The most crucial factor of the Russia-Ukraine war is still Putin‘s health

 

The Russian offensive in Kharkiv has been defeated, and the Ukrainian army has even launched a local counterattack. Putin, in order to garner support from allies, had no choice but to launch the Kharkiv offensive. This is more of a political battle than a military one. Relying on the forces of five divisions to try to capture Kharkiv is unrealistic, especially considering that the city could not be taken even when Russia had the advantage at the beginning of the war. The key question is: what is the purpose of attacking Kharkiv? If the goal is to occupy the city, then it would require surrounding it, which cannot be achieved with the current limited forces. If the aim is to eliminate or severely damage the defending forces, the best approach would be to lure them out and engage outside the city rather than in urban warfare. Currently, the Russian military strategy seems to lack a clear objective.

Choosing Kharkiv is primarily due to its proximity to the Russian border, allowing for a firepower offensive from within Russian territory. However, the outcome has led to the West agreeing for Ukraine to use its weapons to launch attacks on Russian soil, which has backfired on Russia. As Russia can freely attack Ukraine, Ukraine can retaliate with superior quality. This shift will fundamentally change the situation on the Russia-Ukraine battlefield. Ukraine is transitioning from a strategic defensive phase to a strategic offensive phase, while Russia's position is becoming more passive. 

The Russian military's manpower and firepower advantages will be constrained, and if major attacks hit Russia's energy, transportation, military, and civilian facilities, it could cause panic among the population who have not yet felt the full impact of the war, making governance more difficult for Putin. Striking Russian mainland becomes an effective way for Ukraine to curb Russian attacks, essentially playing a "tit-for-tat" game. As long as Russia attacks Ukrainian military or civilian infrastructure, Ukraine will respond in kind, reducing the intensity of Russian attacks.

Overall, even if Ukraine gains a certain military advantage in the future, it will not shorten the duration of the war. Both sides have accepted the direction of a prolonged conflict. Putin hopes to prolong the war as much as possible, while the West aims to exhaust Russia over the long term. The war will only end in the short term if the Russian military suffers a complete defeat, which would threaten Putin's rule. As long as Putin remains in power, the war will continue. Russia's initial strategic goal was to occupy all of Ukraine, but now it aims to hold the territories it has seized, which requires continuous military investment. Given Russia's population, abundant resources, and ability to support a medium-scale limited war, sustaining such a war is not impossible in the short term but will inevitably lead to Russia's collapse in the long run.

The current issue is how long the Russian military can hold out under increasing Western support for Ukraine. The war has evolved from a high-tech conflict at the beginning to trench warfare reminiscent of World Wars I and II. With the gradual introduction of Western weapons and direct involvement of NATO forces, the conflict is likely to return to high-tech warfare. Russia currently lacks the basic requirements for fighting a fully high-tech war solely based on its military capabilities. The much-touted high-tech Russian weaponry has proved inadequate in the war.

Russia now relies on ground weapons left over from the Cold War era and traditional manpower tactics. These war resources are gradually depleting and will eventually run out. Russia's current military capabilities cannot be replenished through production to sustain the war. Even with support from neighboring countries, it can only delay the depletion of resources. Eventually, the war will naturally end as resources are exhausted. The West does not want a quick end to the war as it aims to consume Russia's war resources – in essence, its national strength. After three years of war, Russia's military capabilities have significantly declined, losing its position as the world's second military superpower. If given enough time, the Russian military will naturally be depleted, leading to the collapse of Putin's regime and potentially the fragmentation of Russia once again.

For Russia's biggest allies, continuously supporting until the collapse is not wise. After Russia's downfall, the "Super NATO Alliance" led by the United States will ultimately target its competitors. While the overall strength of the competitors far exceeds that of Russia, they too will face a gradual erosion across all fronts over time. Therefore, the most prudent choice for competitors is to abandon Russia at the opportune moment. After decades of effective development under wise leadership that cooperated with the West, the competitor currently lacks most is the wisdom it once possessed.

