正文开始前，先和大家预告一下，我周四有一场直播，专门针对当周发生的热点事件和大家去做分析，让大家看懂当下到底是个什么样的情况。 大家可以先点击下方预约周四的直播。 这个世界，真的有点无语凝噎了。 前段时间， 美俄密谋谈判，然后川普出面端出了个结束俄乌冲突28点计划。 懂王近日给乌克兰发了一个最后通牒，要求乌克兰在 27 日之前必须确认回复，否 则， 我断你的武器装备，断你的情报支持，再也不管你了。 大家注意啊，这是美俄的一场密探。 什么是密探，就是欧洲和乌克兰都没有参与，美国和俄罗斯就定下了这28点新计划。 内容劲爆到让人怀疑泽连斯基看完会不会当场心梗。 关键是，100年前那个弱肉强食的世界，也不会有如此不平等的条约。 怪不得泽连斯基表态： 太难了，要么失去尊严，要么失去美国这个关键伙伴。 这28点计划，到底多离谱啊，我挑选一些核心的内容和大家分享。 不要觉得这事儿和大伙没有关系，但凡你们看深一层，你们就知道，美国这一招，最后的针对对象，还是我们。 这份计划，主要分三部分来看。 第一，关于军事，有4点核心。 1、乌克兰修改宪法，明确承诺永不加入北约，同时北约也修改其章程，明确规定未来永不接纳乌克兰加入。 2 ...

Core Points - Trump's 12-word statement signifies a dramatic shift in the US-China trade war, indicating a potential retreat from high tariffs that were previously seen as a political tool [1][3] - The statement reveals the underlying struggles of the US government, highlighting the impact of China's rare earth dominance on US military capabilities and the agricultural sector [3][5] Group 1: Trade War Dynamics - The US reliance on Chinese rare earth materials is critical, as China accounts for 80% of global production, affecting military technologies like the F-35 fighter jet [3] - The agricultural sector is facing severe challenges, with US soybean exports dropping by 40% and sorghum orders down by 90%, as Chinese buyers turn to Brazil [3][5] - The US beef export to China has plummeted from $120 million to $8 million monthly, while Australia benefits from increased exports [3] Group 2: Economic and Political Implications - The US national debt has surpassed $37 trillion, equating to approximately $110,000 per American, creating a fiscal crisis that complicates government operations [5] - The government shutdown has led to significant disruptions, affecting federal employees and services, which undermines the administration's agenda [5] - The trade war has escalated from an economic conflict to a political survival battle for the Trump administration, as domestic pressures mount [5][7] Group 3: Future Outlook - The reversal in the trade war signals a potential collapse of the existing US hegemony, raising questions about the future of global trade dynamics [7] - The interconnectedness of rare earths, agriculture, and national debt illustrates the complexity of US-China relations and the need for a new balance in global trade [7]

2025年，美国政坛上演了一出"复古大片"。特朗普卷土重来，重新坐上了总统椅子。 拜登在大选期间发出的警告——"特朗普的回归将让美国陷入混乱、失去全球领导力"，如今看起来，已不再只是政敌嘴里的口水战。 九个月过去，美国不仅打起了新一轮的关税战，还在外交场上四处"退群"，国内则是一地鸡毛。 曾经那个让世界"又怕又服"的超级强国，现在似乎正在亲手拆掉自己苦心经营的大厦。 拜登的话，或许真的应验了：继续这样搞下去，美国可能真的要变成"世界老二"。 特朗普回归后，打的第一张牌就是"关税升级版"。这回，连盟友都没放过。10%的全球基准关税直接端上了桌子，对中国商品征税更是高得离谱，125%的 税率让不少企业头疼得直喊"受不了"。 可问题是，这招"保护主义翻版"并没有换来美国制造的复兴，反而把美国消费者推到了物价上涨的风口浪尖。 从2024年到2025年，美国的通胀水平不降反升，CPI涨了近3%，一个普通家庭一年下来光生活成本就多掏了3000多美元。 再看资本市场，也没给特朗普面子。美股在2025年第一季度全线下挫，标普500跌了11%，纳指更惨，跌了16%。 亚特兰大联储预测美国经济将萎缩近3%，这可不是小数目。过去几 ...

