新华财经华盛顿／布鲁塞尔1月8日电 （记者徐剑梅黄强陈斌杰）美国突袭委内瑞拉后，又不断威胁要 夺取格陵兰岛，引发欧洲强烈反应。 美国可能会通过哪些手段夺岛？背后有哪些深层战略意图？会对跨大西洋关系造成哪些影响？回看历 史，美国通过巧取豪夺扩张自身版图的"传统"由来已久，背后是其帝国主义掠夺本性和赤裸裸的霸权思 维。 四种可能的夺岛手段 白宫声称，会为得到格陵兰岛"保留所有选项"。国际媒体和专家分析，特朗普政府可能通过以下四种手 段达到目的，不过无论哪种手段都面临不小的障碍。 三是挑唆独立。分析人士说，从去年美国副总统万斯访问格陵兰岛，到前不久高调任命美国格陵兰岛特 使，特朗普政府有意挑唆格陵兰岛独立，迫使其对美依附。不过，民调机构弗里安一项调查显示，绝大 多数格陵兰岛民众反对该岛成为美国一部分。 四是条约绑定。美国可能诱使格陵兰岛方面签署所谓《自由联系协定》，允许美军在其领土内不受限行 动，美国则以提供安全保护、部分公共服务以及贸易免税作为交换，实现对格陵兰岛的实际控制。 美欧媒体分析，美国很可能会混合使用以上手段。美国《星条旗报》网站文章认为，美国核心诉求并非 立即改变格陵兰岛归属，而在于扩大美国在当地军事 ...

转自：北京日报客户端 美国突袭委内瑞拉后，又不断威胁要夺取格陵兰岛，引发欧洲强烈反应。 美国可能会通过哪些手段夺岛？背后有哪些深层战略意图？会对跨大西洋关系造成哪些影响？回看历 史，美国通过巧取豪夺扩张自身版图的"传统"由来已久，背后是其帝国主义掠夺本性和赤裸裸的霸权思 维。 这是2025 年3月20日拍摄的丹麦自治领地格陵兰岛首府努克景色。新华社记者赵丁喆摄 四种可能的夺岛手段 白宫声称，会为得到格陵兰岛"保留所有选项"。国际媒体和专家分析，特朗普政府可能通过以下四种手 段达到目的，不过无论哪种手段都面临不小的障碍。 一是花钱购买。白宫7日称，特朗普及其国家安全团队正积极讨论购岛方案。美国国务卿鲁比奥曾表 示，购岛是首选方案。不过，美方过去多次提出购岛，均遭丹麦方面及格陵兰岛当地民众强烈反对。美 欧法律专家普遍认为，在当今世界，"买卖"领土违背国际法原则。 二是武力夺取。白宫方面直言"动用军队"是"选项之一"。美媒说，美国在格陵兰岛有军事基地，格陵兰 岛没有本土常备军队，美军占岛"可能只需5架直升机"。但美国将为此付出巨大政治代价。美国智库北 极研究所所长罗曼·许法尔认为，美国军事攻击北约盟友，将"意味着北 ...

【环球时报报道 记者 郭媛丹】美国国防部长赫格塞思当地时间5日在视察美国最大军事造船厂时宣称，美国正在重建绝对军事优势，将令敌人"不 敢"轻易试探美国。香港《南华早报》称，这是赫格塞思向中俄发出的"严厉警告"。接受《环球时报》采访的专家表示，赫格塞思的发言凸显了美 国"以绝对军事优势维持霸权行动自由"的思维。 赫格塞思5日在纽波特纽斯造船厂面向船厂工人和海军人员作出上述发言。从美国国防部网站刊登的赫格塞思讲话全文来看，"让美国的威慑力回 来"是明确主题。赫格塞思称，美国要重建"绝对且不容置疑的威慑力"，强大到让敌人"不敢"轻易试探美国。 北京外国语大学国际关系学院国际问题专家卓华6日对《环球时报》记者表示，赫格塞思的讲话是对本届政府"以实力求和平"论调的又一次政治动 员。卓华分析说，从中可以看出美国霸权实施模式的三点变化。"一是不再伪装。冷战结束后美国一直通过霸权稳定论、'仁慈'霸权等叙事为霸权 寻找理论基础和合法性，如今干脆宣布霸权就是对任何国家的绝对军事优势；二是深陷权力转移焦虑，军工复合体正利用焦虑叙事永久绑定美国 国家战略；三是霸权焦虑下美国对外战略行为更加具有攻击性，随时准备通过霸凌弱小国家杀鸡儆猴 ...