 

上杉智世 Tomoyo Uesugi

 

俄烏戰爭走勢最關鍵的因素還是普京他老人家的健康

 

俄羅斯的哈爾科夫攻勢已經挫敗，烏克蘭軍隊甚至展開了局部反擊，普京為了得到盟友的援助，不得已發動了哈爾科夫攻勢，這本身就是政治仗不是軍事仗，就憑5個師的兵力就想打下哈爾科夫，何況還是在戰爭開始時兵力占優的情況下都沒能打下來的城市，現在僅靠有限兵力就想取勝不現實。關鍵是打哈爾科夫的目的到底為何，如果佔領城市就需要將其包圍，但是目前的兵力根本不夠，甚至連基本的包圍都做不到，如果想要消滅或重創守軍，最好的辦法是避開城市巷戰，將對方引出來消滅而不是打陣地戰，而現在俄軍的戰法簡而言之就是邊打邊看，缺乏明確的戰略目的。

 

選擇哈爾科夫最大的原因是因其距離俄邊境很近，可以在本國境內發動火力攻勢。但最後的結果是導致西方同意烏克蘭利用其武器對俄本土發動攻擊，如此俄羅斯反而得不償失。既然俄羅斯可以隨意攻擊烏克蘭，相反烏克蘭也可以反擊，而且品質遠較對手為高。自此俄烏戰場的形勢將會發生根本改變，烏克蘭從戰略防守階段過渡到戰略進攻階段，而俄羅斯的處境將會變得比以往被動。俄軍的兵力和火力優勢將會受到遏制，而且俄羅斯本土的能源，交通，軍事，民用等各種設施如果遭到大面積攻擊，對現在尚未完全感受到戰爭威脅的民眾會產生打擊進而引發恐慌，從而提高普京對內執政的難度。對烏克蘭來講打擊俄羅斯本土不失為一個有效節制對方攻擊的手段，也就是所謂“你打你的，我打我的”，只要俄羅斯攻擊烏克蘭軍民用設施，烏克蘭也會同樣應對，如此反而會降低俄羅斯的攻擊力度。

 

但總體來說即便烏克蘭今後佔據一定程度的軍事優勢，也不會縮短戰爭的進程，戰爭長期化已經是雙方都認可的發展方向。普京希望戰爭能夠儘量拖延下去，歐美希望對俄羅斯進行長期消耗，烏克蘭的要求是收回包括克裡米亞在內，被俄羅斯佔領的全部領土。戰爭短期內結束的唯一可能就是俄軍徹底戰敗，如此會導致普京執政的危機，失去軍隊意味著他政治生涯的結束，因此只要普京仍掌握權力，戰爭就必然進行下去。俄羅斯開戰之初的戰略目標是佔領烏克蘭全境，現在則是守住已經佔領的烏克蘭領土，而維繫此戰略的唯一手段就是不斷投入軍力。

基於俄羅斯的有限人口，豐富的能源和充裕的糧食，支援一場中等規模有限度的戰爭，對於本國來講不是不可維繫的，但長遠來說必定導致俄羅斯的崩潰。如同對付阿富汗小國十年的消耗下，最終成為導致前蘇聯崩潰的重要因素之一。而普京的終生執政已成定局的情況下，戰爭的進程完全取決於他的健康。這就是他宣稱戰爭最少再進行5年的原因，因為屆時他將年近八旬，他考慮的是在有生之年維持戰爭，確保個人生命財產的安全。普京自己稱有4個替身，其中最象普京的則是他的替身，而從最近頻繁出鏡的本人看，則是面目腫脹行走怪異。俄烏戰爭就是普京一個人的戰爭，就是他個人實現俄羅斯偉大復興夢的最后行動。

 

現在的問題是歐美在不斷加大對烏克蘭援助力度的前提下，俄羅斯軍隊到底能夠撐多久，這場戰爭從開戰之初的高科技戰爭，發展到一二戰水準的陣地戰，現在隨著歐美武器的逐步開放，以及北約軍隊的直接介入，今後將重新回到高科技戰爭的形態。而俄羅斯僅在軍備上就不具備打一場完全高科技戰爭所需要的基本條件。而戰前被宣傳得神乎其神的俄羅斯高科技武器，在戰爭中被證明不堪重用。現在俄羅斯所依賴的是冷戰年代留下來的地面武器，還有傳統上的人海戰術，這些所謂戰爭資源隨著不斷地消耗，終有耗費殆盡的一天，因為俄羅斯現有的軍事能力，完全不能靠生產彌補戰爭帶來的消耗。即便鄰國如何支持也只能延長被消耗殆盡的時間而已，如此發展到最後戰爭自然會結束。歐美並不希望戰爭儘快結束的原因就是希望儘量地消耗俄羅斯的戰爭資源，簡而言之就是對方的國力。現在經過3年的戰爭俄羅斯的戰爭能量已經大不如前，所謂世界第二軍事強國的地位已經消失。現在俄羅斯軍隊只能算是世界軍事強權之一，但已經不是世界軍事強國。

 