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around the U.S. demanding a prepayment of $350 billion from South Korea, which has been denied by South Korean officials, highlighting the unsustainable nature of such a payment [2][4] - The U.S. proposal includes a profit-sharing scheme where both countries would initially split profits 50/50, but after cost recovery, the U.S. would take 90% of the profits, leaving South Korea with only 10% [4] - South Korea's current foreign reserves are approximately $410 billion, and a one-time payment of $350 billion would nearly deplete these reserves, raising concerns about a potential financial crisis similar to that of 1997 [6] Group 2 - Analysts suggest that the U.S. is exhibiting a bullying diplomatic strategy, showing more restraint with larger powers like China while exerting pressure on allies like South Korea [7] - The situation reflects a growing trend of U.S. unilateralism, disregarding the interests of allies, as seen in its policies towards Ukraine and now South Korea [8] - Observers note that South Korea may be forced to compromise due to its reliance on military security and economic ties with the U.S., potentially leading to unfavorable terms [9][10]

Core Argument - The article argues that Trump's tariff policy, while seemingly beneficial in the short term, ultimately sows the seeds of America's decline in global hegemony, leading to a loss of trust among allies and a strengthening of adversaries [1][4]. Group 1: Impact on Allies - Trump's tariff policy has resulted in a complete breakdown of trust among allies, with countries like the EU and Japan feeling betrayed and seeking more reliable partnerships, such as with China [10]. - The once steadfast allies are now distancing themselves from the U.S., which has led to a significant erosion of loyalty and trust [3][10]. - The actions taken by the Trump administration have pushed allies towards alternative alliances, marking a shift in global cooperation dynamics [10]. Group 2: Response from Adversaries - In response to U.S. trade policies, BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and others) are uniting to form a counterforce against American hegemony, indicating a profound shift in the global power structure [3][5]. - Brazilian President Lula's strong stance against U.S. tariffs exemplifies the growing resistance among emerging markets, as they seek to challenge U.S. dominance [3][5]. Group 3: Historical Parallels - The article draws parallels between Trump's tariff policies and Argentina's protectionist measures under President Perón, which initially appeared successful but ultimately led to economic decline [12]. - Historical lessons suggest that isolationism and protectionism can accelerate decline, as seen in the case of Argentina, which serves as a cautionary tale for current U.S. policies [4][12].

Core Viewpoint - The recent imposition of a 50% tariff by the U.S. on Brazil is seen as politically motivated and contrary to the current global order, prompting Brazil to focus on diplomatic negotiations and potential reciprocal measures rather than outright retaliation [1][29][30]. Group 1: U.S. Tariff Impact on Brazil - The U.S. tariff is partly motivated by the prosecution of former President Bolsonaro, which Brazil views as an interference in its domestic affairs [1][30]. - Brazil is preparing to implement equivalent tariffs on U.S. products as a form of reciprocal measure [4][31]. - The Brazilian government emphasizes the importance of maintaining a rational approach to foreign policy while expressing dissatisfaction with U.S. actions [6][34]. Group 2: Brazil's Diplomatic Strategy - Brazil aims to diversify its partnerships, with China playing a significant role in this strategy [4][31]. - The country plans to take the tariff issue to multilateral institutions like the WTO to seek a resolution [4][31]. - Brazil's leadership under President Lula is characterized by a commitment to dialogue and peaceful conflict resolution, positioning the country as a mediator in international disputes [16][47]. Group 3: BRICS and Global Influence - The U.S. tariffs are perceived as a sign of the growing influence of BRICS nations, which Brazil views positively as a validation of their efforts to create an alternative global order [36][37]. - Brazil believes that the tariffs will not undermine BRICS solidarity but rather strengthen political and commercial ties among member countries [36][37]. - The recent BRICS summit resulted in several declarations on key global issues, reflecting the group's commitment to addressing contemporary challenges [40][41]. Group 4: China-Brazil Relations - The potential construction of a railway linking Peru's Chancay port to Brazil's east coast is seen as a significant opportunity to enhance bilateral relations, although it is still in the feasibility study phase [43][44]. - Brazil's trade with China is substantial, but there is a need to improve the quality of trade, particularly in high-tech products [43][44]. - The Brazilian government supports closer cooperation with China, especially in infrastructure projects that could benefit both economies [45][46]. Group 5: Brazil's Role in Global Peace Efforts - Brazil is positioning itself as a mediator in global conflicts, leveraging its tradition of peaceful conflict resolution and diplomatic engagement [16][47]. - The country is actively working with China on peace initiatives related to the Ukraine conflict, although significant progress has yet to be made [50]. - Brazil condemns the violence in Palestine and seeks to address the humanitarian crisis, emphasizing its role as a responsible global actor [51][52].

