千變萬化的飛俠

2026年3月18日星期三

Trump’s delay in visiting China is to see who blinks first over Iran

Trump has postponed his visit to China, citing the intensifying conflict in the Middle East with Iran. His earlier proposal for international escort missions in the Strait of Hormuz received little response, and China has remained silent. The delay benefits both sides: Trump can use it as leverage, while China needs time to reassess its internal strategy.

Iran’s strongest backer against the United States is China. As the U.S. and Israel launch full‑scale attacks on Iran, Tehran has struck neighboring countries while attempting to blockade the Strait. Strategically, the former is “you fight your war, I fight mine,” while the latter is “unrestricted warfare special attack”—both concepts taught by China, with Iran merely the executor. Beijing did not anticipate Washington would truly strike Iran; Israel’s attacks were expected, but U.S. foreign policy has been stable since the Cold War, with little uncertainty. Historically, U.S.–China relations were more cooperative than confrontational. Yet with Trump and China’s new leadership, the long‑standing balance has been broken.

During the Cold War, the U.S. and China cooperated against the Soviet Union. Afterward, comprehensive cooperation became the norm. Now, personal will from both leaders has turned relations into direct confrontation: China promotes the “community of shared destiny” and the rise of the East, while Trump’s “Make America Great Again” demands eliminating competitors. Iran, the strongest anti‑American force in the Middle East, has become the flashpoint. China will not easily escort the Strait of Hormuz, as ensuring safe passage would mean betraying Iran. With Israel having largely neutralized Iran’s nuclear program, Tehran’s only options are blockade and ground warfare. Drones and missiles will eventually be exhausted; despite Iran’s manufacturing capacity, it cannot withstand relentless U.S.–Israeli pressure.

Launching a “people’s war” on the ground requires public support, absolute military control, and strong external aid—none of which Iran currently possesses. Blockading the Strait is low‑cost, high‑impact, and immediately effective, which is why Trump’s escort plan has no takers. China needs time to evaluate Iran’s situation, ultimately deciding whether to continue support or use Iran as a bargaining chip. The U.S. does not seek to rule Iran but aims to dismantle the theocracy, install a pro‑American regime, eliminate nuclear weapons, secure oil, and remove threats to Israel. The U.S.–Iran conflict stems from earlier policy misjudgments: Iran was once Washington’s closest ally in the region, with strong ties to Israel. For America, restoring normal relations with Iran would naturally dissolve anti‑U.S. forces in the Middle East.

Iran is the backbone of anti‑American sentiment in the region, and China is its largest patron and energy importer. If Iran is neutralized, China will suffer backlash—just as in Venezuela, where massive investments were lost and energy supplies restricted. China’s urgent priority is to preserve Iran’s government, but that inevitably means concessions to Trump. Both sides now need time to adjust, but the final decisions may depend less on national interest than on the personal will of their leaders.

特朗普推遲訪華等的是北京的“投名狀”

特朗普推遲了對中國的訪問，理由是中東伊朗的戰事吃緊，之前他倡導的各國護航霍爾木茲海峽也未得到積極回應，中國對此甚至沒有表態。推遲訪問對中美都有利，特朗普可以用此施壓，中國則更需要時間進行內部策略的檢討。

伊朗對抗美國背後最大的支持者就是中國，美以展開對伊朗全面攻擊的同時，伊朗一方面不斷打擊周邊國家，於此同時正在試圖封鎖海峽，按照戰略上說前者是所謂“你打你的，我打我的”，後者是“超限戰特種攻擊”，這些都是中國傳授的戰略，伊朗不過是執行者。中國沒有預判到美國真會對伊朗動手，雖然以色列的攻擊是預料之中，冷戰後美國的對外政略和戰略基本穩定，不存在所謂的不確定性，中美關係整體上是合作大於對抗。但隨著特朗普和中國新一代領導人的上臺，這種維持多年的平衡關係被打破。

