----- Forwarded Message -----                 From: le>To: "Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 03:19:40 AM CDTSubject: 拜登將放棄澤倫斯基停止戰事與普京妥協全力對付中國？Re: 帝國主義殖民集團將與普京和解以烏克蘭割地籠絡俄羅斯籍此擴大北約一同對付中國 – 從紐約時報五月十九日的一篇重要社論說起
                 

拜登將放棄澤倫斯基停止戰事與普京妥協全力對付中國？

李良書簡 04-29-2023

帝國集團在美代理人拜登不看好澤倫斯基,將在五月後停止烏克蘭戰事而與普京妥協，從此全力對付中國？

下附“Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive ”一文，於以上的結論有甚為詳盡之分析，頗值關心此事的朋友們一讀。若然，則2022年5月19日之紐約時報社論 “The War in Ukraine Is Getting Complicated, and America Isn’t Ready ， https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/19/opinion/america-ukraine-war-support.html ”作者的主張勝出。

問題是，“Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive ”一文的主要論據，是采自最近一位21歲美國大兵提供的機密文件，真真假假，其中或有作為欺敵之謠戰成分而故意泄漏者，是以上述的結論僅是多樣變化中之一而已。

------------------------------------------------------------------

Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive

Behind closed doors, the administration worries about what Ukraine can accomplish.

A Ukrainian army soldier stands guard at the war damaged Irpinsky  Lipky residential complex following the visit of United Nations  Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on April 28, 2022 in Irpin, Ukraine. |  John Moore/Getty Images

By Jonathan Lemire and Alexander Ward

Updated: 04/24/2023 11:14 AM EDT

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/24/biden-ukraine-russia-counteroffensive-defense-00093384

The Biden administration is quietly preparing for the possibility  that if Ukraine’s spring counteroffensive falls short of expectations,  critics at home and allies abroad will argue that America has come up  short, too.

Ukraine’s  ever-imminent counteroffensive will attempt to retake Russian-seized  territory most likely in the east and south, though for operational  reasons no senior officials from Kyiv have detailed specifics.

Publicly,  President Joe Biden’s team has offered unwavering support for Ukraine,  pledging to load it up with weapons and economic aid for “as long as it  takes.” But, if the impending fighting season yields limited gains,  administration officials have expressed privately they fear being faced  with a two-headed monster attacking it from the hawkish and dovish ends  of the spectrum.

One side will say that Ukraine’s advances would’ve worked had the  administration given Kyiv everything it asked for, namely longer-range  missiles, fighter jets and more air defenses. The other side,  administration officials worry, will claim Ukraine’s shortcoming proves  it can’t force Russia out of its territory completely.

That  doesn’t even account for the reaction of America’s allies, mainly in  Europe, who may see a peace negotiation between Ukraine and Russia as a  more attractive option if Kyiv can’t prove victory is around the corner.

Inside the administration, officials stress they’re doing everything possible to make the spring offensive succeed.

“We’ve  nearly completed the requests of what [Ukraine] said they needed for  the counteroffensive as we have surged weapons and equipment to Ukraine  over the past few months,” said one administration official who, like  others, was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive internal  considerations.

But belief in the strategic cause is one thing. Belief in the  tactics is another — and behind closed doors the administration is  worried about what Ukraine can accomplish.

Those concerns recently spilled out into the open during a leak of classified information onto social media. A top secret assessment from early February  stated that Ukraine would fall “well short” of its counteroffensive  goals. More current American assessments are that Ukraine may make some  progress in the south and east, but won’t be able to repeat last year’s  success.

'Not a game': Pentagon leak sparks bipartisan fury

Ukraine has hoped to sever Russia’s land bridge to Crimea and U.S.  officials are now skeptical that will happen, according to two  administration officials familiar with the assessment. But there are  still hopes in the Pentagon that Ukraine will hamper Russia’s supply  lines there, even if a total victory over Russia’s newly fortified  troops ends up too difficult to achieve.

Moreover, U.S. intelligence indicates that Ukraine simply does not  have the ability to push Russian troops from where they were deeply  entrenched — and a similar feeling has taken hold about the battlefield  elsewhere in Ukraine, according to officials. Ukrainian President  Volodymyr Zelenskyy says the U.S. hasn’t adequately armed his forces  properly and so, until then, the counteroffensive can’t begin.

