網頁

2025-07-08

中國露馬腳 維持俄羅斯戰爭態勢,以利於自己的侵略擴張

【雙魚之論】
In a recent meeting with the EU, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated that “China cannot accept Russia’s failure in the Ukraine war,” as it would jeopardize the stability of Russia’s anti-Western regime. This statement confirms the existence of a “Coordinated Strategic Diversion” between China and Russia. This coordination extends beyond the Ukraine-Russia conflict, revealing a broader blueprint of China’s national strategy. For Xi Jinping, invading Taiwan, alongside simultaneous offensives against the Philippines, Okinawa, and South Korea, is critical to legitimizing his extended tenure as both President and Party Chairman. Failure to act or a failed action during his extended term would undermine the legitimacy of his leadership and continued rule, with severe consequences. To safeguard these personal interests, China must at least sustain Russia’s ability to prolong the war, thereby reinforcing the importance and necessity of Xi’s grip on power domestically and China’s influence internationally.
In response, the West has long recognized this trend and is taking steps to prevent the “arc of instability” from coalescing and causing further disruption. Additionally, the West is imposing economic and technological sanctions on China to further erode its capacity and support for waging war.
中國外長王毅近日在與歐盟會議中表達了「中國無法接受俄羅斯在烏克蘭戰爭中失敗」(China cannot afford for Putin to fail, as this would threaten the stability of the anti-Western regime in Russia)一語,確認了是中俄間確實存在「協同戰略分流」(Coordinated Strategic Diversion)。此協同不僅僅是為了烏俄戰爭,更展現一種中國國家戰略的宏圖。對習近平而言,侵略台灣,以及同步進攻菲律賓、沖繩、南韓等,是攸關國家主席與黨主席延任的正當性基礎。若在延任的任期內沒有行動,或行動失敗,其掌權與延任的正當性就消失了。後果會非常嚴重。為此私利,中國至少要維持俄羅斯延續戰爭的態勢,才能保持自己(習近平在中國、中國在國際社會)掌權的重要性與必要性。
相對的,西方早就看出這態勢,因此,一步一步防止「不安定弧」的串連生事,並且對中國展開經濟與科技的制裁,進一步削弱中國發動戰爭的能力與奧援。

中國戰略底牌曝光! 王毅布魯塞爾會談:無法接受俄羅斯戰敗    三立 20250707

2025-07-07

20250601蜘蛛網行動 俄國已無前線後方之分,中國也一樣

【雙魚之論】
Ukraine's military operation coded "Spider Web," as its name suggests, is a multi-pronged, deep-penetrating offensive campaign spanning the vast expanse from Murmansk to Vladivostok. This highly innovative operation leverages Russia’s internal highway network, demonstrating remarkable strategic flexibility.
The "Spider Web" operation dismantles the traditional distinction between frontlines and rear areas, effectively constituting a combined "containment" and "psychological" warfare campaign launched by Ukraine against Russia. The battlefield is no longer confined to eastern Ukraine. While Russia may establish checkpoints along its highway network, such measures would significantly hamper logistical efficiency, thereby slowing its economic momentum.
From a geopolitical perspective, the optimistic assumption that Russia would focus solely on Europe while China dominates East Asia may no longer align with new reality. This operation also serves as a "deterrence" strategy, sending a sobering message to Beijing to refrain from aggressive actions in regions like the Taiwan Strait.

「蜘蛛網」命名的軍事行動,顧名思義,是一場多點並發、深入敵境的進攻作戰,涵蓋從莫曼斯克到海參崴的廣闊範圍。這項行動極具創意,充分利用俄羅斯境內的公路網絡展開,展現了高度的戰略靈活性。
「蜘蛛網」行動打破了傳統的前線與後方界限,等同於烏克蘭對俄羅斯發動了一場兼具「牽制戰」與「心理戰」的複合攻勢。戰場不再侷限於烏東地區,俄羅斯雖可在公路網增設檢查哨,但此舉將大幅降低物流效率,進而拖累經濟運作。
從地緣戰略視角觀之,原本設想俄羅斯專注歐洲、中國主導東亞的樂觀格局,或已不再符合現實。這場行動同時也是一種「嚇阻」策略,讓中國獲得震懾效果,不要在台海等地冒進。