面对这一挑衅，中国的立场非常清晰：谨慎应对，但绝不示弱。官方多次强调，国际法不是美国的私有 财产，国家主权更不能被侵犯；国内舆论也炸开了锅：既然美国敢率先动手抢夺，那是不是也该以牙还 牙？有声音提出明确表态：任何进入台海海域的船舶，都必须接受检查，拒不配合就直接扣押。 美国的行为，不只是扣押，而是光天化日下的明抢。更令人气愤的是，仅在短短11天内，美军就在委内 瑞拉附近连续扣押三艘油轮，目标直指中国与委内瑞拉之间的石油贸易。换句话说，美国看不惯中国购 买委内瑞拉石油，干脆用军事手段来搅局。 特朗普一声令下，全球舆论为之一震。中国香港的世纪号油轮，满载着180万桶委内瑞拉原油，竟被美 国官方宣布永久扣押，连船带油一并掌控。 中委之间的石油合作并非一朝一夕，这关系到中国的能源安全，也牵动着委内瑞拉的经济命脉，完全是 依照市场规则进行的正常商业活动。而美国却无法容忍这种双赢合作，直接跳出海盗逻辑：不认可你的 贸易，就能抢你的船、没收你的货？这种霸权思维，简直把自己的意志就是规矩刻进了骨子里。 面对这种赤裸裸的挑衅，中国没有退让。一方面，断然拒绝美国无理要求，照样购买石油——能源安全 是国家底线，谁也不能干涉；另一方 ...

马克龙）这种前恭后倨的行径，严重破坏了双方合作的友好氛围，也损害了自身信誉。其背后暴露出 的，是部分西方势力根深蒂固的霸权思维，他们妄图按照自己的意愿行事，必须获取足够利益，全然不 顾他方合理权益。 西方文明就是必须按照他们的意愿做事，必须给他们足够的利益，除他们以为，任何人都可以没，唯有 西方要获利，这就是西方逻辑。 12月17日，法国相关肉类产品出口遭遇重大挫折，这背后与马克龙）访后态度转变紧密相关。马克龙此 前访时阵容庞大，带着八十多位政府官员与企业高管，涉及航空、农业等多个关键领域，三天内签下不 少合作协议，其中空客那笔120亿欧元的飞机订单以及天津总装线扩容计划尤为引人注目，这笔订单本 可为法国本土创造上万个就业岗位。 然而，马克龙）回国不到两天就变脸。12月7日他接受《回声报》采访时，完全换了腔调，先抱怨欧方 贸易逆差不可持续，称相关方的贸易顺差是在"扼杀客户"，接着又放狠话威胁，若相关方不扩大进口、 不保障稀土出口，欧盟就效仿美高层加征关税。更过分的是，12月16日他还在英国《金融时报》发文， 虽承认加征关税会引发严重后果，却仍坚持错误观点。 ...

2025年刚刚过去一半，关注国际政治的人会发现，拉丁美洲已经成为特朗普外交布局中最热闹的舞台。 他提出的唐罗主义与过去美国在拉美的做法大相径庭，表现出一种说不清的反常，这让人不禁想探究其 背后的深层次原因。如果回顾特朗普这一年在拉美的各种举措，你会发现他的行动节奏非常紧凑。 年初，特朗普突然提出要重新掌控巴拿马运河，接着他又高调宣布将墨西哥湾改名为美国湾。当时很多 人觉得这些举动已经够离经叛道了，结果没想到年底更为震惊的事件发生了——美国军用飞机炸毁了从 委内瑞拉出发的一艘小艇，宣称船上是毒贩，这次轰炸造成了接近百人的死亡。这一系列举动表明，特 朗普在拉美的政策，决心按照自己的方式来进行，毫不妥协。 特朗普的唐罗主义显然不同于过去美国的传统做法，后者总是打着推广价值观的旗号，支持拉美地区进 行资本主义发展，虽然背后有利益的考量，但很少有针对整个拉美的统一、强力行动。相比之下，特朗 普的唐罗主义则更具实用性，始终围绕具体的利益展开，每一步都清楚地盯着实际的好处。 首先从资源角度来看，拉美地区是世界上自然资源最丰富的地区之一，尤其是锂矿和铜矿等在全球范围 内都极为稀缺，南美洲的这些资源储量足以让许多国家垂涎。此前 ...

