [15][16][17]. - Despite these favorable conditions, the ongoing battlefield situation remains a critical constraint, with Russia maintaining military initiative [18][19]. Group 4: Possible Outcomes - The report outlines four potential scenarios for the meeting, with the most likely being limited outcomes that pave the way for future discussions, such as a ceasefire on long-range strikes [21]. - Other scenarios include failure leading to increased U.S. sanctions or a negative outcome where agreements bypass Kyiv, though the latter is deemed unlikely [22]. - The nature of any agreement will be more impactful than whether an agreement is reached, with unfavorable terms for Ukraine potentially leading to long-term negative effects on Ukrainian assets [22].

Core Viewpoint - The upcoming meeting between Russian President Putin and US President Trump on March 15 in Anchorage, Alaska, is expected to address the Ukraine ceasefire and long-term solutions to the Ukraine crisis, as well as the potential for improving US-Russia relations [1] Group 1: Meeting Expectations - The meeting is the first face-to-face encounter between the two leaders since June 2021, with expectations being lowered by the US side prior to the meeting [1][3] - Trump estimates a 25% risk of failure in reaching an agreement during the meeting, indicating a cautious approach [1] Group 2: Divergent Positions - There is a significant gap in core positions between the US and Russia, making breakthrough progress unlikely [2] - Trump has assured European allies that he will not negotiate territorial issues with Putin alone, despite previously suggesting "land swaps," indicating potential shifts in his stance [3] Group 3: Current Environment for Negotiations - Although immediate breakthroughs seem unlikely, conditions for serious negotiations have improved compared to 6-12 months ago [6] - Key factors contributing to this improved environment include enhanced European defense capabilities and increased US support, as well as changing public opinion in both Ukraine and Russia favoring negotiations [7][8] Group 4: Economic Challenges for Russia - Russia's economic situation is deteriorating, with a projected sharp slowdown in 2025 and a rising fiscal deficit, which may hinder its ability to sustain military spending [9] - Despite these challenges, the battlefield situation remains critical, with Russia maintaining an advantage in military operations [9][10] Group 5: Possible Outcomes of the Meeting - Four potential scenarios for the meeting are outlined, with the most likely being limited outcomes that pave the way for future talks, such as a ceasefire on long-range strikes [11] - The nature of any agreement reached will be more significant than whether an agreement is reached at all, as a perceived unfavorable deal for Ukraine could have long-term negative impacts on Ukrainian assets [11]

美国总统特朗普8日宣布将于15日与俄罗斯总统普京在美国阿拉斯加州会晤，讨论乌克兰危机。据法新社 报道，欧洲多国领导人当地时间10日就此发表联合声明。 报道称，声明由 英国首相斯塔默、 法国总统马克龙、意大利总理梅洛尼、德国总理默茨、波兰总理图斯克、 芬兰总统斯图布以及欧盟委员会主席冯德莱恩联合签署。声明表示，欢迎美国总统特朗普为制止俄乌冲突所作 的努力。 声明指出，唯有积极外交斡旋、继续支持乌克兰并施压俄罗斯，才有可能实现乌克兰和平与安全。相关欧洲国 家将通过"志愿联盟"继续给予乌克兰"实质性军事和财政支持"，并维持和实施针对俄罗斯的限制性措施。 责编：李丹 校对： 刘榕枝 版权声明 证券时报各平台所有原创内容，未经书面授权，任何单位及个人不得转载。我社保留追 究相关 行 为主体 法律责任的权利。 声明强调，没有乌克兰的参与，就无法决定乌克兰的和平之路。只有在停火或敌对行动减少的前提下，才有可 能开展有意义的谈判。 泽连斯基强调乌克兰将坚守立场。他表示，必须以一个有尊严的和平来结束俄乌冲突，这个和平必须建立在清 晰、可靠的安全架构基础上，"乌克兰的合作伙伴已准备好在这方面提供帮助"。 当地时间9日，俄罗斯总统 ...

Group 1 - The core discussion between Ukraine's President Zelensky and UK Prime Minister Starmer focused on enhancing Ukraine's defense capabilities, expanding sanctions against Russia, and promoting peace negotiations [1] - There is an urgent emphasis on increasing the production of drones, particularly in the area of interception drones, with both leaders expressing the need to find specific solutions for funding requirements [1] - The conversation also included discussions on the sanctions imposed on Russia, indicating a continued commitment to economic pressure on the country [1]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint is that discussing security issues between Russia and Ukraine in the context of pan-European security is meaningful [1] - There is an indication that disappointment in peace negotiations stems from overly high expectations [1]

Core Viewpoint - The spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, stated that peace negotiations and the resolution of the Ukraine issue have never been a genuine agenda for the West [1] Group 1 - The statement emphasizes that the West's focus has not been on achieving peace in Ukraine [1] - It suggests a lack of sincerity from Western nations regarding the resolution of the Ukraine conflict [1] - The remarks indicate a potential ongoing tension between Russia and Western countries concerning the Ukraine situation [1]

Core Viewpoint - NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stated that Europe will seek to raise funds to ensure Ukraine is in the most favorable position during peace negotiations [1] Group 1 - Europe is actively looking for financial resources to support Ukraine [1] - The initiative aims to strengthen Ukraine's negotiating power in potential peace talks [1]

Core Viewpoint - German Chancellor Merkel stated that Russia's new wave of attacks on Ukraine demonstrates its unwillingness to engage in peace negotiations [1] Group 1 - The recent escalation of attacks by Russia indicates a shift in its strategy towards Ukraine, moving away from diplomatic solutions [1] - The ongoing conflict continues to pose significant geopolitical risks in the region, affecting stability and security [1] - Merkel's comments highlight the urgent need for international dialogue and intervention to address the crisis [1]

Core Viewpoint - Iran's Foreign Minister Zarif expressed uncertainty about trusting the U.S. for peace negotiations, suggesting that Trump's negotiations serve as a "cover" for Israeli attacks on Iran [1] Summary by Relevant Sections - **Iran's Position on U.S. Trust** Iran's Foreign Minister, Zarif, indicated a lack of confidence in the U.S. regarding peace talks, questioning the sincerity of American intentions [1] - **Accusations Against the U.S.** Zarif accused Washington of "betraying diplomacy," emphasizing that U.S. officials must demonstrate a genuine commitment to reaching a resolution [1]