俄空軍史上最大挫敗!烏稱「蜘蛛網行動」炸41戰機 萬里外海參崴也挨轟    新頭殼 20250602

日本將向菲律賓出口「阿武隈」級護衛艦


【雙魚之論】
援助退役軍艦簡單,但要教會操作較為困難。簡單的作法是美日菲人員混合編組,可以在最短時間形成戰力並與盟國協同作戰。

加強威懾大陸!日本將向菲律賓出口中古護衛艦 預定今夏檢視船艦    聯合 20250706

在美國的兩個盟友日本菲律賓加強合作對抗中國之際,日本讀賣新聞今天報導,日本將向菲律賓出口多艘中古護衛艦,強化對中國海上擴張行動的威懾力。

2025-07-06

雙生颱風??結果(台北)風平浪靜,等待回馬槍???





習近平攻打台灣前將先知會普亭牽制歐洲!北約秘書長警告陸犯台劇本 聯合 20250706

【雙魚之論】
星期專論》轟炸伊朗對亞洲是件好事 馬明漢(Michael Mazza)@自由 20250706
20250704 俄羅斯承認為塔利班阿富汗合法政府
應對中共擴張:日美同盟重返戰後地緣政治框架 雲程 HoonTing
為一個目標,東亞戰略已經全數整合為一個戰區
北約峰會 關切台灣
伊朗核彈:來料代工

習近平攻打台灣前將先知會普亭牽制歐洲!北約秘書長警告陸犯台劇本    聯合 20250706

紐約時報雜誌5日刊出北約秘書長呂特的專訪,呂特高度讚賞美國總統川普對於北約軍費改革的貢獻,並罕見地提及台灣與中國大陸情勢,強調印太地區與大西洋安全已密不可分。呂特警告,若中國國家主席習近平決定攻打台灣,將首先通知並要求俄羅斯總統普亭同步對北約發動攻擊以牽制歐洲,各國唯有強化軍費與印太協作,才能有效嚇阻中俄聯動挑戰。

星期專論》轟炸伊朗對亞洲是件好事 馬明漢(Michael Mazza)@自由 20250706

【雙魚之論】
The author lays bare China’s sense of impotence and bluster. Unless China matches its words with deeds, its “final warnings” will increasingly fail to convince the world. Yet, should China act on these warnings, it risks staking its regime’s survival.
It is well known that in geostrategy, a “zone of instability” exists at the intersection of sea and land power. East Asia, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe lie along this “arc of instability.” Communist and authoritarian states such as China, North Korea, Iran, and Russia are precisely those situated on this arc, persistently challenging the Western world. The Western world, rooted in democratic values, struggles to comprehend that communist regimes prioritize propaganda, intimidation, cognitive manipulation, and subversion, with weapons serving as mere props to enhance these efforts, never intended for actual use.
Since World War II, the West has fallen into the propaganda traps set by communist states, not only surrendering but also introspecting and dutifully offering up targeted technological and financial achievements.
We observe that Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea are preparing to undertake sequential military actions in their respective regions in the short term. Their aim is not to wage war but to exhaust the Western alliance with threats of war, at most pursuing limited blitzkrieg operations to secure significant territorial gains.
Leaders like Reagan and Trump, who believe in strength and wield it decisively when necessary, defy the Western leadership archetype envisioned by communist states. Consequently, the United States has refrained from direct military involvement in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, instead collaborating with NATO to provide weapons and training. Regarding Iran, the U.S. has partnered with Israel to neutralize its nuclear ambitions and eliminate Hamas in Gaza. These two critical decisions have effectively disrupted the Russia-Iran-China-North Korea axis along the “arc of instability.” In other words, individual events cannot coalesce into a favorable strategic landscape for these states, nor will they precipitate a world war. China now hesitates.
Therefore, the U.S. adopts “deterrence” as its strategic objective toward China, extending beyond mere “freedom of navigation” missions. By containing Russia and suppressing Iran’s belligerence from afar, the U.S. induces hesitation in China. In time, the Chinese Communist Party will collapse under its own weight.