只要時間拖得夠久俄羅斯軍隊會被自然消滅，只要失去軍隊不可避免的就是普京政權的解體，最終導致俄羅斯的再次分裂。蘇聯解體導致當時2200萬平方公里的國土面積直接喪失了5百萬，如果歷史再次重演恐怕俄羅斯作為國家的形態將不會再繼續存在。對於俄羅斯的最大盟友來講，一味支持直到解體並不明智，當俄羅斯垮臺後目前由美國領導的“超北約聯盟”，將會最終將矛頭直指其競爭對手。雖然所謂對手的整體實力遠較俄羅斯為高，但最終面對的將是與俄國同樣的命運，也是各層面長時間的逐步消耗。因此，選擇最佳時機拋棄俄羅斯是最明智的選擇，而就目前來講在冷戰後該國在具有智慧的幾代領導人主導下，在與西方合作的大前提下持續進行了數十年的有效發展後，現在該國最缺乏的就是過往應有有的智慧。

日本如能重生牙齒就是人類自抽水馬桶以來最偉大的發明

 

世界首個可以再生牙齒的藥物將於幾個月後開始進行人體試驗，這距離其在動物試驗中取得成功還不到一年。這為該藥物在2030年左右投入商業使用鋪平了道路。這項試驗將在京都大學醫院進行，從九月開始持續到2025年八月，將會治療30名年齡在30至64歲之間、至少缺失一顆臼齒的男性。該藥物將通過靜脈注射的方式進行測試，以評估其對人類牙齒的效果。在此前的鼬鼠和小鼠模型中，這種藥物成功促使了新牙的生長，而且沒有顯著的副作用。

「我們希望能幫助那些因為牙齒缺失或缺乏而受苦的人，」研究負責人Katsu Takahashi說道，他是北野醫院牙科和口腔外科的負責人。「雖然迄今為止還沒有能提供永久性治療的方法，但我們感覺人們對牙齒再生的期望很高。」在這11個月的第一階段試驗之後，研究人員將對2至7歲、因先天性牙齒缺失而至少缺失四顆牙齒的患者進行藥物測試，這種情況估計影響到1%的人群。研究團隊正在為這一階段的試驗招募志願者。

接下來研究人員計劃將試驗擴展到部分牙齒缺失的患者，或因環境因素導致缺失一到五顆恆牙的人群。這種情況在不同國家的發生率各不相同，但估計約有5%的美國人缺牙，老年人中的發生率更高。這種藥物通過抑制子宮敏感相關基因1(USAG-1)蛋白來實現牙齒再生。正如我們在2023年報導的那樣，阻斷USAG-1與其他蛋白的相互作用，可以促進骨形成蛋白(BMP)信號，從而觸發新骨的生成。

這種藥物在小鼠和鼬鼠的口腔中成功促使了新牙的生長，這兩種動物與人類在USAG-1蛋白的性質上非常相似。「USAG-1蛋白在包括人類、小鼠和比格犬在內的不同動物物種之間有97%的高胺基酸同源性，」研究人員指出。然而，目前還沒有關於比格犬試驗的消息。分子生物學家兼牙醫Takahashi自2005年以來一直致力於牙齒再生的研究，他希望這種治療方法不僅能用於先天性牙齒問題，還能適用於任何年齡段的牙齒缺失患者。

如果成功此療法可能在六年內對任何永久性缺牙的患者開放，這恐怕是人類自抽水馬桶以來最偉大的發明，將徹底改變人類的飲食生活。

上杉智世 Tomoyo Uesugi

 

河合明日菜 河合あすな Asuna Kawai

 

Russia can be attacked by Ukraine without restrictions and no receipt

 

Several Western countries have lifted restrictions on using weapons against Russia's mainland. Although the United States has proposed certain conditions, it has indirectly relaxed restrictions on Ukraine using weapons. Almost simultaneously, Ukrainian forces have utilized advanced Western weaponry to launch attacks on Russian mainland, leading to the collapse of Russia's so-called "Kharkiv Offensive." 

As the second largest city closest to the north of Russia, Russian forces have gathered firepower to initiate an attack on Kharkiv. Previously, due to restrictions on using weapons, Ukraine could not utilize Western weaponry to attack Russian mainland, resulting in a passive defensive situation. Moreover, with inadequate ammunition supply, the defense forces were struggling. However, the situation has completely changed now.

