美国总统特朗普5日在社交媒体发文称，与其延长当天到期的美俄《新削减战略武器条约》，更应该着 手制定一项"改进且现代化"并能长期有效的新条约。 稍后在一场白宫记者会上，白宫新闻秘书莱维特重复特朗普的说法，表示特朗普希望美方专家着手制定 新条约取代《新削减战略武器条约》。被问及美俄双方是否同意在新条约谈判期间遵守《新削减战略武 器条约》相关条款，莱维特称不知情。 当天早些时候，美国阿克西奥斯新闻网站报道，美俄双方过去24小时一直在阿联酋首都阿布扎比就继续 遵守《新削减战略武器条约》进行谈判，接近达成协议。 美俄2010年签署《新削减战略武器条约》，旨在限制两国部署的核弹头和运载工具数量。条约2011年2 月5日正式生效，原定有效期10年，后经协商延长至2026年2月5日。特朗普今年1月接受采访时称，他不 担心这一条约即将到期，并表示双方会达成新协议。 俄官员：《新削减战略武器条约》终止不会导致新军备竞赛或核战争 特朗普 资料图（视觉中国） 特朗普声称，先前由民主党政府签署和延长的《新削减战略武器条约》是美国谈判达成的"糟糕"协议， 并遭到"严重违反"。但他没有就此细说。 当地时间2月5日，俄罗斯联邦委员会（议会） ...

" 凛冬将至 " 俄外交部网站在当地时间4日晚发表声明说，俄总统普京建议，俄美《新削减战略武器条约》到期后至少一年内，缔约方自愿将相关武器限制在条 约规定的上限。但俄方尚未收到美方通过双边渠道对俄方建议的任何官方回应，美方的公开表态也未表明其愿遵循俄方提出的"战略进攻性武器行 动程序"。 声明强调，在当前形势下，俄方认为缔约方不再受该条约的任何义务或对等声明约束，与此同时，俄方将负责任和审慎行事，在细致分析美国军 事政策和整体战略环境的基础上，制定自身的战略进攻性武器方针。 声明还说，俄方准备采取果断的军事技术反制措施，应对国家安全面临的潜在威胁。如果未来"具备开展类似协作的必要条件"，俄方仍愿在平等 互利对话基础上，寻求通过政治外交途径实现战略局势全面稳定。 "凛冬将至。"俄联邦安全会议副主席梅德韦杰夫4日晚在社交媒体上发布图文称，条约到期意味着，自1972年以来，苏联或俄罗斯同美国之间首次 在限制战略核力量的条约方面"出现空白"，所有条约"都已是过去式"。 古特雷斯4日表示，冷战及后冷战时期，俄美间的核军控构筑了战略稳定，并与其他措施相结合，避免了灾难性误判。《新削减战略武器条约》失 效发生在最糟糕的时刻 ...

俄罗斯外交部4日晚发布声明称，2025年9月22日，俄罗斯总统普京公开提出了倡议，建议俄美双方在 《新削减战略武器条约》到期后至少一年内，自愿遵守条约中规定的相应武器数量的上限，但是俄方迄 今为止没有通过双边渠道收到美国对俄罗斯倡议的任何正式回应。这也就意味着俄方的想法被故意置之 不理。 在此情况下，俄方认为，《新削减战略武器条约》各方不再受条约有关的任何义务和对等声明的约束， 原则上可以自由选择后续步骤。 俄外交部强调，俄罗斯随时准备采取坚决的军事技术反制措施，以消除对国家安全构成的潜在额外威 胁。与此同时，如果未来具备相应条件，俄罗斯仍对在平等和互利对话基础上达成全面战略稳定寻求政 治外交解决方案持开放态度。 （文章来源：央视新闻客户端） ...

【环球时报驻美国特约记者 萧达 环球时报记者 郭媛丹 环球时报特约记者 王逸】当地时间23日晚，美国国防部发布了2026年国防战略报告。这份 报告将美国本土安全和在西半球的利益作为最优先事项，并宣称要 "确保对西半球关键地区的控制权"，令美洲国家以及众多盟友感到忧心忡忡。 这份四年一度的国防战略报告威胁称，美国将确保"美国军队和商业机构能够进入从北极到南美洲的关键地区，尤其是格陵兰岛、美国湾（指墨西 哥湾）和巴拿马运河"。文件还指责从欧洲到亚洲的众多盟友长期依赖美国为其防务买单，要求盟友和伙伴"承担更多责任"。有分析认为，这一说 法其实更像一张对盟友发出的账单。多家国际媒体关注到，新版国防战略报告没有提及"台湾"，关于中国的新提法也引发关注。美国"政治新闻 网"称，这份战略文件不再将"对抗中国"置于最优先位置，而是宣称"通过力量而非对抗，以在印太地区威慑中国"。中国学者25日接受《环球时 报》记者采访时表示，美国在新版国防战略报告中强调确保在西半球的利益，与去年12月美国发布的国家安全战略报告一脉相承，其立场看似从 全球霸权中后退，但实际上美国仍企图在世界维护其绝对力量优势。 5 次提及格陵兰岛 对美国国防部 ...