作者將中國的無力感與吹噓暴露無遺。往後,除非說到做到,否則「中國最後的警告」越來越難取信世界。但,中國若要履行其「最後的警告」,正巧是拿政權做為堵住
眾所周知,在地緣戰略上海權陸權對峙交界有條「不安定弧」,東亞、中東、東歐位在這「不安定弧」上。中朝、伊朗、俄羅斯等共產與威權國家正好就是「不安定弧」上的國家,長期挑戰西方世界。以民主黨價值為主西方世界,缺點就是無法理解共產黨是以宣傳為上,以嚇唬對手、塑造對手認知、顛覆為主,武器是用來襯托前者的精美道具,從來不是拿來使用的。
二戰以後的西方世界中了共產國家的宣傳圈套,不僅束手就擒,還深自反省並乖乖奉上針對的技術成就與金融成果。
於是我們看出來,俄國、伊朗、中國、朝鮮準備短時間內在周遭先後進行軍事行動,在讓西方陣營疲於奔命,不是想發動戰爭,而是威脅要發動戰爭,頂多是著眼閃電戰,目的在獲取極大的領土利益
雷根、川普等。他們相信實力,必要時毫不猶豫展現出來,不是共產國家所設定的西方領袖。於是,美國絕不以軍隊涉入烏俄戰爭,僅攜手北約提供武器與訓練。對於伊朗,則攜手以色列解決核武發展並殲滅加薩的哈瑪斯。這兩件重大決策,徹底隔絕「不安定弧」的俄伊中朝串連一線的企圖。換言之,個別的事件無法形成對他們有利的局面,也不會導致世界大戰。中國現在遲疑了。
因此,美國以「嚇阻」為對中戰略目標,不僅只在執行「自由航行」任務而已,而更遠在天邊拖住俄羅斯、鎮住伊朗的戰火,最後讓中國遲疑。然後,中共自會垮台。

星期專論》轟炸伊朗對亞洲是件好事    馬明漢(Michael Mazza)@自由 20250706

當六月初中東情勢升溫之際,五角大廈內部有些人反對美國介入以色列與伊朗的戰爭,認為此舉將會分散美國對真正挑戰—中國—的注意力與資源投入。這種看法完全錯誤。事實上,對美國的亞洲政策而言,轟炸伊朗是所有可能情境中最好的發展。

2025-07-05

20250704 俄羅斯承認為塔利班阿富汗合法政府

【雙魚之論】
The timing is strikingly ironic: on the United States’ Independence Day, Russia formally recognized the Taliban’s “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan,” a regime governed by a supreme leader under the banner of Islamic theocracy, devoid of separation of powers, clear legal frameworks, and mired in internal disorder. Contrary to expectations that China would be the first to fill the vacuum left by the U.S. withdrawal and recognize the new Afghan government, it was President Putin who took the lead.
From a geopolitical perspective, Putin’s announcement—following reports that he dismissed warnings from Russian intelligence agencies and sought to stabilize Russia’s partnership with China—appears aimed at safeguarding Russian interests in Central Asia while counterbalancing the regional influence of Iran and China. However, under international law, “premature recognition” of a new regime is generally viewed critically. If the recognized entity fails to maintain effective control or collapses, the recognizing state risks entanglement in legal and diplomatic complications.
Notably, while most states have refrained from formally recognizing the Taliban’s “Emirate,” many have chosen not to evacuate their embassies in Kabul, opting instead to remain and monitor the situation. The “Emirate,” for its part, has refrained from interfering with these diplomatic missions, seemingly awaiting broader international recognition. What does this situation suggest?
Historically, a parallel can be drawn to April 23, 1949, when the Chinese Communist forces entered Nanjing, the Capital of the Republic of China. By then, Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist government had already initiated a “phased evacuation and decentralized operations,” rendering its administrative structure fragmented and unsustainable, even before the formal establishment of the People’s Republic of China on October 1. Many foreign embassies chose to remain in Nanjing to observe developments rather than follow the Nationalist government’s relocation to Guangzhou, Chongqing then Chengdu.
By December 1949, the Nationalist government had retreated to Taiwan, proclaiming itself the “Republic of China.” However, foreign embassies did not relocate to Taipei. Even the unique case of the Vatican’s diplomatic mission never established an ambassadorial presence in Taipei. This indicates that, unlike during the Nanjing period, the international community did not widely recognize Chiang Kai-shek’s Taiwan-based regime as the “sole legitimate government representing China.” Despite Chiang’s declaration on March 1, 1950, to “resume duties,” his regime was regarded merely as a point of contact for post-war Allied affairs, not a sole legitimate governmental entity.
Another noteworthy case is the Afghan ceasefire in February 2020, during which the Biden administration issued a joint statement with the “Islamic Republic of Afghanistan” while simultaneously signing a peace agreement with the Taliban’s “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.” The U.S. explicitly affirmed the “Islamic Republic” as a sovereign state and UN member, recognized as legitimate, while referring to the “Islamic Emirate” with the cumbersome designation: “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This phrasing categorizes the “Emirate” as a “belligerent” or “non-sovereign entity.” For Taiwanese observers, this bears a striking resemblance to the U.S. designation in the Taiwan Relations Act, which refers to Taiwan as “the governing authorities on Taiwan, recognized by the United States as the Republic of China prior to January 1, 1979.” In other words, the U.S., through domestic legislation, treats Taiwan as a “non-sovereign entity” with the status of a “belligerent.”