There  is belief that Kyiv is willing to consider adjusting its goals,  according to American officials, and a more modest aim might be easier  to be sold as a win.

There  has been discussion, per aides, of framing it to the Ukrainians as a  “ceasefire” and not as permanent peace talks, leaving the door open for  Ukraine to regain more of its territory at a future date. Incentives  would have to be given to Kyiv: perhaps NATO-like security guarantees,  economic help from the European Union, more military aid to replenish  and bolster Ukraine’s forces, and the like. And aides have expressed  hope of re-engaging China to push Putin to the negotiating table as  well.

But that would still lead to the dilemma of what happens next, and how harshly domestic critics respond.

“If the counteroffensive does not go well, the administration has  only itself to blame for withholding certain types of arms and aid at  the time when it was most needed,” said Kurt Volker, the special envoy  for Ukraine during the Trump administration.

A  counteroffensive that doesn’t meet expectations will also cause allies  in foreign capitals to question how much more they can spare if Kyiv’s  victory looks farther and farther away.

“European public support may wane over time as European energy and  economic costs stay high,” said Clementine Starling, a director and  fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington, D.C. “A  fracturing of transatlantic support will likely hurt U.S. domestic  support and Congress and the Biden administration may struggle to  sustain it.”

Austin: Abrams tanks will arrive ‘in the next few weeks’

Many European nations could also push Kyiv to bring the fighting to  an end. “A poor counteroffensive will spark further questions about  what an outcome to the war will look like, and the extent to which a  solution can really be achieved by continuing to send military arms and  aid alone,” Starling said.

Biden and his top aides have publicly stressed that Zelenskyy  should only begin peace talks when he is ready. But Washington has also  communicated to Kyiv some political realities: at some point, especially  with Republicans in control of the House of Representatives, the pace  of U.S. aid will likely slow. Officials in Washington, though not  pressing Kyiv, have begun preparing for what those conversations could  look like and understand it may be a tough political sell at home for  Zelenskyy.

“If  Ukraine can’t gain dramatically on the battlefield, the question  inevitably arises as to whether it is time for a negotiated stop to the  fighting,” said Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign  Relations. “It’s expensive, we’re running low on munitions, we’ve got  other contingencies around the world to prepare for.”

“It’s legitimate to ask all these questions without compromising Ukraine’s goals. It’s simply a question of means,” Haass said.

Earlier this month, Andriy Sybiha, a deputy head in Zelenskyy’s office, told the Financial Times that Ukraine would be willing to talk if its forces reach Crimea’s doorstep.  “If we will succeed in achieving our strategic goals on the battlefield  and when we will be on the administrative border with Crimea, we are  ready to open [a] diplomatic page to discuss this issue,” he said.

That comment was quickly rebuffed by Tamila Tasheva,  Zelenskyy’s Crimea envoy: “If Russia won’t voluntarily leave the  peninsula, Ukraine will continue to liberate its land by military  means,” she told POLITICO earlier this month.

It doesn’t help America’s confidence that the war has slowed to a brutal slog.

Both  sides have traded punishing blows, focused on small cities like  Bakhmut, with neither force able to fully dislodge the other. The  Russian surge ordered up earlier this year, meant to revitalize Moscow’s  struggling war effort, seized little territory at the cost of  significant casualties and did not do much to change the overall  trajectory of the conflict.

------ Original Message ------
Received: Sun, 22 May 2022 01:00:05 AM CDT
From: ">
To:
Subject: 帝國主義殖民集團將與普京和解以烏克蘭割地籠絡俄羅斯籍此擴大北約一同對付中國 – 從紐約時報五月十九日的一篇重要社論說起
                                     

帝國主義殖民集團將與普京和解以烏克蘭割地籠絡俄羅斯籍此擴大北約一同對付中國 – 從紐約時報五月十九日的一篇重要社論說起            

李良書簡 05-22-2022            

帝國主義殖民集團透過其旗下的一個重要宣傳口 - 紐約時報，於五月十九日發布了一篇以“烏克蘭戰爭越來越複雜，美國還沒有準備好（The War in Ukraine Is Getting Complicated, and America Isn’t Ready，https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/19/opinion/america-ukraine-war-support.html）”為名的重要社論，為當前歐洲的俄烏問題向帝國集團在美的代理人拜登政權傳遞指令，帶起節奏，為未來的世界格局定調。此社論似乎未為大家所注意，有在此一言的必要。            