Ukrainian forces have transitioned from a passive state to actively using advanced Western weapons for offensive operations. With the deployment of F-16s, Russia, which already lacked superiority in the air and intelligence, will now face even more challenges. Large-scale ground offensives leveraging armor advantages will be thwarted, and troop concentrations conducting localized trench warfare will be targeted by air power. 

Particularly, with NATO countries led by France deploying ground forces for combat, even though they have not directly engaged in fighting against Russia yet, the scale of subsequent forces will continue to increase. While they may initially focus on defensive, support, training, and logistical roles, direct combat is inevitable. In fact, Poland and the Baltic States are already preparing for direct involvement, and Russia lacks the capability to prevent Western countries from joining the conflict. Just as Russia can attack Ukraine using weapons and ammunition from North Korea and Iran, the West can retaliate in kind.

While Russia may deploy mercenaries from abroad to attack Ukraine, Western countries can directly send troops into combat. In fact, Western military forces have been deeply involved in the Russia-Ukraine war under various pretexts. The start of Ukraine's summer offensive is clearly marked by the arrival of F-16s to execute combat missions. The nearly one hundred F-16s currently present are just the beginning, with additional NATO aircraft like Typhoons, Rafales, and F-15s gradually joining the fray, and supposedly retired Western pilots directly engaging in combat. 

Given Ukraine's current shortage of pilots, it is impractical to rapidly train their air force to operate advanced Western fighter jets. Thus, the ultimate development will likely involve direct NATO air force participation in combat, rendering the current training of Ukrainian pilots merely a formality. The primary goal of Ukraine's summer offensive is Crimea, the root cause of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Historical involvement in Crimea includes the UK, France, and Germany, and history appears to be repeating itself.

Once Ukraine establishes air superiority, the nature of the conflict will fundamentally change. As NATO's direct involvement deepens and with ample ammunition and reinforcements alongside advanced weaponry, the Russia-Ukraine conflict is poised to enter a new phase. Currently, the only concern for the West is the attitude of the only neighboring major power on which Russia relies. Whether this country ultimately deploys troops directly into the conflict remains uncertain. If the situation escalates to this point, a world war may become difficult to avoid. 

However, this is a matter of extreme concern for the country's leadership, as authorizing military action and potentially losing control over the troops could pose a significant threat to the regime. The direction in which armed forces are pointed is not easily controlled by those in power. Moreover, with recent crackdowns and extreme shifts in domestic and foreign policies, unpredictable changes are likely to occur once hostilities begin.

 

永岡怜子

 

歐美對烏克蘭給錢給槍俄國本土隨便打不用開發票

 

歐美十幾個國家解禁了武器對俄羅斯本土攻擊的限制，美國雖然提出了一定的限制條件，實際上也已經間接放鬆了對烏克蘭使用武器的限制，幾乎與此同時烏軍利用西方先進武器，對哈爾科夫在內的俄羅斯本土進行了攻擊，俄羅斯發動的所謂“哈爾科夫攻勢”也隨之瓦解。作為北方最接近俄羅斯的第二大城市，俄羅斯利用本土集結兵力火力展開對哈爾科夫的進攻，之前由於受到使用武器的限制，烏克蘭不能利用西方武器攻擊俄羅斯本土，所以造成了防守方面的被動局勢，況且還是在彈藥補給不到位的情況下，然而現在局面完全改觀了。

 

烏軍已經從被動狀態下解放出來，開始利用西方提供的先進武器進行主動進攻。隨著F-16的進入戰場，在空優和情報方面本就不占優的俄羅斯將更加被動。利用裝甲優勢發動規模龐大的地面攻勢將被遏止，人數占優的的部隊進行局部範圍的陣地戰也將被空中力量所打擊。特別是在法國為首的北約國家已經出動地面部隊參戰的情況下，雖然現在人數很少沒有直接參加對俄作戰，但後續部隊規模將不斷增加，雖然可能初期仍會執行防禦，勤務，訓練，後勤等方面的工作，但最後直接作戰已成定局。事實上波蘭和波羅的海三國已經在準備直接參戰，俄羅斯根本沒有能力阻止西方國家的參戰。既然俄羅斯攻擊烏克蘭可以使用來自朝鮮和伊朗的武器彈藥，西方也可以以其人之道還治其人之身。

 

