美国战略与国际研究中心的报告指出，这种非对称战争本质上是一场经济战。当俄罗斯的财政收入有 70%依赖于能源出口时，摧毁一座炼油厂的影响力远大于消灭一支装甲部队。比如，乌军袭击了乌法炼 油厂，导致俄空天军的18%航空燃油供应中断，影响持续了两个月之久。而乌克兰为了这次袭击，仅付 出了相当于三枚巡航导弹的无人机成本。在哈尔科夫的地下指挥中心，乌军的电子战部队正在调试新一 代的自杀式无人机。这些无人机配备了AI路径规划系统，能够自动识别炼油厂的核心设备。正如乌克 兰国防部情报局长布达诺夫所说：我们不需要与熊直接搏斗，只需让它的血液慢慢流干。随着俄罗斯国 内汽油价格的上涨，这种精准的能源手术正不断侵蚀着克里姆林宫的财政。 凌晨三点，俄罗斯伏尔加格勒的乌留平斯克油库在猛烈的爆炸中燃起熊熊火光，整片天空都被火光映 红。这一爆炸不仅是乌克兰军队对俄罗斯能源设施的第三次打击，也意味着俄罗斯前线装甲部队的燃油 供应线被彻底切断。从乌克兰对里海油田的打击，到地中海油轮的袭击，再到如今的内陆油库，乌军正 利用低成本的无人机，摧毁俄罗斯价值数十亿卢布的战略能源资产。军事专家将这一系列打击称为全链 条能源绞杀，它正在重新定义现代战争的 ...

据凤凰卫视报道，泰国和柬埔寨距离上一轮冲突结束签下和平协议还不满两个月，又爆发了更激烈的新 一轮的冲突。双方从天空打到地面，两国接壤的所有省份都处在战火之中，东南亚大坝生命线也受威 胁，特朗普和东盟的紧急调停也毫无成果。东南亚为何成了残酷战场？折射出背后经济和安全怎样的困 境？ Part. 1 12月12日，还在继续追逐诺贝尔和平奖的美国总统特朗普，在社交媒体上写道：双方已经同意"自当晚 起全面停火"；并将恢复执行此前在达成的《吉隆坡和平协议》。特朗普称两国都"准备好与美国一起实 现和平并继续贸易"。 特朗普口中的两国，就是正在爆发激烈冲突的泰国与柬埔寨。在先后与泰国看守总理阿努廷、柬埔寨首 相洪玛奈通话之后，特朗普在社交媒体上写下了那些话语。 当全世界都在惊讶于特朗普手中的和平魔术棒时，12月13日，泰国外交部长西哈萨·蓬集在记者会上否 认了同意停火的说法。西哈萨·蓬集最后还称，关注外部声明只会分散泰国的注意力，如果把时间花在 听这个人或那个人的话上，泰国将没有时间捍卫我们的主权和人民。 追溯冲突根源，领土争议与协议失效构成了直接导火索。 今年10月26日，泰柬两国在东盟峰会期间签署和平联合声明，本为边境问 ...

Core Viewpoint - The defense sector has rebounded significantly this year due to ongoing conflicts and geopolitical tensions, with DroneShield, an Australian anti-drone technology company, standing out with a 380% increase in stock price since 2025, outperforming many global defense peers [1]. Company Summary - DroneShield focuses on developing technology to disrupt communication between drones and their operators, utilizing sensors to detect drones and jamming their flight or image transmission [4]. - The company's most popular product is the DroneGun, a handheld jamming device [4]. - In June, DroneShield's stock surged after securing a €61.6 million contract with European governments, marking its largest order to date [4]. - Recently, DroneShield also won two contracts from the U.S. Department of Defense totaling AUD 7.9 million, contributing to the stock price increase [4]. - The company has signed multiple contracts with governments in Australia, the U.S., and Europe, which have driven its stock price up and led to its inclusion in the Australian benchmark index [4]. - Analyst Daniel Laing from Bell Potter Securities Ltd. noted that the contracts obtained this year demonstrate an increase in demand, and the company is capable of meeting these needs [4]. - DroneShield reported a more than threefold increase in revenue year-on-year for the first half of the year, attributing this growth to markets outside the U.S., including Europe and the Asia-Pacific region [4]. Market Sentiment - Some investors remain skeptical about the surge in DroneShield's stock price, citing the company's AUD 3.2 billion market capitalization as being tied to "inflated" fundamentals [5]. - The forward price-to-earnings ratio for DroneShield is approximately 70 times, significantly higher than the Australian S&P/ASX 200 index [5]. - Concerns were raised as some board members sold shares during the stock price increase, which was viewed as a warning signal by investors [5].

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around the potential military intervention of Europe in Ukraine and the subsequent response from Russia, which could escalate tensions significantly [2][22] - Russia's "red line" is defined as foreign military intervention in Ukraine, particularly in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, due to historical fears and national security concerns [2][3] - The response from Russia would likely involve a multi-faceted approach, including conventional military strikes, nuclear deterrence, and asymmetric warfare tactics [3][4][6] Group 2 - Conventional military retaliation would target European troops and critical infrastructure in Ukraine, utilizing missiles and drones to disrupt European military operations [3][4] - Nuclear options would include tactical nuclear weapons for preemptive strikes and strategic nuclear weapons for deterrence, with a focus on maintaining a credible threat to NATO [4][5] - Asymmetric methods could involve energy weaponization, cyberattacks, and financial sanctions to destabilize Europe and create internal chaos [6][7][8] Group 3 - Three potential catastrophic scenarios could arise if Europe crosses the red line: limited conflict with nuclear threats, accidental escalation to full-scale war, and a non-conventional war impacting Europe's economy and infrastructure [9][10][12][15] - The consequences of European military involvement could lead to significant losses for European forces, economic turmoil, and heightened nuclear risks, making it a high-stakes gamble [16][18] - Historical precedents indicate that direct confrontations between Europe and Russia have historically resulted in severe consequences, suggesting that diplomatic solutions are preferable [18][21] Group 4 - The article advocates for diplomatic negotiations to de-escalate tensions, emphasizing the importance of dialogue over military confrontation [20][21] - It suggests that both Europe and Russia should prioritize peace and stability rather than engaging in a potentially destructive conflict [22]