中美冷戰年代合作對抗蘇聯，冷戰後全面合作是兩國的基本國策，現在則因爲各自領導者的個人意志而打破，逐漸成爲針鋒相對的全面對抗，在中國是領導人類命運共同體下的東升西降，而美國則是讓美國再次偉大必須消除競爭對手，中東反美最強大的力量伊朗，最終成爲兩國角力的爆發點。中國不會輕易護航霍爾木茲海峽，如果護航確保航道安全等於背叛伊朗。在伊朗核武已被以色列基本清除的前提下，能夠與美以對抗的只有封鎖海峽和地面作戰。無人機和導彈終有消耗完的時候，伊朗雖然有相當的武器製造能力，但經不住美以不間斷的強力打壓。

發動人民戰爭式的地面作戰，至少需要民衆的支援，軍隊有絕對的控制能力，還有外援的強力支援，這三點至少目前都不具備。封鎖海峽成本低，效果好，影響立竿見影，至少特朗普倡導的護航得不到任何響應。中國需要時間對伊朗形勢做出評判，最後結果無非是繼續支持，還是作爲籌碼出賣。美國並不想統治伊朗，但必須整治神權政府，建立親美政權，徹底清楚核武，控制伊朗石油，永久放棄對以威脅。美伊衝突實質上是多年前美國對外政策誤判引發的，伊朗曾經是美國在中東地區最堅實的盟友，伊朗和以色列也關係緊密。對美國來講是恢復過往對伊的正常關係，只要關係正常化中東地區的反美勢力自然消亡。

伊朗是中東地區反美的中堅力量，中國是伊朗最大的金主國和能源進口商。如果伊朗問題徹底解決則中國必遭反噬，正如委內瑞拉一樣，巨額投資作廢，能源供給被限制，在中東地區的影響大幅下降。中國現在迫切要做的是盡量保全伊朗政府，但如此必定對特朗普做出讓步。因此中美雙方現在都需要時間做調整，但最後的決定未必完全取決於國家利益，而是領導者的個人意願。

Chelsea Lose 3 More to PSG: Owner’s ‘Make the Blues Great Again’ Turns Out to Mean Becoming a 2–8 Goal‑Giving Machine

Chelsea were crushed 0–3 by Paris Saint‑Germain in the Champions League second leg. The match was effectively over within five minutes, when 19‑year‑old, inexperienced Sarr was easily beaten on the right flank, leading to the opening goal. From then on, it was garbage time. In the previous leg, the first 75 minutes were evenly matched, but then the goalkeeper deliberately gifted the ball away. At 2–2 the score did not meet outside expectations, so naturally more goals had to be conceded. This broke the players’ mentality. Enzo loudly berated the keeper, and afterward rumors of his departure spread. Captain James, having just renewed his contract, was injured again, leaving the team weakened before kickoff. Now the forwards fight desperately to score, while the defense works just as hard to give goals away, and eventually the key players lose the will to play. Enzo and Palmer are both in this situation. The outcome is not in the players’ hands, so perhaps they should seek other paths.

In the previous match, Chelsea played well but lost under external influence. In this one, the squad had no desire to fight; since the result was predetermined, why struggle? Maresca once defeated PSG, but that was due to many factors—good fortune, lucky goals, and Palmer’s brilliance. Chelsea are now an American‑owned club; Trump was present, knew the owner, and stole the spotlight at the trophy ceremony, refusing to leave. Winning the title then was “destined.” Now, losing is simply payback. As for coach Rossignol, after the initial “three fires” of a new boss, his true level is revealed: about seventh place in Ligue 1, and Chelsea now sit at that level too.

Maresca at least promoted Leicester City and studied for years at Manchester City, gaining experience. For a rookie Premier League coach, breaking through is extremely difficult, especially at a big club where results are demanded. Normally, such clubs hire proven managers with records of success, even if guarantees are impossible. Letting a young coach “level up” slowly is not realistic for a European giant; fans lack patience. This season, TV directors have repeatedly shown crowds leaving early, a clear sign of disillusionment. Chelsea have even fallen so far that they cannot find sponsors for the shirt front.

The American owner runs the club like a business, but even tariffs must eventually be repaid. Money has been spent on young talent, but why is it harder to sign experienced defenders than to fight Iran? Turning a Champions League‑winning side into a youth team—will it become a junior team next, and then rely on the women’s squad for results? The stated goal was to “make Chelsea great again,” but after years of this, the team is now “toothless in attack, shaky in defense,” conceding on every counterattack, a volatile adolescent squad. Buying a pile of youngsters like lottery tickets, then selling them for profit, is the model of mid‑table clubs, not European champions.