Core Viewpoint - The evolution of US-China relations has transitioned from "new cold war" rhetoric during Trump's first term to a phase characterized by "strategic stability" in his second term, highlighting a significant shift in diplomatic focus towards trade and negotiation rather than ideological confrontation [1][2][9]. Group 1: Changes in US-China Relations - The "new cold war" narrative emerged post-2009 financial crisis, with the perception that the US was increasingly reliant on China, leading to a shift in US policy towards competition [4][5]. - Trump's first term marked a clear pivot to "great power competition," fundamentally altering the US approach to China, which was previously characterized by engagement and cooperation [5][6]. - The Biden administration has maintained the "Washington new consensus," indicating a bipartisan agreement on viewing China as a competitor, with no significant changes in policy direction [5][6]. Group 2: Trump's Second Term Dynamics - In Trump's second term, there has been a notable shift in focus from ideological battles to trade negotiations, with media reports suggesting a more conciliatory approach towards China [7][8]. - The concept of "strategic stability" has emerged, indicating a stalemate where neither side can decisively undermine the other, leading to a search for compromise [3][9]. - Trump's second term is characterized by a departure from the hardline stance of his first term, with a focus on practical trade discussions rather than ideological differences [9][10]. Group 3: Implications for Future Relations - The current state of "strategic stability" suggests that previous strategies of confrontation may have been flawed, with a recognition of China's resilience and a need for negotiation [9][10]. - The potential for continued diplomatic engagement exists, but the stability of this phase is uncertain due to the influence of traditional hawkish elements within the US administration [10][11]. - Public sentiment in the US reflects a desire for reduced international intervention, indicating a shift in priorities that could affect future US-China relations [10][11].

Core Points - The third Minsk Eurasian Security International Conference opened in Minsk, Belarus, with participation from over 40 countries and regions, as well as 7 international organizations, discussing strategic stability, arms control, regional cooperation, information and economic security, and migration issues [1][9] Group 1: Key Statements from Leaders - Belarusian President Lukashenko stated that the Western unipolar world order poses a threat to global stability, advocating for a multipolar world based on mutual respect and cooperation, and emphasizing the need for diplomatic dialogue over sanctions [2][4] - Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov emphasized that Europe must abandon its "arrogant exclusive claims" and hostile stance towards many Eurasian countries, including Russia and Belarus, expressing willingness to engage in substantive discussions on security issues [5][10] - Hungarian Foreign Minister Szijjarto highlighted the importance of regional partnerships in addressing migration and economic security issues, urging all parties to adopt inclusive approaches that benefit all stakeholders [7]

Core Viewpoint - Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov addressed the UN General Assembly, responding to accusations from NATO countries regarding Russia's intentions and actions in Ukraine, emphasizing Russia's commitment to respond decisively to any acts of aggression [1] Group 1: Russia's Stance on NATO Accusations - Lavrov denied any missile launches or drone deployments targeting Europe or NATO countries, asserting that any attempts to intercept Russian aircraft in its airspace would have serious consequences [1] - He criticized the ongoing unfounded accusations against Russia, stating that the country will not tolerate violations of its airspace [1] Group 2: US-Russia Relations - Lavrov noted that there has been no deviation from the US's commitment to "open and honest" dialogue with Russia [1] - Ongoing discussions between the US and Russia include topics such as visa regulations, the return of diplomatic assets, and the daily operations of embassies [1] - He mentioned that Russia has observed the US's preliminary response regarding the extension of the New START treaty [1] Group 3: Ukraine Crisis Negotiations - Lavrov reiterated Russia's openness to negotiations concerning the Ukraine crisis, but emphasized that any negotiation framework must safeguard Russian interests [1] - He highlighted the importance of restoring and respecting the rights of Russian-speaking individuals within Ukraine [1]

Group 1 - The 22nd Shangri-La Dialogue was held in Singapore from May 30 to June 1, with over 550 representatives from defense and security agencies from more than 40 countries attending [1] - Indian Army Chief Anil Chauhan and Pakistan's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Sahir Shamshad Mirza led their respective delegations, deliberately avoiding each other during the event [1][3] - The organizers arranged for the Indian and Pakistani representatives to speak at the same time but in different sessions to prevent direct interaction [1] Group 2 - During the dialogue, Chauhan emphasized India's strong stance on terrorism, stating that India has redefined its "red lines" regarding terrorism and hopes recent military actions will serve as a warning to adversaries [3] - Mirza criticized India for allegedly violating the UN Charter through airstrikes and missile attacks, warning that any attempts to disrupt Pakistan's water resources would be considered acts of war [3] - Reports indicated that both countries have begun to reduce military deployments, returning to pre-April 22 levels [3][4] Group 3 - Chauhan acknowledged the loss of Indian aircraft during recent conflicts but refrained from disclosing the exact number, countering Pakistan's claim of having shot down six Indian jets [3] - He highlighted the importance of learning from tactical errors and mentioned the effective use of indigenous defense systems like the Akash missile system in countering threats [4] - The Chinese defense spokesperson expressed a desire for both India and Pakistan to maintain calm and restraint to avoid further complications in the region [4]

Core Viewpoint - The Russian Foreign Ministry has stated that the U.S. Iron Dome project undermines strategic stability [1] Group 1 - The U.S. Iron Dome project is perceived by Russia as a threat to its national security [1] - Russia argues that the deployment of such missile defense systems could provoke an arms race [1] - The statement reflects ongoing tensions between the U.S. and Russia regarding military capabilities and strategic defense initiatives [1]

Core Points - The Kremlin emphasizes the need to restore discussions on strategic stability with the United States to maintain global interests [1] Group 1 - Many documents related to strategic stability between Russia and the United States have expired [1] - The Kremlin calls for a renewed focus on strategic stability to address current global challenges [1]