俄羅斯可以用來自海外的雇傭軍攻擊烏克蘭，西方也可以直接派部隊參戰。事實上西方軍隊以各種名義早就深度參與到俄烏戰爭之中。烏克蘭的夏季攻勢何時開始非常明確，就是從F-16直接到位執行作戰任務開始。現在接近百架的F-16只是前奏，後續北約的颱風，陣風，鷹獅等都會逐步到位，並且有所謂退役的西方飛行員直接參戰。按照烏克蘭現有的飛行員數量，根本不足以達到在短時間內掌控西方先進戰機作戰的程度，對烏克蘭空軍進行全面培訓太過耗時，因此最終的發展必然是北約空軍直接參戰，現在所謂的對烏克蘭飛行員的訓練也不過是走個形式而已。烏克蘭夏季攻勢的主要目標就是克裡米亞，這是俄烏戰爭爆發的真正源頭。歷史上的克裡米亞戰爭英法德都曾參與其中，現在無非是歷史的重演罷了。

 

烏克蘭在取得空中優勢後戰爭的形態將發生根本改變，隨著北約直接介入的程度不斷深入，只要有了充足的彈藥和援軍，配合先進的武器，俄烏戰爭多得發展將進入一個全新的局面。現在唯一令西方擔憂的情況是俄羅斯目前唯一可依靠的鄰近大國的態度，最終是否會發展成直接出兵參戰，如果事態發展到如此局面，那麼世界大戰也就難以避免。但是這也是該國高層極度擔憂的問題，一旦參戰出動多少軍力反在其次，直接將軍權下放軍隊並對部隊進行軍事武裝，極有可能對政權產生致命威脅。軍人武器到手後指向哪裡，並非執政者可以輕易控制。何況在近年對軍隊反復清洗打壓，內政外交背離過往走極端路線的情況下，只要戰端一開必然發生難以預料的變化。

愛德格·斯諾對自己年輕時寫的那本小紅書后悔了

 

愛德格·斯諾( Edgar Snow，1905-1972)，生於美國堪薩斯城，1928年以記者身份到中國上海，1934年1月起在燕京大學新聞系任講師，1936年6月曾秘密赴陝北革命根據地採訪，回京後，寫了《紅星照耀著中國》即《西行漫記》。建國後，斯諾曾先後三次訪問中國，為發展中美人民的友誼做出貢獻。1972年2月15日逝世於瑞士日內瓦郊區的寓所中。遵照斯諾的遺願其部分骨灰安葬在中國。1973年10月19日在北京大學舉行了安養儀式。

愛德格·斯諾，因為寫那本震撼世界的著作《西行漫記》，這本著名的《西行漫記》大大美化了中國革命，在世界上爭取了不少支持，也使得不少中國青年投奔延安。他成為「我們的美國朋友」，一度禮敬有加，斯諾曾經獲得與毛澤東一起在天安門城樓上國慶觀禮的殊遇，這段故事是中國政府大書特書，還收入語文教科書，中小學生都知道愛德格·斯諾的大名。

如果沒有1970年〜1971年的中國之行，斯諾也許就沒有晚年的悔恨。這一年，斯諾偕同他的夫人路伊絲從香港到廣州，發現「中國是一個只有一種聲音的國家」。到了北京以後，見到中國所有的人都背誦毛的語錄，每天要履行「早請示晚匯報」的政治程式，覺得這就像是一種宗教儀式。然後他去了他當年採訪毛澤東的「革命聖地」延安，參觀了「五·七幹校」，認為那裡的生活就象監獄。

這次訪華的所見所聞使這位革命的熱烈擁護者感到：「在一個地位日益顯赫的神權階層看來，所有不同意見或者補充性的思想都是異端邪說。」然後他再次回到北京，到他熟悉的北京大學參觀，聽到的介紹竟然是「北京大學在1949年以前是文化帝國主義機構」，1949年建立政權後才獲得新的生命。對這種肆意否定文化傳統的言論，斯諾感到非常吃驚。

最後他終於見到了毛澤東，毛對他大罵知識分子是資產階級，要對他們實行專政。毛還對他說「人民對領袖的個人崇拜是正當的和必不可少的。」毛澤東那句自鳴得意的話「我這個人是『和尚打傘，無法無天。』」就是這次對斯諾說的，讓他深受刺激的另一件事情，是他的一位老朋友路易·艾黎的兒子艾倫被關押的可怕遭遇。路易·艾黎參加了革命並定居。艾倫告訴斯諾，「文化革命」開始後，他就被囚禁於西北，在監獄裡，他周圍所有的人都死於毆打、飢餓和自殺，只有他想辦法逃了出來，想辦法找到周恩來，才算是保住了一條命。