結論先說：此社論的目的是帝國主義殖民集團中央向美國代理人拜登政權表達了其與普京和解，以烏克蘭割地來終結俄烏之爭，統合歐洲各國，抹平歐洲內部糾紛；功力了得，是一篇上乘之作。估計其最終目的是要結合俄羅斯，然後北約（NATO，North Atlantic Treaty Organization）擴大為包括俄羅斯在內的環球約（GTO，Global Treaty Organization），成為360度的O型包圍圈，無縫圍堵與肢解中國。            

這篇社論的結尾數段，寫得非常精緻而委婉，用具有說服性的語言，表達了此一意願，羅列如下（中譯文見後），大家仔細看：            

“。。。it  is still not in America’s best interest to plunge into an all-out war  with Russia, even if a negotiated peace may require Ukraine to make some  hard decisions. And the U.S. aims and strategy in this war have become  harder to discern, as the parameters of the mission appear to have  changed.          

Is  the United States, for example, trying to help bring an end to this  conflict, through a settlement that would allow for a sovereign Ukraine  and some kind of relationship between the United States and Russia? Or  is the United States now trying to weaken Russia permanently? Has the  administration’s goal shifted to destabilizing Vladimir Putin or having  him removed? Does the United States intend to hold Mr. Putin accountable  as a war criminal? Or is the goal to try to avoid a wider war — and if  so, how does crowing about providing U.S. intelligence to kill Russians  and sink one of their ships achieve this?          

Without  clarity on these questions, the White House not only risks losing  Americans’ interest in supporting Ukrainians — who continue to suffer  the loss of lives and livelihoods — but also jeopardizes long-term peace and security on the European continent.          

Americans  have been galvanized by Ukraine’s suffering, but popular support for a  war far from U.S. shores will not continue indefinitely. Inflation is a  much bigger issue for American voters than Ukraine, and the disruptions  to global food and energy markets are likely to intensify.          

The  current moment is a messy one in this conflict, which may explain  President Biden and his cabinet’s reluctance to put down clear goal  posts. All the more reason, then, for Mr. Biden to make the case to  American voters, well before November, that support for Ukraine means  support for democratic values and the right of countries to defend  themselves against aggression — while peace and security remain the  ideal outcome in this war.          

（與俄羅斯全面開戰仍然不符合美國的最佳利益，即使談判和平可能需要烏克蘭做出一些艱難的決定。隨着任務的參數似乎發生了變化，美國在這場戰爭中的目標和戰略變得更加難以辨別。            
         

例如，美國是否試圖通過解決烏克蘭主權以及美俄之間某種關係的解決方案來幫助結束這場衝突？還是美國現在正試圖永久削弱俄羅斯？政府的目標是否已轉向破壞弗拉基米爾·普京的穩定或讓他下台？美國是否打算追究普京先生作為戰犯的責任？或者是試圖避免一場更廣泛的戰爭的目標——如果是這樣，那麼提供美國情報以殺死俄羅斯人並擊沉他們的一艘船是如何實現這一目標的？            
         

如果不明確這些問題，白宮不僅有可能失去美國人支持烏克蘭人的興趣——他們繼續遭受生命和生計的損失——而且還會危及歐洲大陸的長期和平與安全。            
         

美國人對烏克蘭的苦難起了激情，但民眾對遠離美國海岸的戰爭的支持不會無限期地持續下去。於美國選民來說，通貨膨脹是比烏克蘭更大的問題，對全球食品和能源市場的破壞可能會加劇。            
         

目前在這場衝突中處於混亂狀態，這或許可以解釋拜登總統及其內閣不願設立明確的目標職位。那麼，拜登先生更有理由在 11 月之前向美國選民表明，對烏克蘭的支持意味着對民主價值觀和各國自衛免受侵略的權利的支持——而和平與安全仍然是理想的這場戰爭的結果。）“          

以上這幾段話是自明的，重點在“與俄羅斯全面開戰仍然不符合美國的最佳利益，即使談判和平可能需要烏克蘭做出一些艱難的決定“此句，而末尾更引出十一月的美國選舉來挾持帝國在美代理人之一的拜登政權，真有畫龍點睛之妙。            

