嘿，各位朋友，大家好！今天我带来一篇关于国际局势的观察，聚焦美国以50%的高关税向印度施压 后，印度是如何迅速调整外交策略，积极寻求与中国和欧洲的合作，同时坚决拒绝成为任何大国博弈中 的附庸。 2025年8月，美国特朗普政府突然宣布对印度商品加征高达50%的关税，声称此举是为了回应 印度持续从俄罗斯采购能源。紧接着，美方加大了与巴基斯坦的战略互动，推动双方在加沙维和以及中 亚矿产开发上的合作。这一系列举措让新德里措手不及，印度的外交节奏被完全打乱。 面对如此巨大的压力，印度是否只能选择低头？然而，它却加快了与中国、俄罗斯接触的步伐，并深度 发展与欧洲的关系。那么，这种被称为多向结盟的外交策略，到底是被迫反应，还是印度早有谋划？它 是短期的应急之策，还是印度长期战略布局的一部分呢？ 美国这次给印度上了生动的一课，让它更加 深刻理解到现实政治的残酷与复杂。 在过去的十多年里，印度的外交战略看起来似乎很明确：高举战略自主的旗帜，但实际上却不断拉近与 美国的关系，把美印关系作为应对地区安全挑战的重要支点。尤其在特朗普的第一个任期里，特朗普与 莫迪的互动频繁，两国高层互访不断，使得印度决策层普遍认为，若特朗普再次入主白 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles highlights the deteriorating trade relations between the US and India, with President Trump criticizing India's recent proposal to lower tariffs to zero as being too late [1] - Trump emphasized that India has been purchasing oil and weapons from Russia while selling a large volume of goods to the US, leading to a long-standing trade imbalance [1] - The US government is reportedly urging European countries to impose similar punitive measures against India, including halting oil and gas purchases from India [1] Group 2 - During the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, Indian Prime Minister Modi and Russian President Putin reaffirmed their strategic partnership, indicating a strengthening of ties despite US pressure [2] - Modi expressed that India and Russia have always supported each other in difficult times, and he highlighted the anticipation of Putin's visit to India for a summit later this year [2] - The interactions among China, Russia, and India during the SCO summit may signal a shift in the global power dynamics, potentially diminishing US influence in the region [2] Group 3 - The US Embassy in India claimed that US-India relations are reaching new heights, coinciding with significant meetings among major Eurasian leaders at the SCO summit [3] - An Indian think tank refuted Trump's claims by stating that the US actually enjoys a trade surplus of $35 to $40 billion with India when all benefits are considered [3] - Observers suggest that Trump's frequent criticisms of India may stem more from personal pride than from genuine trade concerns [3]