這次大陸之行使斯諾深受刺激，對於當年寫《紅星照耀中國》頗感歉意。一年後，癌癥奪去了斯諾的生命。伯訥德·托馬斯根據斯諾40多年的日記整理成書出版了《冒險的歲月：愛德格·斯諾在中國》，上述內容就是該書透露的。2000年，斯諾夫人到北京，這次她想做兩件事情，一是想將斯諾的遺骨遷回美國，二是想將外國人的捐款送給某學生運動受害者家屬的團體。

結果她所到之處都有秘密員警跟蹤「保護」，行動處處受限制，當局既不准遷走斯諾的遺骨，也不准斯諾夫人與任何人接觸。斯諾夫人深感受辱，對丈夫以畢生之力支持的革命極度失望。估計她的丈夫也對自己年輕時寫的那本小紅書后悔了。

 

Arina Hashimoto 橋本ありな

 

Is Trump being prosecuted because of his old friend Abe?

 

Trump faces over 30 charges in various lawsuits, and it is highly likely that he will be convicted in the end. The so-called multiple charges actually boil down to one charge of hush money. Trump is facing over 90 lawsuits, and if they all go through the judicial process, it will be a lengthy ordeal. The notion of the verdict having political motivations is evident, and whether it is political persecution goes without saying. Whether or not a Republican candidate goes to jail has little actual impact on his re-election prospects, but it naturally limits his ability to campaign and rally support. 

Up to now, he leads significantly in polls compared to his opponents, but whether he can be re-elected depends on the actual votes. Furthermore, the electoral system in the U.S. is very outdated, with too many external factors involved. Even the ballots cast cannot truly represent the will of the people. Looking at the current situation, he and Biden are neck and neck in terms of campaign support. The issue for the Republican Party lies in the difficulty of finding a replacement for Trump, while the issue for the Democratic Party is that Biden is simply too old. 

During Trump's tenure, the trade war he initiated escalated into a confrontation with America's competitors, ultimately leading to the disintegration of globalization. While he fired the first shot against the "competitors" and quickly surrounded them in the Indo-Pacific region, this idea was originally proposed by Abe but actually implemented by Trump. Leveraging the enormous influence of the United States, he swiftly exerted pressure on competitors, but his defeat strategy did not further play out. His primary task during his tenure shifted from implementing the America First policy to stimulating the economy, gradually evolving into a comprehensive confrontation with competitors, which eventually led to the outbreak of the pandemic and his eventual downfall. 

Therefore, if he were to return to office, he would inevitably need to refocus his strategy on the competitors, aiming to quickly end the war in Ukraine and persuade Russia to join the containment camp against strong countries. With Russia pressuring from the north, the final piece of the puzzle in the Indo-Pacific region would be completed, leaving competitors surrounded on three sides by the south, north, and west, with the Pacific Ocean to the east. His final slogan of ending the rule of the opponent's ruling party was a strategy proposed for the first time since the Cold War, leading to a coalition of forces, including Wall Street, major corporate factions, left-wing media, financial technology giants, and the woke camp, uniting to push him out of office.

 

During Trump's term, the trade war he initiated evolved into a confrontation with America's competitors, eventually leading to the breakdown of globalization. While he launched the first attack against the "competitors" and quickly surrounded them in the Indo-Pacific region, this idea was originally proposed by Abe but was actually realized by Trump. Leveraging the immense influence of the United States, he swiftly exerted pressure on the competitors, but his strategy of defeat did not have a further impact. His primary task during his term shifted from implementing the America First policy to gradually developing into a comprehensive confrontation with the competitors, ultimately resulting in the outbreak of the pandemic and his eventual removal from office. 

Therefore, if he were to return to power, he would inevitably need to shift the strategic focus back to the competitors, making it crucial to swiftly end the conflict in Ukraine and persuade Russia to join the containment camp against powerful nations. With Russia applying pressure from the north, the final piece of the puzzle in the Indo-Pacific region would be completed, leaving the competitors surrounded on three sides by the south, north, and west, with the Pacific Ocean to the east. His final slogan of ending the ruling party of the opponents was a strategy proposed for the first time since the Cold War, leading to a coalition of forces, including Wall Street, major corporate factions, left-wing media, financial technology giants, and the woke camp, joining together to oust him from power. 

The United States has now contacted more than 60 countries outside of NATO to counterbalance Russia, establishing the so-called "Super NATO" system. This mechanism will naturally be applied to competitors after the end of the Russia-Ukraine war. Even from an economic perspective, abolishing globalization does not align with America's long-term interests. In fact, globalization was proposed and implemented by the United States. America does not face the issue of regaining greatness because it has never truly declined. Even if America experiences a revival, it is not about bringing manufacturing back to the U.S., especially in this era dominated by AI and high technology. The problem with competitors is that personal will overrides national interests, which is very similar to Trump's own issue. In the decades following the Cold War, peaceful development was the mainstream.

