就美国突袭委内瑞拉，欧盟呼吁"各方保持克制"，表态含糊其辞。 而当美国转身索要格陵兰岛，欧盟又表示将"持续坚定捍卫"丹麦国家主权、领土完整。 分析人士指出，欧洲国家在美国武力侵犯委内瑞拉主权问题上"选择性失语"，是担心得罪美方，但很快 在格陵兰岛一事上被美国霸凌。这暴露了西方国家在国际事务上一贯的"双重标准"，也揭示了欧洲在跨 大西洋关系上的困境。 表态截然不同 欧洲的"双标"在5日欧盟委员会发言人希佩尔的记者会上显露无遗。 在被问及美国对委行动是否符合国际法时，希佩尔称，就美国行为在法律层面评估所有影响还为时尚 早。但被问到格陵兰岛主权问题时，她说，欧盟将"持续坚定捍卫"国家主权、领土完整、边界不可侵犯 和《联合国宪章》原则等国际准则。 （来源：新华日报） 丹麦自治领地格陵兰岛纳尔萨克镇的码头。 （新华社发） 实际上，在美国突袭委内瑞拉后，欧盟官员和许多欧洲国家领导人的表态都含糊其辞，虽然提及国际法 和《联合国宪章》原则，却极力回避直接批评美国。 欧盟外交与安全政策高级代表卡拉斯发表声明说，欧盟呼吁各方保持冷静与克制，在任何情况下都应尊 重国际法和《联合国宪章》的原则。据称，这一声明得到欧盟27国中26国支 ...

中方的反应非常迅速。中国商务部宣布，将对来自欧盟的部分乳制品实施临时反补贴措施，主要影响的 将是法国的生产商。这一举措被看作是中国对欧盟加税提案的精准回应。随着法国总统马克龙提出脱钩 警告，中欧之间的贸易摩擦加剧，双方进入了相互警告的阶段。 与此同时，另一个更具震撼力的外交 事件正在发生。俄罗斯总统的特使高调访问美国迈阿密，与特朗普核心团队进行秘密会谈，而欧洲代表 则被刻意排除在外。这个场景充满了象征意义，它表明美国正绕过欧盟，直接与俄罗斯讨论乌克兰问题 的潜在解决方案。特朗普政府明显的实用主义政策目标在于降低冲突成本，达成对美国有利的停火协 议，而非关注欧盟的地缘政治利益。 在这一背景下，欧盟委员会主席冯德莱恩近日突然将批评的矛头 指向中国，声称中国才是美欧共同的敌人。这一言论背后，实际上是欧盟试图将焦点从其自身的困境中 转移开，试图通过对中国的指责来转嫁其面临的战略压力。这也暴露了欧盟领导层在应对美俄幕后交易 时的无奈与慌乱。然而，当前美国的主要关注点是处理俄乌冲突及大国关系的稳定，而非开辟新的对华 战线。欧盟此举不仅难以改变美国的既定战略，还可能进一步损害欧盟在国际上理性务实的形象。由此 引发的关税冲突 ...

【环球网报道 记者 李梓瑜】据路透社报道，美国总统特朗普当地时间8日在白宫一场活动上告诉记者， 欧盟委员会对美国企业家马斯克旗下社交媒体平台X处以1.2亿欧元罚款一事"令人厌恶"，他同时表达对 欧洲的不满。 特朗普还抨击"欧洲正走向某些错误的方向"，"欧洲必须非常谨慎"。 报道说，特朗普称他预计将于当日晚些时候收到关于欧盟这笔罚款的完整报告。 欧盟委员会12月5日认定美国社交媒体平台X违反《数字服务法》透明度义务条款，对其处以1.2亿欧元 罚款，美国副总统万斯、国务卿鲁比奥等多名美方高官群起而攻之，指责欧盟破坏"跨大西洋关系"。马 斯克5日则在X平台上大呼"废除欧盟"。他还在另一篇帖文中称欧盟是"官僚怪兽"。 白宫12月4日发布的美国国家安全战略报告也对欧洲盟友提出尖锐批评。欧盟"外长"卡拉斯6日回应时强 调美国是欧盟"最大盟友"。但西方媒体认为，随着本届美国政府对欧政策出现"急剧转变"迹象，美欧分 歧愈发暴露。 "我不明白他们怎么能这么做。"特朗普说，马斯克并未就此事致电向他寻求帮助。 ...