此事頗具諷刺意味:俄羅斯選擇在美國國慶日正式承認一個由最高領袖以神權名義統治、缺乏權力分立與明確規則、內政混亂的塔利班「阿富汗伊斯蘭酋長國」。原本預期中國會是填補美國勢力撤退後的空缺而首先承認阿富汗新政府,事實反倒是普丁率先出手。
地緣政治上,普丁在新聞〈報導稱普丁拒絕聽信俄國情報單位的警告,持續試圖和中國穩定夥伴關係〉後宣告承認阿富汗,表面上意在保護俄羅斯在中亞地區的利益,骨子裡也可制衡伊朗與中國等國的區域影響力。然而,國際法對「過早承認」新政權通常持負面態度。理由是,若被承認的政權無法維持有效控制,甚至最終崩潰,過早承認的國家可能陷入法律與外交困境。
更值得注意的是,儘管多數國家尚未正式承認塔利班的「酋長國」,但許多國家的駐喀布爾大使館並未撤離,而是選擇留守觀察局勢。「酋長國」方面也未侵犯各國使館,似乎在等待國際社會的正式承認。這是怎樣一種情境?
回顧歷史,1949423日,中國共產黨軍隊攻入中華民國首都南京,當時蔣介石領導的國民政府已提前實施「分批疏散、分地辦公」,政府架構難以整合統一,不待稍後中華人民共和國於101日的建政,中華民國已是崩潰狀態。許多國家的駐南京大使館選擇留守觀察,而未隨國民政府遷往廣州、重慶或成都。
1949
12月,國民政府最終敗退台灣,雖自稱「中華民國」,但各國大使館並未隨之遷台。甚至連較為特殊的「梵蒂岡」使館也從未在台北設立大使級駐點。這表明,國際社會並未如同在南京時期一般,普遍承認遷台的蔣介石政權為「代表中國的唯一合法政府」。即使蔣介石於195031日宣布「復行視事」,其地位也僅被視為盟軍戰後事務的聯絡對象,而非完整的合法政府實體。
另一個值得關注的現象是,阿富汗停火案例中,拜登政府在2020229日同時與「阿富汗伊斯蘭共和國」發表聯合聲明,並與塔利班的「阿富汗伊斯蘭酋長國」簽署和平協議。美國明確表示「共和國」是作為聯合國會員國,是美國認可的主權國家,具備合法地位;相對的,美國則以冗長的措辭稱「酋長國」為「美國不承認其為國家、通常被稱為塔利班的阿富汗伊斯蘭酋長國」(the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban),意即視其為「交戰團體」或「非主權實體」。做為台灣人,不免回顧美國在台灣關係法中對台灣的冗長稱呼,即「台灣統治當局(197911日前美國承認其為中華民國)」(the governing authorities on Taiwan, recognized by the United States as the Republic of China prior to January 1, 1979)。換言之,美國以國內法律承認台灣是具「交戰團體」地位的「非主權實體」。
1949101日毛澤東的抉擇