Boehly may be the American face, but he is not the sole investor; Middle Eastern funds are behind the scenes, and the two sides fight for control. Last season’s two trophies masked the conflict, but this year’s empty cabinet will worsen it. Abramovich’s money is frozen by the government, earmarked for Ukraine. The U.S. has left NATO and no longer supports Zelensky. Should Britain return the funds to the former owner, who was originally a Ukrainian‑Jewish tycoon? During matches, fans chant the Russian owner’s name—under “political correctness,” does this count as propaganda? Americans don’t understand football. They can fight Iran and Venezuela, but running a club, they lose miserably.

車路士再輸3球PSG：老闆“讓藍軍再次偉大”原來是成爲2-8送分機

歐冠次回合藍軍0比3完敗巴黎聖日爾曼，比賽5分鐘已結束，19歲毫無經驗的薩爾在右路輕易被突破導致失球，比賽實進入垃圾時間。上場比賽前75分鐘雙方勢均力敵，然後是龍門故意送球，2比2沒達到外圍要求的比分，自然是要多輸幾個，最後導致球員心態失衡。安素大聲呵斥守門員，賽後發生離隊傳聞，隊長詹士續約後再次受傷，戰前損大將開戰不利。現在球隊前場球員拼命得分，後場努力送分，最後導致主力都不想踢了。安素和彭馬都是如此，比賽勝負不在球員，還是尋找其他發展爲好。

上場對賽表現不錯下受外圍影響輸球，本場隊員已經無心戀戰，既然比賽已設定好結局何必拼命。馬列斯卡曾經擊敗過PSG，當時綜合因素很多，走綫好，運氣球，彭馬天才發揮，藍軍是美資球隊，特朗普在現場和老闆認識，頒獎搶鏡頭不肯走，最後奪冠也是天經地義，現在的輸球是一報還一報。至於教練羅仙尼亞水準如何，新官上任三把火之後，真實水準也不過如此，法甲第7的水準，現在車仔也就是這個位置。

馬列斯卡好歹還帶過李斯特城升班，在曼城學藝多年有經驗，英超新人教練想突圍而出非常困難，畢竟大球會有成績方面的要求，正常情況必定是請有經驗成績的名教練，即便如何也未必有必勝的把握，現在讓年輕教練慢慢練級，對於藍軍這種歐洲大球會，至少球迷不會有那麽多耐性。本賽季英超直播導演多次把鏡頭放到觀衆席，大量球迷離場的鏡頭歷歷在目。要知道藍戰士近年已經淪落到胸前廣告都找不到客戶的地步。

美國老闆經營球隊像是做生意，但即便是亂加關稅最後還是要還的，雖然錢是花了買了些年輕才俊，但引入有經驗的球員和後防名將，難道比打伊朗都難嗎？把一支歐洲冠軍球隊轉變成青年隊，後續是否要改換成少年隊，然後讓藍軍女足去爭取成績嗎？投入資金的目的不是口口聲聲“要讓藍軍再次偉大”嗎？現在幾年下來車仔成了“攻不銳，防不穩”，對方一個反擊必失球，成績波動極大的青春期球隊。買一堆年輕球員開彩票式找球星，練級後再賣掉賺錢，這是中下游球會的經營理念。

伯利作爲美國老闆，實際上投資者不僅是他一人，背後真正出資的是中東財團，雙方為爭奪主導權明爭暗鬥。上賽季的2冠掩蓋了矛盾，本賽季是四大皆空的局面，必然導致情形惡化。俄羅斯前任老闆的錢，政府扣著不給要捐給烏克蘭，美國已退出北約不再給予澤連斯基支持。是否英國也應該將錢還給前任，況且對方原本就是烏克蘭猶太裔富商。比賽中球迷一直高呼俄羅斯老闆的名字，按照政治正確這算不算大外宣。美國人不懂足球，打伊朗和委內瑞拉行，經營球隊打大巴黎輸慘了！