【国际在线：#欧盟罚X美国跳脚#】#欧盟重罚美国急眼了#据国际在线，欧盟委员会12月5日认定美国 社交媒体平台X违反《数字服务法》透明度义务条款，对其处以1.2亿欧元罚款，美国副总统万斯、国务 卿鲁比奥等多名美方高官群起而攻之，指责欧盟破坏"跨大西洋关系"。白宫4日发布的美国国家安全战 略报告也对欧洲盟友提出尖锐批评。欧盟"外长"卡拉斯6日回应时强调美国是欧盟"最大盟友"。但西方 媒体认为，随着本届美国政府对欧政策出现"急剧转变"迹象，美欧分歧愈发暴露。欧盟委员会5日发布 公报，援引欧盟《数字服务法》对美国企业家马斯克旗下社交媒体平台X处以1.2亿欧元罚款。据多家外 媒报道，这是欧盟依据该法规实施的首次重大执法行动。据法新社报道，马斯克2022年买下X平台（原 称推特）后，对其用户账号的"蓝标认证"系统进行调整，该认证原本需经过平台核验身份才可获得，调 整后则付费即可获得。欧盟认定，这种"欺骗性"设计致使许多平台用户遭到"恶意操纵"。马斯克5日在X 平台上大呼"废除欧盟"。他还在另一篇帖文中称欧盟是"官僚怪兽"。美国务卿鲁比奥、联邦通信委员会 主席布伦丹·卡尔当天称，上述罚单凸显欧盟对美国科技企业的"偏见"。 ...

《大西洋月刊》提到，德国曾经随处可见美国存在的痕迹，例如驻军基地里存放着美军核武器；但德国人眼中"美国主导"的秩序如今正在 消失。德国军官如今密切关注危机发生时美国是否真的会出手保卫欧洲。"你不仅面临着在敲门的敌人，"弗罗伊丁说，"同时还在失去一个 真正的盟友和朋友。" 《大西洋月刊》当地时间12月1日刊发一篇报道，作者艾萨克·斯坦利-贝克尔在文中提到，自己于去年夏天前往德国柏林，采访到德国军方 官员，了解对方如何应对俄乌冲突中的俄罗斯和反复无常的美国。当时，弗罗伊丁正负责德国国防部的乌克兰事务部门，但他刚被任命为 下一任陆军总司令，并于同年10月履新。 弗罗伊丁在受访时透露，曾经他可以与美国五角大楼官员保持全天候沟通，然而这种沟通近期已"中断，真正中断"，而且美国政府并未就 相关事宜发出预警，例如暂停对乌运送部分武器。为获取美国政策的相关信息，弗罗伊丁只得向德国驻华盛顿大使馆求助，那里"有人负 责尝试联系五角大楼内部人士"。 【环球网报道 记者 张倩】俄罗斯塔斯社12月2日援引美国《大西洋月刊》消息报道称，德国联邦国防军陆军总司令克里斯蒂安·弗罗伊丁此 前在接受这家美媒采访时表示，美国国防部已暂停与德国国防 ...

Group 1: Purpose of Trump's Visit - Trump's visit aims to strengthen US-UK relations amidst growing tensions over issues like Ukraine and Gaza, with the UK seeking to downplay these differences [1][3] - The UK government hopes to leverage royal ceremonies to secure investment and security benefits from the US during this visit [1][2] Group 2: Investment Announcements - The US is expected to announce a package of cooperation agreements covering technology, clean energy, civil nuclear energy, and defense [2] - Notable investments include approximately $1.7 billion from US financial firms creating around 1,800 jobs, Microsoft's commitment of $30 billion over four years for AI infrastructure, and Google's new data center in the UK [2] Group 3: US-UK Discrepancies - Despite the ceremonial aspects, significant differences remain, particularly in trade, with the US imposing high tariffs on UK steel and aluminum products [3] - The UK government views Trump's visit as a diplomatic boost, yet there are widening gaps in positions on international issues, such as support for Ukraine and the situation in Gaza [3] Group 4: Public Sentiment in the UK - Protests against Trump's visit were organized by a group called "Stop Trump Coalition," reflecting a significant portion of the public's discontent [4][5] - Recent polls indicate that only 36% of the UK population believes in a "special relationship" with the US, and only 16% hold a positive view of Trump's administration [5]