塔利班執政首獲承認 俄羅斯認可為阿富汗合法政府    中央社 20250704

阿富汗塔利班(Taliban)政府今天宣布,俄羅斯成為第一個正式承認其統治的國家,還說俄羅斯此舉是「勇敢的決定」。

2025-07-04

法庭直播:會是司法正義的曙光,還是瘋狂實境秀?

【雙魚之論】
法庭直播是件大事,一方面當事人的隱私是否適合無保留的公開?法庭會不會成為譁眾取寵的實境秀?法官、檢察官、律師會不會著重在爭取鏡頭外不確定觀眾的意見,從而改變體制對於法官不語的傳統被動角色的期待?反過來說,在資訊公開的潮流下,法院雖要保持專業與獨立,卻也很難不面對社會情緒
就個案而言,周軒FB問「迷因台式民主」:「台北地院2名承審法官的照片,拍攝地點在法庭,法官還身著法袍看著電腦,應該是在開庭時被偷拍。由於這2張照片從來沒有在網路上公開過,這些照從何而來,戴男又是如何取得,是否有人提供、提供者為何,是否在法庭上偷拍?此外,這些照片真的如戴男所說,都是他一人蒐集而來?還是另有其人?」網民用法庭拍攝的照片等不尋常的方法威脅了體制(不只個人),直播的話還得了?這顯然是國安層級的問題。
這是一件拷問級的大哉問,沒有全好、全壞的的答案。答案在全好、全壞的中間某一點上。作為國民,無須太早下結論。將政治攻守雙方交鋒的內容,作為補足自己不足之處就好。而執政者,能否藉此事件作為契機改革司法弊端?這是很難,但手腳要很隱晦的大事。

美國法庭直播意見兩極 強尼戴普案遭諷大型實境秀    中央社 20250704

立法院三讀通過法庭直播新制,後續效應引關注;美國法院依層級與各州規定不同,影星強尼戴普誹謗案3年前直播,吸引百萬觀眾,掀網路熱潮,但也有正反意見交鋒。

AI的寫作問題與協作技巧

【雙魚之論】
這也是我對於AI寫作的觀察。缺乏內容與諂媚,是最嚴重的,不過,整理的功夫還不錯。
在一般用途上,AI「協作」下的文章已經很好。此處強調「協作」是AI會誤解、惡用(此語可能有問題)、用語不精準等,甚至會出錯而變成「正經八百講廢話」的現象,所以人的事前(草稿)、事中(指定規格)、事後(調整與校正),變成非常關鍵。畢竟,要擔負文責的不可能是AI(哪一個硬體GPU?那一版次的LLM?甚至於,哪一間公司該負責?完全無法確認),要負文責的是人。人,才是作者。所以,AI的缺點,正好是人應該補足部分,甚至於是人的優點。
但未來會有改變與改善嗎?未來再說。

AI 生成的文章還有救嗎    張文鈿FB 20250701

最近看到很多人反感 AI 文章,覺得 AI 感太重。最近看到兩篇關於 AI 寫作的好文,分享給大家來改善 AI 文章品質。

2025-07-03

戰狼:明知違法所以改由「民間」出面製造「動能行動」?

