斯洛伐克议会国防和安全委员会副主席 米哈尔·巴尔泰克：在欧洲，这种做法正越来越多，被描述为典型的"贸易胁迫"，即将贸易工具滥用于施加政治压 力。当美国将贸易关系与地缘政治要求挂钩时，实际上是在削弱其自身曾经参与建立的以规则为基础的国际贸易体系。 本文转自【央视新闻客户端】； 斯洛伐克议会国防和安全委员会副主席米哈尔·巴尔泰克在接受总台记者采访时表示，围绕格陵兰岛的争议，已不再只是单一领土或安全议题，而是折射出 欧美关系、欧洲战略自主以及国际规则体系面临的深层次挑战。 斯洛伐克议会国防和安全委员会副主席 米哈尔·巴尔泰克：从欧洲安全和国际法的角度来看，这是一种危险的先例，它正在动摇战后国际秩序的根本基础。 格陵兰岛是丹麦王国的一部分，任何第三国，即便是盟友，提出所谓"有效控制"的要求，都是对欧盟成员国主权的侵犯。 巴尔泰克指出，美方将贸易工具用于施加政治压力的做法不仅违背国际法精神，也削弱了以规则为基础的国际贸易体系。 巴尔泰克还直言，欧盟当前的困境与长期盲目跟随美国密切相关，这种战略上的天真正在被现实无情揭示。 斯洛伐克议会国防和安全委员会副主席米哈尔·巴尔泰克：这种行为损害了欧洲与美国之间的信任，也表明美国 ...

格隆汇1月31日｜据CCTV国际时讯，斯洛伐克议会国防和安全委员会副主席米哈尔·巴尔泰克日前在接 受采访时表示，围绕格陵兰岛的争议，已不再只是单一领土或安全议题，而是折射出欧美关系、欧洲战 略自主以及国际规则体系面临的深层次挑战。巴尔泰克还表示，美方将贸易工具用于施加政治压力的做 法不仅违背国际法精神，也削弱了以规则为基础的国际贸易体系。 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration is facing a complex array of domestic and international challenges, including legal battles over tariff policies, conflicts with state governments, and military actions in Venezuela, which have drawn widespread condemnation from the global community [1][3][19]. Domestic Issues - The Trump administration's tariff policy, enacted through an executive order bypassing Congress, has led to numerous legal challenges questioning its legality [5][19]. - A warning issued by Trump regarding potential financial repercussions from unfavorable Supreme Court rulings has intensified tensions between the executive and judicial branches [7][19]. - The administration's handling of immigration enforcement has sparked public outrage, leading to lawsuits from Democratic-led states like Minnesota and Illinois against the federal government [9][19]. Judicial and Federal Relations - The relationship between the Trump administration and the Federal Reserve has become strained, particularly following a subpoena issued to Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, which was perceived as political pressure [11][19]. - The ongoing power struggle between the executive branch and the judiciary, along with the involvement of bipartisan senators, complicates the situation further [19]. International Actions - The Trump administration's military intervention in Venezuela, aimed at seizing control of its oil resources, has faced significant international backlash, being labeled as an illegal invasion [13][15]. - Despite the lack of support from major oil companies for investment in Venezuela, Trump has insisted that U.S. oil firms should engage directly with the government rather than the Venezuelan authorities [17][19]. Broader Implications - The administration's approach, characterized by a preference for unilateral action over legal frameworks, raises concerns about the potential erosion of constitutional checks and balances in the U.S. [20][22]. - The ongoing domestic and international crises could lead to a significant shift in the global order and legal systems if the current trajectory continues [20][22].