Core Viewpoint - The article outlines the evolution of Trump's foreign policy since taking office, dividing it into three distinct phases: "100 Days New Policy," "Focused Offensive," and the current phase marked by the Israel-Iran conflict, highlighting the internal conflicts within the Trump administration and the balancing act between establishment Republicans and MAGA supporters [1][2][3]. Phase Evolution: From Comprehensive Strike to Budget Priority - The first phase, "100 Days New Policy," was characterized by a comprehensive approach to foreign policy, attempting to extract resources externally but yielding limited results [6]. - The second phase, starting from May 1 to mid-June, saw a shift to a "Focused Offensive" led by establishment figures, with a strategic focus on isolating Iran through alliances with Arab nations and economic support for Syria [2][9]. - The third phase began in mid-June with the Israel-Iran conflict, where Trump attempted to balance the conflicting interests of establishment Republicans and MAGA supporters [3][12]. Transition to "Focused Offensive" and Underlying Reasons - The transition to a "Focused Offensive" was marked by the appointment of Marco Rubio as National Security Advisor, consolidating power within the establishment [8]. - The shift was driven by the ineffectiveness of the previous comprehensive strategy and the urgent need to pass budget and tax legislation, necessitating cooperation with establishment Republicans [11]. Israel-Iran Conflict Initiating the Third Phase - The Israel-Iran conflict escalated following Israel's attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, revealing deepening internal divisions within the Trump administration regarding military involvement [13][14]. - Trump's "tightrope" strategy involved quick military strikes against Iran while simultaneously pushing for a ceasefire, reflecting the administration's multiple dilemmas [15]. Outlook and Implications - The potential for a phase of strategic contraction in U.S. foreign policy following the ceasefire, with concerns that establishment Republicans may instigate new conflicts [17]. - Key observation points for the ongoing power struggle between Trump and establishment Republicans include the progress of the 2026 fiscal budget and the Federal Reserve's stance on interest rates [18]. - The U.S. strategic contraction may lead to reduced concerns over U.S. debt financing and create a "stabilizing window" for Chinese foreign trade, as the focus shifts to domestic fiscal legislation [19][20].

特约评论员 苏晓晖：特朗普在候任期间以及执政之后，多次强调美国要解决乌克兰危机，而近一时期关于停火的时间表又再次提出了4月20日这个时间点。 也就是说，特朗普仍然希望在执政百日之内，能够在处理乌克兰危机方面展现自己所取得的成绩。而停火被认为是一个重要的标杆，即使俄乌双方只在部分 地区或者是某一领域实现停火，美国仍然可以展现自己的行动力，强调自己在外交方面，在处置地区热点问题、地缘冲突方面能够产生预期的效果。另外美 国显然现在希望从乌克兰危机当中抽身，节省减少对乌军援的投入，聚焦大国竞争，为下一阶段的战略调整再进行铺垫和准备。 俄乌均避免拒绝停火但难掩立场分歧 责编：黄之安、卢思宇 特约评论员 苏晓晖：同时，对于美方的意图，俄罗斯和乌克兰都心知肚明。双方都避免拒绝停火，希望与美方进行所谓较为积极的回应。俄乌双方也意识 到，如果拒绝停火，至少在舆论上、在道义上可能会使自己处于劣势，是要避免出现这一情况。但是就停火相关的具体条件，很显然现在双方之间仍然有明 显的立场分歧。乌克兰方面以停火向俄罗斯进行施压，要求美国看到是俄方拒绝停火，希望美国对乌克兰进行更多军事方面的支持，进而对俄方施压，同样 也希望阻碍美俄关系重置 ...