Group 1: Currency Dynamics - The offshore RMB against the USD surged over 400 points, reaching a new high for the year, positively impacting A-shares [2] - Despite Trump's threats of imposing a 60% tariff on Chinese goods, global capital continues to flow into China, indicating a weakening of USD hegemony [2] - The popularity of Chinese culture and products is evident, with TikTok's ChinaTravel topic surpassing 700 million views, showcasing China's global influence [2] Group 2: Military Developments - The Houthi forces demonstrated the vulnerability of the US-Israeli defense systems by successfully striking Israel with a hypersonic missile, creating a significant impact [4] - The US military's response to the Houthi blockade of the Red Sea was marked by the sudden withdrawal of the USS Eisenhower, highlighting operational challenges [4] Group 3: Geopolitical Shifts - Trump's recent comments about using military force to seize Greenland reflect the anxiety surrounding the decline of US hegemony, as evidenced by the strengthening of Houthi forces [6] - The completion of China's third aircraft carrier and the use of RMB for oil transactions by Middle Eastern countries signify a shift in the international order [6] Group 4: Opportunities for China - The current global changes are seen as a result of multiple factors, with China leveraging cultural diplomacy and digital currency to enhance its international standing [8] - The advancements in military technology by the Chinese military are reshaping the strategic landscape, indicating a potential shift in power dynamics [8] - The acceleration of RMB internationalization and the cultural tourism boom during the recent holiday reflect a broader trend towards national rejuvenation for China [8]

Group 1 - The article discusses the low approval rating of President Trump's administration, which stands at 39%, marking the lowest in 80 years for a president's first 100 days in office [1][6][7] - The article highlights that Trump's domestic policies, particularly the "reciprocal tariffs," have led to significant economic and social issues, causing dissatisfaction among the public and businesses [2][7] - Trump's foreign policy is criticized for oversimplifying international conflicts and failing to deliver on promises, such as resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict within 24 hours [2][8] Group 2 - The article notes that Trump's administration has withdrawn from several international agreements, including the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization, which may weaken the U.S.'s global leadership [10][11] - The article suggests that the U.S. is experiencing a strategic contraction in its foreign policy, focusing more on domestic issues and reducing its involvement in multilateral systems [3][11] - The article indicates that the relationship between the U.S. and Europe is deteriorating, with European nations seeking greater strategic autonomy in security matters [12][13] Group 3 - The article discusses the impact of Trump's tariff policies, which have faced backlash and led to market volatility, ultimately undermining investor confidence [17][18] - It is mentioned that Trump's attempts to curb China's technological rise through tariffs may only temporarily slow progress, as these measures could inadvertently accelerate China's innovation efforts [20] - The article concludes that the U.S. is entering a more multipolar world, with its hegemonic status being challenged, particularly in economic terms [19]

Group 1 - Mahathir criticizes the high tariff policy of the Trump administration, predicting it will not last more than three months due to rising living costs leading to widespread protests among the American populace [1][4] - The U.S. economy's deep reliance on global supply chains is highlighted, with Mahathir noting that the country has "almost no domestic products," leading to a hollowing out of local manufacturing [3][4] - The imposition of high tariffs could result in significant price increases for American consumers, particularly for products like the iPhone, which relies heavily on overseas production [3][4] Group 2 - The anticipated nationwide protests in the U.S. in April 2025 are linked to rising prices, stock market declines, and shrinking retirement funds, reflecting the real impact of the trade war on American citizens [4][6] - Mahathir argues that the Trump administration's tariffs may backfire, creating three major challenges: overcoming cost disadvantages, increasing inflation, and the risk of global supply chain disruptions [4][6] - The U.S. stock market has already seen a significant decline, with a loss of $6.6 trillion in market value due to the tariff policies, indicating the immediate economic repercussions [4][6] Group 3 - Despite widespread protests, Trump maintains a high approval rating among Republican voters, and there is no unified opposition within the party against the tariff policies [6][7] - The slow response of the government to the negative economic impacts of tariffs is noted, with decision-making processes being influenced by public opinion and lobbying from interest groups [6][7] - Mahathir's critique reflects a broader concern about the decline of American hegemony and the potential ineffectiveness of unilateral pressure on China in trade negotiations [6][7] Group 4 - The conflict between globalization and protectionism is underscored, with Mahathir's predictions highlighting the structural contradictions within the U.S. economy [9] - The Trump administration faces a "triple paradox" involving insufficient domestic production, rising inflation pressures, and the political divide between populist movements and elite consensus [9] - The challenge for the Trump administration lies not only in the potential repeal of tariffs but in finding a way to exit the economic conflict without triggering a systemic crisis [9]