However, the Russia-Ukraine war has evolved into a comprehensive confrontation between two major camps. In such a situation, it is crucial for the U.S., as a global leader, to be led by an experienced, objective, and rational leader who can distinguish priorities and urgencies and avoid extreme measures. If Trump returns to power, his threat to the world is no less than Putin's. Judging from his recent conviction, if he continues to act recklessly, the outcome will likely be similar to Abe's.

 

 

川普菜菜子的被抓難道是他老朋友安倍安排的

 

川普被起訴30多專案罪名，並且最終很有可能被判有罪，所謂的多項罪名其實就是一條掩口費。川普面臨90多項官司，如果全部走司法程式時間上也是曠日持久，所謂判決當然包含政治目的，至於說是否是政治迫害不言而喻。作為共和黨候選人入獄與否，對於他競選連任實際上的影響不大，但是對於他競選拉票宣傳造勢自然是受到限制。直到現在為止他在民調上遠領先于對手，但是真正是否能夠再次當選還是要看選票。況且美國的選舉制度非常落後，涉及的場外因素太多，即便是開出來的選票也不能代表真正的民意。從現在的局勢看他和拜登在競選支持率上也難分伯仲。共和黨的問題是難於找到川普的替代者，民主黨的問題是拜登實在太老。

 

川普任內發動貿易戰演變成與美國競爭對手的對抗，最後導致了全球化的分崩離析，雖然他打響了與“競爭對手抗衡”的第一槍，而且在短時間內組成了印太戰略區包圍競爭者，此一想法雖然是安倍提出，但真正實現的則是川普，他利用美國的巨大影響力，在極短的時間內完成了對競爭對手的打壓，但是由於他的落選戰略圈沒有進一步發揮作用。他任內的最大任務從實施刺激經濟下的美國優先政策，逐漸發展成貿易戰與競爭對手全面對抗，最後導致了疫情的發生他最終下臺。所以，他如果重新上臺後必然要將戰略重心轉移到對手身上，如此儘快結束烏克蘭戰爭爭取俄羅斯加入圍堵強國的陣營就極為重要了。只要俄羅斯在北方施壓印太戰略區的最終拼圖將會完成，競爭對手從南北西三面被包圍，東面則是太平洋。他最後提出的口號是結束對手執政黨的統治，這是美國冷戰以後首次提出的戰略，如此導致了對手聯合美國的背後勢力，包括華爾街，大企業財團，左派媒體，金融科技巨頭，白左陣營等等，聯合起來將他搞下臺。

 

如果川普一意孤行正如他最近又大放厥詞，稱要轟炸對手發動斬首行動之類，從安倍的下場就可以看到川普最後的結局。歐美的力量目前正在全力對付俄羅斯，這是重中之重不能動搖，競爭對手是徹底解決普京後的選項，而不是將戰爭數年來取得的成果拋之腦後，將重啟的北約機制停擺讓俄國從現在的被逐步消耗中得以逃脫，如此整個歐洲也不會答應。從川普最近的瘋狂言論可以看出，他根本談不上所謂的政治智慧，完全是個人意志下的任何妄為而已。他在任內已經完成了自己的歷史使命，至於對競爭對手的打壓將由未來的繼任者完成，現在美國最重要的是延續拜登政府的對俄政策，將好不容易重新確立的幾乎遭到廢除的北約機制強化，全力徹底解決俄羅斯問題取得歐洲的最終安全，然後才能集中精力對付競爭對手。

 

現在美國已經聯絡了北約以外總共60多個國家抗衡俄羅斯，建立了所謂的“超北約”體系，這套機制在俄烏戰爭結束後會很自然地套用到競爭對手上。即便從經濟角度上看廢除全球化也不符合美國的長遠利益，事實上全球化就是美國提出並且實施的，美國不存在再次偉大的問題，因為從未真正衰落過。即便美國再次復興也談不上製造業回歸美國，何況現在是AI主導的高科技領導世界的時代。競爭對手的問題是個人意志淩駕於國家，這與川普自身的問題非常相似。冷戰後的幾十年基本上是和平發展是主流，現在通過俄烏戰爭發展成兩大陣營的全面對抗。越是這種情況越需要作為全世界領導者的美國，由一個經驗豐富客觀理性的領導者來操控國家，至少能夠分清楚輕重緩急，而不是採取極端過激手段。如果川普再次上臺對世界的威脅不亞於普京，就從這次他被判有罪來看，如果他仍然一意孤行，最後的結果也會和安倍別無二致。