此文沒有說出口的，李良在這給它補全。此次俄烏兩造經歷了為時三個月的戰事，俄羅斯的底牌已被帝國集團徹底摸清，認為其不足為帝國患，若果稍施恩惠，以割讓部分烏克蘭土地為餌（反正跟俄羅斯一樣，本來就是從前蘇聯領土），則俄羅斯必然順服，而其能源與礦產更能為帝國集團所利用，並以此為槓桿，統合和抹平歐洲內部各國的糾紛，並得以網羅屬於羅俄羅斯勢力範圍的中亞五國，讓北約（NATO，North Atlantic Treaty Organization）東擴經由中亞，南亞印度，再到達西太平洋的東南亞各國和日韓，成為環球約（GTO，Global Treaty Organization），將原來的印太C型包圍圈進階為O型包圍圈，自東南西北360度來無縫圍堵與肢解既定的帝國第一敵人中國；這跟目前以無底洞式的金錢援助烏克蘭，落得一個分崩離析的歐洲，進而動搖北約的根本相比，比打七傷拳還要蠢蠢，兩相比較，實有天淵之別！            

那麼，普京跟俄羅斯會不會就範呢？            

李良認為有七成的概率可能會。原因是，俄烏戰起，普京本來認為既然跟習近平在今年二月份冬奧後簽了那個“不封頂無上限合作“的協議，進軍烏克蘭必然會得到北京方面的聲援，即使不是軍事上的輸送，口頭上的聲援不會少，譬如習近平訪問莫斯科之類的舉手之勞。哪裡想得到習近平如此弱勢，竟會被帝國集團第五縱隊安置在中國的鄧小平特遣支隊所死死按住，動彈不得，以至於食言而肥。這段因果，還得稍稍道來，作為補充。            

習近平跟普京的“不封頂無上限合作”協議簽於2022年二月四日（https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/zyxw/202202/t20220204_10638957.shtml）。其實，早於一年前的2001年一月二日，中國外交部長王毅就已發出“中俄戰略合作沒有止境，沒有禁區，沒有上限”的聲明，當時王毅是這麼說的：            

“2021年對中俄關係是有特殊意義的一年，兩國都將邁入新的發展階段。中俄戰略合作沒有止境，沒有禁區，沒有上限。雙方將以落實兩國元首共識為核心任務，以共同慶祝《中俄睦鄰友好合作條約》簽署20周年為契機，重溫世代友好、合作共贏的締約初心，堅持互為戰略依託，互為外交優先，互為發展機遇，互為全球夥伴，在更高起點、更大範圍、更深層次上推進雙方合作，繼續為大國睦鄰友好作出中俄表率，為世界經濟復甦注入中俄動力，為全球戰略穩定打造中俄支柱。”（http://www.xinhuanet.com/2021-01/02/c_1126937927.htm）            

俄羅斯總統普京今年2月4日赴華出席北京冬奧會開幕式，並與中國國家主席習近平舉行會談。他是國際上極少數親自出席北京冬奧開幕式的大國最高領導人之一。中俄事後發表聯合聲明，強調兩國“友好沒有止境，合作沒有禁區”。中國副外長樂玉成當時還評價，中俄關係“上不封頂”，不斷攀登新高。（https://www.zaobao.com.sg/realtime/china/story20220325-1256051 ）            

2022年2月4日，中俄雙方的正式簽署以文字表述的協約，基本上落實了習近平關於跟俄羅斯作為戰略夥伴的意願；簽約之事，是為時至少一年前習近平的意旨拍案定調。            

因被帝國主義殖民集團旗下的北約東擴所迫，為了國家的生存，2月24日普京毅然以  “使烏克蘭非軍事化和去納粹化” 為名，進軍烏克蘭。戰事伊始，二十萬大軍卻兵分四路進入烏東，烏西，烏南，與烏北；兵力分散，犯了孫子兵法上  “十則圍之，五則攻之”  的大忌，且自綁手腳，困於有烏克蘭人民參與烏軍行動而不能果斷進行飽和式的火力攻擊的宋襄公之仁，加上戰線延長以致補給難為。於是整個戰事踟躕不前，一開始烏西已逞敗像，烏東烏北烏南則陷入苦戰；僅一個烏南的馬里烏波爾鋼鐵廠，因為礙於亞述營挾持平民在內，綁手綁腳（其實效法當年秦將白起水灌大梁的故技，將亞述海水pump入，一彈不發，一天就解決了），打了三個月還沒能攻下，直到本月21日由於烏軍在廠內彈盡糧絕，出廠投降，才能結束；此期間俄軍損兵折將，焦頭爛額，俄軍，已不復有當年二戰時期的意氣了。            