【雙魚之論】
敵對國使館人員的跟蹤與收集情報,並非違法,反而是職務行為。也因此,中共企圖以「中國民間情報部門試圖製造條件,對受保護人士進行『示威性』的『動能行動』(Kinetic action,軍事術語),包括車輛碰撞」,才是令人矚目的「危險的實體間諜行動,威脅外國高層政治人物的生命安全」。
令人矚目的還有台灣在野黨的反應,包括前外交官徐勉生無根據的推測:「此時重提舊案,『極可能由民進黨政府唆使』」、徐巧芯強調「台灣應追究捷克政府責任」,完全失去國家立場。

「戰貓」捷克險遇「戰狼」?追蹤蕭美琴計劃背後的交鋒    BBC 20250703

捷克軍事情報部門上週表示,20243月台灣副總統當選人蕭美琴訪問布拉格期間,中國駐布拉格大使館外交人員「採取了違反外交規範的行動」,包括計劃以車輛衝撞等方式進行示範性的「動能行動」。這一消息在台北及布拉格引發輿論騷動與政壇激烈爭論。

路透社報導指,捷克軍事情報發言人·佩伊塞克(Jan Pejsek)向稱,調查顯示中國的行動包括對蕭美琴進行「實體跟蹤、蒐集其行程資訊,以及試圖記錄她與捷克政界及公眾重要代表的會晤」。他進一步向路透社表示:「我們甚至記錄到中國民間情報部門試圖製造條件,對受保護人士進行『示威性』的『動能行動』(Kinetic action,軍事術語),包括車輛碰撞,但此行動並未付諸實施。」

睥睨司法不夠,開始威脅體制

【雙魚之論】
過去,台灣的政客,特別是地方政客,犯法了總會說「司法迫害」,但選民都知道這是行禮如儀的行為。但民主化,特別是司法改革之後:警察只有24小時拘留期限,時間到要移送檢察官;檢察官不能自獨自羈押嫌疑人,要將證據與顧慮提交法院審理;相對的,嫌犯可以對法院的羈押提抗告,一樣有審級審查,核准、駁回、撤銷下級法院決定。在這以保護人權為要的體制之下,很多年來已經少有人懷疑司法公正性,特別是在程序階段(羈押)。
但,很異類的,在柯文哲京華城案與罷免提議的偽造文書上,民眾黨與國民黨不僅全盤批評司法,更不斷睥睨司法,彷彿自己超越體制
他們的行為模式很突兀,除少數之外,有此行為者多是新一代的政客或素人。我們不禁懷疑,他們的言行好像不曾台灣社會生活過一樣,這些錯誤認知從何而來?為何要衝撞體制,甚至影響人民對體制的信心?過去,固然也有威脅個案中單一檢察官的案例,但事屬罕見。現在更進一步,生命威脅單一個案相關整批11位檢察官受到生命威脅,並廣為號召,持續逼近。目的似乎在保護柯文哲。這是過去未曾見到的手法與規模。這樣說來,副市長夫人的墜樓,可能是這威脅司法的一環。
這是一種心理戰,目的是體制,意在兵不刃血的從內部破壞台灣社會的團結與安定。我們當然要懷疑主使者是外部的特定政權與其內部協力者了。真的要注意橫空出世的政黨、政客與網紅

「命債命還」恐嚇京華城案檢察官 已鎖定涉案網友    新唐人 20250621

昨有社群媒體刊登經手京華城弊案的十一名檢察官照片,並在照片上後製血痕,上面寫有「命債,命還」、「記住他們的名字跟臉」等恐嚇、仇恨性圖文,並註記「發現他們在外的蹤跡,請立即通報」的字句,因公然挑戰公權力,法務部及台北地檢署今凌晨發出新聞稿,除表達嚴重讉責之意,並強調將確保檢察官等執法人員人身安全,據了解,檢警已鎖定帳號「rosetree881」的網友,全力偵辦中。

2025-07-02

駐日美軍功能擴大 駐韓美軍司令可能降為2星 自由 20250702

【雙魚之論】
The most striking aspect of the situation described in this report is the downgrading of the U.S. Forces Korea commander’s rank, while the U.S. Forces Japan commander is elevated to the same level as the Indo-Pacific Command and concurrently assumes the role of United Nations Command commander. This signifies that U.S. Forces Korea will be integrated into the command structure of U.S. Forces Japan, which, when necessary, can coordinate and mobilize forces under the Indo-Pacific Command.
More significantly, the political implication is that the unresolved legal issues from the Korean War will revert to their original form: the adversaries of the United Nations Command will be clearly identified as North Korea and the Chinese Communist Party, rather than a state of gradually blurred distinctions between friend and foe.