Group 1 - The U.S. is issuing dual warnings to China regarding chip technology and tariffs, indicating a potential escalation in trade tensions [1][5] - President Trump emphasized that the most advanced chips from Nvidia will not be allowed to reach China, asserting that only the U.S. will possess such technology [3] - Trump's comments suggest that while he may allow Nvidia to engage in transactions with China, the most advanced versions of chips will remain exclusive to the U.S. [3] Group 2 - U.S. Treasury Secretary Yellen expressed concerns over China's future rare earth policies and hinted at the possibility of imposing additional tariffs on China, citing unreliability as a partner [5] - The U.S. has a history of frequently changing its stance in trade negotiations, undermining mutual trust between the two nations [5][7] - The U.S. approach is characterized by unilateralism and protectionism, which has led to strategic dilemmas rather than successful outcomes [7] Group 3 - Russia is seizing the opportunity to strengthen ties with China amidst the uncertain U.S.-China relationship, with Prime Minister Mishustin emphasizing the importance of Sino-Russian relations [7][9] - Despite facing sanctions from Western countries, Russia is keen to deepen its relationship with China, viewing it as a critical partnership [9] - China maintains a principled stance in its foreign relations, indicating that its approach towards the U.S. and Russia are independent of each other [9]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article is that the U.S. aims to maintain its competitive edge over China, as articulated by former U.S. Ambassador to China, Burns, who emphasizes the need for the U.S. to not fall behind China in various sectors [1][3] - Burns describes the current U.S.-China relationship as being in a "highly competitive state," focusing on key areas such as AI, biotechnology, quantum computing, and cybersecurity, indicating that this competitive situation is unlikely to change in the short term [3] - The article highlights that while Burns criticizes China for being aggressive in these sectors, he fails to acknowledge the U.S.'s own actions, such as semiconductor export controls and trade tariffs against China [3] Group 2 - The article notes that recent communications between Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and U.S. Secretary of State Rubio emphasize the importance of a healthy and stable U.S.-China relationship for global stability, with discussions on maritime logistics, tariffs, and fentanyl cooperation [5] - It mentions that tensions have escalated in U.S.-China relations, particularly in trade, with China reducing its soybean purchases from the U.S. to zero, while Japan emerges as a significant "buyer" of U.S. agricultural products [5][6] - The article discusses the recent agreements between the U.S. and Japan, including a commitment for Japan to purchase $8 billion worth of U.S. agricultural products annually, while also highlighting the implications of these agreements for Japan's economy and potential debt issues [6][8] Group 3 - The article indicates that the U.S. is pressuring Japan and other Asian allies to increase defense spending, with Japan committing to accelerate its defense budget goals [6] - It raises concerns that if South Korea follows Japan's lead in increasing investments and defense spending, it could exacerbate military tensions in Northeast Asia [8] - The article concludes that Trump's approach reflects a hegemonic mindset, using allies as stepping stones, which may provide short-term benefits for Japan but could lead to long-term complications [8]

Group 1 - The core point of the article highlights the ongoing tension in US-China trade relations, particularly following the US announcement to continue the 301 investigation despite recent agreements on soybean purchases and other concessions [1][13][21] - The cooperation between the US and China is characterized as a transactional exchange rather than a foundation of mutual trust, with both sides making concessions that cater to their immediate needs [3][9][11] - The US has agreed to lower tariffs on fentanyl-related products and suspend the "50% rule" that previously restricted Chinese companies, allowing them some breathing room in the market [5][9] Group 2 - China has committed to purchasing 12 million tons of US soybeans in the current quarter and 25 million tons annually for the next three years, which is seen as a significant relief for struggling US farmers [7][15] - The tightening of export controls on fentanyl precursor chemicals by China aligns with US political needs, providing a rationale for the US government to address domestic concerns [9][19] - The initiation of the 301 investigation serves as a political tool for the Trump administration, allowing them to maintain a strong stance against China while appeasing domestic hawkish interest groups [13][17][21] Group 3 - The 301 investigation, launched on October 4, is based on the US Trade Act of 1974 and aims to assess China's compliance with the 2020 trade agreement, serving both domestic political purposes and external pressure on China [17][19] - The investigation creates uncertainty in the market, undermining business confidence and complicating supply chain planning for companies affected by the trade war [25][27] - The article emphasizes that the fundamental issue in US-China relations is not merely about trade figures but rather the need for a dialogue framework that respects equality and mutual interests [33][34]

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around the EU's dual standards, demanding China not to expand the impact of the Nexperia incident while simultaneously calling for relaxed export controls on rare earths [1] - The Netherlands forcibly took control of Nexperia, a company fully owned by China's Wingtech Technology, citing security risks and freezing Chinese assets [1][3] - The EU's strong demands stem from its high dependence on China's rare earths, which are essential materials for modern industries such as electric vehicles and wind power [3] Group 2 - According to the US Geological Survey, China accounts for over 90% of global rare earth processing capacity and 70% of production, with a separation purity stability exceeding 99.99% [5] - The EU's 27 countries rely on China for 90% of the neodymium-iron-boron magnets needed for semiconductors [5] - Reports indicate that over a thousand EU companies have pending rare earth export applications in China's approval system, with only half receiving approval [7] Group 3 - The core of the EU's decarbonization plan focuses on electric vehicles and wind power, which have a pressing demand for rare earths [9] - China has implemented export controls but maintains a green channel for compliant European companies to ensure reasonable supply [9] - China has urged the Netherlands to resolve the Nexperia issue as a prerequisite for restoring smooth rare earth supply [11] Group 4 - The EU's contradictory stance of advocating for free trade while forming a rare earth alliance with the US highlights its struggle to overcome production capacity bottlenecks [11] - The US refining technology is not up to standard, and Australian facilities are not expected to be operational until 2027, still relying on Chinese technical support [13] - The EU's insistence on double standards and disregard for China's legitimate rights may ultimately harm its own industrial layout and development pace [15]