Core Points - The situation in Eastern Europe has escalated following reports of Russian drones entering NATO airspace, with Poland and Romania both taking action to intercept these incursions [1][3] - NATO has initiated the "Eastern Sentinel" military operation, which involves the deployment of troops from member countries to Poland [4][5] - The Russian government has denied the allegations of airspace violations and claims that NATO's actions are provocative [4][6] Group 1: Incidents and Responses - Poland reported that NATO and Polish aircraft were scrambled to intercept a Russian drone that entered its airspace [1] - Romania's Foreign Ministry summoned the Russian ambassador to protest against the drone incursion, labeling it an unacceptable violation of sovereignty [3] - The UK government also summoned the Russian ambassador, expressing solidarity with Poland, Romania, and other NATO allies in condemning Russia's actions [3] Group 2: NATO's Military Actions - NATO's "Eastern Sentinel" operation includes the deployment of various military assets, such as Danish F-16s, French Rafales, and German Eurofighters [5] - Additional military support is being provided by other NATO members, including Czech attack helicopters and Dutch Patriot missile systems [5] - The operation is seen as a response to perceived threats from Russia, with leaders from Estonia and Lithuania welcoming the increased military presence [4][6] Group 3: Political Implications - The drone incidents have raised concerns about NATO's readiness and the political will to respond to Russian aggression [6][8] - There is a growing perception that the U.S. may be less committed to European security, as indicated by its cautious response to the incidents [8] - The situation may lead to a reassessment of NATO's strategic posture in Eastern Europe, potentially triggering new deployments or adjustments in deterrence strategies [8]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the pressure from Washington on the EU to impose a 100% tariff on China and India for purchasing Russian oil, highlighting the EU's conflicting stance towards China and the complexities in its foreign policy [1][2]. Group 1: EU's Contradictory Mindset - The EU's contradictory mindset is evident in three areas: cognitive, economic, and geopolitical, reflecting a zero-sum game mentality among some EU members [2]. - The EU's leadership expresses a desire to resolve trade tensions through negotiation, yet simultaneously applies unilateral pressure on China while ignoring China's cooperation proposals [2]. - The EU's reliance on the U.S. for strategic direction complicates its position on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, leading to increased sanctions on Russia and blame-shifting towards China [2]. Group 2: Implications of EU's Approach - Prioritizing U.S. interests over its own may undermine the EU's diplomatic independence and credibility, particularly in the context of the Ukraine crisis [3]. - The EU's internal divisions and lack of clear representation in its China policy reflect a disconnect from public sentiment, with citizens favoring a partnership approach rather than confrontation [3][4]. - Engaging in dialogue and cooperation with China is deemed essential for the EU's security and competitiveness, especially in emerging fields like AI and green development [4]. Group 3: Historical Context and Future Direction - The article emphasizes the lessons from World War II, suggesting that appeasement does not lead to peace or respect, urging the EU to resolve its internal conflicts and return to a comprehensive strategic partnership with China [4].

Core Viewpoint - Poland's Prime Minister Tusk stated that Poland has no intention of sending troops to Ukraine after the end of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, emphasizing a focus on logistical support instead [1] Group 1: Political Cooperation - Tusk and Canadian Prime Minister Carney agreed to continue close cooperation on the Ukraine issue within the NATO framework [1] - Both leaders are committed to maintaining strong transatlantic relations and providing assistance to Ukraine [1] Group 2: Military Involvement - Tusk reiterated that Poland will not deploy troops to Ukraine following the conflict's conclusion [1] - Poland will take responsibility for organizing logistical support for Ukraine [1]

Core Viewpoint - The diplomatic friction between Italy and France has intensified due to comments made by Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini regarding French President Emmanuel Macron's statements on Ukraine, highlighting significant divisions within Europe over the Russia-Ukraine conflict [1][2]. Group 1: Diplomatic Tensions - Salvini criticized Macron's suggestion that Europe should consider sending troops to Ukraine, suggesting that Macron should go to Ukraine himself if he believes in such actions [1]. - The French Foreign Ministry summoned the Italian ambassador to express strong discontent with Salvini's remarks, indicating the seriousness of the situation [2]. - This incident is not isolated, as Salvini has a history of making derogatory comments about Macron, including calling him a "madman" and suggesting he should fight in Ukraine himself [2][3]. Group 2: Political Context - Salvini's party, the League, is a key part of Italy's ruling coalition and has a clear stance against sending Italian troops to Ukraine, criticizing the so-called "volunteer alliance" led by France and the UK [3]. - The League's Senate leader has urged Macron to stop discussing topics like a "European nuclear umbrella" and "European army," arguing that these discussions do not contribute to peace [3]. - The ongoing disputes between Salvini and Macron date back to Macron's election in 2017, with frequent public exchanges that have strained diplomatic relations [3][4]. Group 3: Broader Implications - Analysts suggest that Salvini's comments reflect Italy's strategic positioning regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict, preferring to avoid direct military confrontation with Russia, contrasting with France's push for European military unity [4]. - The discord between Italy and France over Ukraine policy is seen as weakening the EU's overall influence on foreign affairs, especially as transatlantic relations and EU diplomatic dynamics are shifting [3][4].