在此期間，如果北京方面即時出面，向全世界宣稱中國無條件支持俄羅斯的正義鬥爭，並以習近平普京的二月協議為基礎，自軍事與物資兩面出手援助，中俄聯手，以此攻城，何城不克？情況立馬可以逆轉。但事與願違，習近平受到帝國集團第五縱隊安置在中國的鄧小平特遣支隊所阻，以致跟普京所簽下的不封頂協約形同廢紙。透過這個帝國集團第五縱隊安置在中國的鄧小平特遣支隊，北京還有意無意之間，配合帝國對俄羅斯在金融上的制裁。習近平不但被這個鄧小平特遣支隊所掣肘，還被透過其走卒駐美大使秦剛，公開聲稱於無上限之下須“有底線”（https://www.zaobao.com.sg/realtime/china/story20220325-1256051 ），此底線即是要尊重各國領土主權完整的聯合國憲章。秦剛此舉，無非是要讓習-普的二月不封頂協議見光死，非常狠毒。但秦剛也是個奉命而為的可憐蟲，就此帶過，可從帝國集團過去的歷史來看，帝國的的個各國代理人前後屠伊拉克，兵臨阿富汗，戮利比亞，毀敘利亞，從來有理會過這“聯合國憲章“並把它當回事嗎？秦剛這個帝國集團第五縱隊安置在中國的鄧小平特遣支隊手下的走狗，無非是欲加之罪，何患無辭，不能不要貫徹帝國殖民集團的意志來搗毀哪個可能會是中國復興途徑之一的習-普協議而已。          

於是習近平只能望這個“不封頂協約“而興嘆，還被迫跟帝國的美國代理人總統拜登和英國的代理人首相約翰孫通話交心表態，明確表達反俄烏之戰的立場，強調了“國際社會應真正勸和促談，為政治解決烏克蘭問題創造條件，推動烏克蘭早日回歸和平”（http://www.kzaobao.com/shiju/20220326/113458.html ）；於是插頭被拔，普京無望。這幾天來普京借其手下將領，學者，或媒體之口，頻頻表達一些關於俄烏戰事的灰色論調，不為無因，無非是想找機會就坡下驢而已。          

種種跡象，說白了，就是帝國集團通過其第五縱隊安置在中國的鄧小平特遣支隊，間接地撕毀了習-普的二月協議，給普京倒冷水，並否定了中俄之間可以作為戰略夥伴的可能，去了心腹的大患。          

在普京一方而言，至少是認為在為習近平辦的冬奧捧場之後簽訂，且又相互信誓旦旦的不封頂協議已被無情地背叛，被北京過河拆橋，其內心哪能不因此而悲憤？所以其後如果帝國殖民集團稍示恩惠，在普京疲兵之餘，壓下烏克蘭政府，越俎代庖，答允不挑戰俄羅斯在烏東已控土地的主權，並以共同肢解中國得利後分享等為條件，來引誘俄羅斯加入擴大後的北約（NATO）或環球約（GTO），普京或任何俄羅斯的後繼領導人，大利當前，加上對北京背叛的怨懟，豈有不加盟之理？若然，則在O型圍堵下，孤家寡人的中國，未來將伊於胡底？李良為中國人民悲。          

帝國主義殖民集團一石數鳥，既以北約東擴威脅俄羅斯的生存為套，迫使普京無法不出兵烏克蘭，再以制裁為名以及透過其第五縱隊派駐中國的鄧小平特遣支隊取消了習-普的讓中俄聯手的二月協議，完美地離間和孤立了中俄兩國，於普京急於解脫困境之時，趁機網羅利誘俄羅斯加入北約擴大後的環球約，為己所用，看來天衣無縫，不是嗎？

轉載