藤森里穂

 

After Putin received the cash He stopped the attack in Kharkiv immediately

 

Putin's visit to allied countries has secured promises of continued assistance, leading to a halt in the offensive in Kharkiv. With the funds secured, there is no need to send troops into the enemy's firing line, as they have already prepared their ammunition. The military aid from the USA is not mobilized domestically; in fact, it has been prepared in NATO armories in Europe, with most equipment directly sourced from various European countries. As long as the funding is in place, the USA can provide the support.

Currently, both sides in the Russia-Ukraine war are at a stalemate. Although President Putin has hinted at negotiations recently, it is widely known that neither side is willing to give up their occupied territories, rendering any talks futile.

Ukraine hopes to obtain permission to use Western weapons to attack Russia's mainland, with the main aim of targeting more vital strategic objectives. Ukraine has been successful in using drones to attack Russia's oil facilities and military targets, causing significant damage to their energy infrastructure and air defenses. Historically, most of Ukraine's requests have been met by the West after some maneuvering. With France already representing NATO forces, the use of Western weapons to attack Russia is a logical progression, blurring the lines between domestic and overseas operations. The anticipated involvement of the F-16 fighter jets is eagerly awaited, as having these advanced aircraft in play will negate Russia's precarious air superiority and ground forces advantage, shifting the dynamics of the conflict.

Although the number of F-16 fighter jets is currently limited, more are expected to be deployed over time. In addition to the F-16s gifted by Denmark and the Netherlands, Belgium is also set to provide 30 fighter jets to Ukraine. Future NATO European member countries are planning to supply their active F-16s to Ukraine, as these aircraft are slated for retirement to make way for more advanced F-35s. Despite being older models, these refurbished aircraft will easily counter the Russian Air Force. Furthermore, Sweden is set to provide Ukraine with their JAS-39 Gripen, with follow-up aircraft such as the Typhoon and Rafale joining the effort. This shift will move the Russia-Ukraine conflict from ground-based to aerial combat, potentially reshaping the balance of power in favor of Ukraine.

Objectively, Ukraine has become a testing ground and furnace for Western weapons, with almost all obsolete NATO weapons finding their way into the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Both sides are utilizing Cold War-era stockpiles, with Ukraine fielding a diverse array of equipment. Although Ukraine has a strong history in weapon development dating back to the Soviet era, their innovative use of drone tactics in this conflict has proven effective against the robust Russian military. Currently, Ukrainian forces are considered the most combat-ready and well-equipped in Europe. In contrast, Russia has suffered significant losses in military capabilities during the war, with their combat effectiveness being questioned internationally. Many of Russia's flagship weapons systems, heavily promoted for export, have proven ineffective or even unsafe in actual combat scenarios.

Currently, the Russian military is resorting to attrition warfare through ground-based tactics, leveraging their numerical and equipment advantage against Ukraine. However, this strategy will need to adapt once Ukraine gains air superiority. The possibility of Russia resorting to tactical nuclear weapons cannot be dismissed, potentially leading to Western tactical nuclear weapons entering Ukraine. Simultaneously, the West may launch decapitation strikes against Putin, effectively ending the war. With NATO's eastward expansion aided by Putin's efforts, the past concern of strategic missile defense systems threatening Russia's security is no longer relevant. If tactical nuclear weapons are employed, it would spell disaster for Russia. Even in a scenario of a nuclear war, not all of Europe and the USA would be obliterated, with the target being Russia alone, lacking Russia's so-called strategic missile defense system.

Another destabilizing factor is the potential intervention of Trump if he comes to power, as strong involvement in the Russia-Ukraine conflict would likely lead to a fate similar to the Czech Prime Minister, who faced five bullets prematurely ending his political career. There is also a risk of direct military intervention from Russia's allies such as North Korea, Iran, or others. While Iran's military might is insufficient to counter Israel, North Korea is the most likely candidate to deploy troops, with the West unconcerned. North Korea's military capabilities, while posing a threat to South Korea on the peninsula, would be better utilized in the Ukraine conflict for attrition. The key lies in observing the involvement of a certain country with a history of military intervention, although any deployment would not be advantageous. While participation in the conflict cannot be measured in terms of rationality, sending troops would mean direct opposition to the West, akin to how the West targeted Suleimani in response to Iran's actions.