美国抓走马杜罗这事引发了世界级的舆情，很多人都在批判美国又开始当世界警察，开始肆意侵犯他国主权，内政。 直接抓走一国总统，这么离谱的事情美国竟然能干得出来？很多人批评美国霸权主义，世界警察，肆意践踏国际秩序，难道二战后建立的国际秩序不要了 吗？ 没错，我觉得，美国这么搞其实体现了它的虚弱，它真的不打算要二战后的国际秩序了。 美国霸权的衰落是全世界所有人都目睹的，但是美国就是不愿意放弃，还要积极打压中、俄、欧，企图维系霸权。 但是经过这么几年操作，发动俄乌战争，发动和中国的全面对抗，什么贸易战，封锁战，军事威逼…… 到最后，美国发现俄乌战争的确废了俄罗斯和欧洲，但是拿中国美国却没有丝毫办法…… 于是我们看到美国开始推出新版的门罗主义，开始逐渐从全球收缩力量，开始把重点集中在美洲。 拉丁美洲各国是有左翼传统的，以古巴，委内瑞拉等国为代表，一直是左翼联盟执政，对外政策以反美为主。委内瑞拉还是拉丁美洲反美的核心。 美国要收缩，要搞新的门罗主义，肯定要拿这些国家开刀。 于是我们看到美国围绕着委内瑞拉搞军事封锁几个月，最后选择了成本最低，效果最好的斩首行动，直接派特种部队抓走了一国元首马杜罗。 这也是杀鸡儆猴，警告拉美其 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses a proposed 28-point plan by the U.S. and Russia regarding the Ukraine conflict, highlighting its implications for Ukraine and the broader geopolitical landscape, suggesting that the plan disproportionately favors Russia while undermining Ukraine's sovereignty and military capabilities [3][22][58]. Military Aspects - Ukraine is required to amend its constitution to permanently renounce NATO membership, with NATO also pledging not to accept Ukraine in the future [4][6]. - Ukraine must reduce its military size to a maximum of 600,000 personnel, significantly down from its current strength [5]. - NATO will not station troops in Ukraine, further limiting Ukraine's military options [6]. - Ukraine agrees to become a non-nuclear state, prohibiting nuclear weapons on its territory and placing its nuclear facilities under international supervision [7]. Territorial Issues - Ukraine must recognize Crimea, Luhansk, and Donetsk as Russian territory, while the areas currently controlled by Russian forces will remain under Russian control [9][12]. - The plan includes a freeze on the front lines in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, with a demilitarized buffer zone established [9][11]. - This effectively requires Ukraine to concede significant territorial claims, altering the established norms of international negotiations [13][14]. Economic Considerations - All economic sanctions against Russia must be lifted immediately and unconditionally, with a structured timeline for phased removal [18]. - A total of $3 trillion in Russian assets, previously frozen, will be allocated for Ukraine's reconstruction and a new investment tool to enhance U.S.-Russia cooperation [18][19]. - The U.S. is positioned to profit from reconstruction efforts in Ukraine, indicating a financial motive behind the plan [20][21]. Geopolitical Implications - The urgency for Ukraine to accept the plan by November 27 is driven by U.S. interests in concluding the conflict and securing financial benefits [24][30]. - The plan appears to be a strategic move by the U.S. to realign its focus and resources, potentially at the expense of Ukraine's interests [36][40]. - The article suggests that the evolving geopolitical landscape may lead to increased tensions in East Asia, particularly concerning U.S.-China relations [43][58]. Market Reactions - The article anticipates that global markets will experience volatility as the situation develops, with investors needing to remain vigilant [52][56]. - There is a suggestion that opportunities may arise from the shifting dynamics, which could be beneficial for strategic investments [63].

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]

Economic Impact - The return of Trump has led to a significant escalation in tariffs, including a 10% global baseline tariff and an outrageous 125% tariff on Chinese goods, which has resulted in increased costs for American consumers, with an estimated additional $3,000 in living expenses for an average family from 2024 to 2025 [3][5] - The U.S. stock market has reacted negatively, with the S&P 500 dropping by 11% and the Nasdaq falling by 16% in the first quarter of 2025, while the Atlanta Federal Reserve predicts a nearly 3% contraction in the U.S. economy [5][19] - The economic policies under Trump have led to a situation described as "Trump recession," with significant job losses and supply chain disruptions affecting various sectors, including automotive and agriculture [5][19] Global Relations - The U.S. has seen a decline in its global leadership, with allies like the EU and Canada implementing counter-tariffs and moving towards greater economic independence, as evidenced by the EU's "Ready for 2030" white paper [10][12] - Trust in the U.S. has diminished significantly, with a Pew Research Center poll indicating a sharp decline in positive perceptions of the U.S. among citizens of 19 major countries, particularly in Canada where 73% of respondents expressed negative views [9][12] - The U.S. is experiencing a shift towards a multipolar world, with countries like Saudi Arabia beginning to settle oil transactions in yuan, indicating a move away from the dollar [7][21] Domestic Policy - Trump's domestic policies have led to significant government downsizing, resulting in labor shortages in critical sectors such as agriculture and construction, exacerbated by tightened immigration policies [14][16] - The political landscape has become increasingly polarized, with concerns about the erosion of democratic institutions and the rule of law, as Trump has been criticized for undermining the judicial system [16][18] - The internal divisions within the U.S. society are deepening, with issues of racial and class conflict becoming more pronounced under Trump's administration, raising questions about the country's ability to maintain its international leadership [16][19]

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]