本報導所述情勢最引人注目之處在於,駐韓美軍司令位階下調,而駐日美軍司令則升至與印太司令部同級,並同時兼任聯合國軍司令。這意味著駐韓美軍將納入駐日美軍的指揮鏈,且駐日美軍在必要時可協同調動印太司令部轄下力量
更重要的政治意涵在於:韓戰未解的法律問題將回歸其原始面貌——聯合國軍的對手將明確為朝鮮與中共,而非逐漸模糊敵我界線的狀態。

為一個目標,東亞戰略已經全數整合為一個戰區
應對中共擴張:日美同盟重返戰後地緣政治框架 雲程 HoonTing

〈推進同盟:駐日美軍和自衛隊改變印度-太平洋安全的未來〉 Lt Gen Stephen F. Jost 20250628
駐日美軍功能擴大 駐韓美軍司令可能降為2 自由 20250702

駐日美軍功能擴大 駐韓美軍司令可能降為2    自由 20250702

駐日美軍兼第5航空隊司令約斯特(Stephen F. Jost)日前投書日本「朝日新聞」,指出駐日美軍司令部的指揮權限將會逐步擴大。一旦駐日美軍的功能擴大,駐韓美軍也將無可避免地出現某種形式的改變,美國可能尋求調整目前僅限於遏制北韓的駐韓美軍,使其依據新的使命重新部署,編制和指揮官層級可能面臨調降。

〈推進同盟:駐日美軍和自衛隊改變印度-太平洋安全的未來〉 Lt Gen Stephen F. Jost 20250628

史蒂芬喬斯特中將的以下專欄文章於 6 28 日在《朝日新聞》上發表,標題為《推進同盟:駐日美軍和自衛隊改變印度-太平洋安全的未來》。

應對中共擴張:日美同盟重返戰後地緣政治框架 雲程 HoonTing

Countering Beijing's Expansion: The US-Japan Alliance's Return to Post-War Geopolitical Alignment    HoonTing 20250702

Geopolitics is fundamentally shaped not only by geographic factors but also by political elements, such as national borders and governing systems. Consequently, geopolitical shifts tend to occur gradually. Since the Korean War, Asia—apart from Indochina, or more precisely, the unification of North and South Vietnam—has experienced minimal changes in geographic boundaries and political systems. This has resulted in relatively constrained shifts in geostrategic dynamics.

2025-06-30

為一個目標,東亞戰略已經全數整合為一個戰區


 【雙魚之論】

此事不稀奇。實際上,報導也錯誤,不是180度,也不是90度。以對手的位置往外海看去而已。重點是報導的後半:美軍將韓國基地屬於日本指揮,而沖繩則是往南海的前哨。意思是,東亞基地全數整合在一起,為一個目標而形成一個戰區。台灣,還能有第二個選擇嗎?國民黨與民眾黨,在自尋政治死路。

駐韓美軍內部戰略圖曝光!南北倒轉包圍中國    NOWnews 20250630

韓國媒體近日曝光一張駐韓美軍的內部戰略地圖,顯示美軍似乎在調整東北亞駐軍的對中國戰略,將駐日、駐韓美軍的角色從「遏制」轉為「擴張」,結合台灣、菲律賓形成包圍中國的態勢。

2025-06-28

擴展亞伯拉罕協議 傳加薩戰爭兩週結束 自由 20250627


【雙魚之論】
川普1.0時就注意亞伯拉罕協議,認為是巨大的外交成果,但媒體為報導故並未細究。WIKI:亞伯拉罕協議(英語:Abraham Accords)是「以色列、阿拉伯聯合大公國美國」於2020813日達成的聯合聲明。隨後以色列與阿拉伯聯合大公國之間的協議(以阿和平協議)和巴林之間的協議(巴林-以色列和平協議)也被視為亞伯拉罕協議的一部分

亞伯拉罕協議可以導致加薩戰爭結束?我有結構性觀察心得,卻也未細究。

擴展亞伯拉罕協議 傳加薩戰爭兩週結束    自由 20250627

以媒指川普與納坦雅胡商討