----- Forwarded Message -----                 From: le>To: "Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 03:19:40 AM CDTSubject: 拜登将放弃泽伦斯基停止战事与普京妥协全力对付中国？Re: 帝国主义殖民集团将与普京和解以乌克兰割地笼络俄罗斯籍此扩大北约一同对付中国 – 从纽约时报五月十九日的一篇重要社论说起
                 

拜登将放弃泽伦斯基停止战事与普京妥协全力对付中国？

李良书简 04-29-2023

帝国集团在美代理人拜登不看好泽伦斯基,将在五月后停止乌克兰战事而与普京妥协，从此全力对付中国？

下附“Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive ”一文，於以上的结论有甚为详尽之分析，颇值关心此事的朋友们一读。若然，则2022年5月19日之纽约时报社论 “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 ”作者的主张胜出。

问题是，“Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive ”一文的主要论据，是采自最近一位21岁美国大兵提供的机密文件，真真假假，其中或有作为欺敌之谣战成分而故意泄漏者，是以上述的结论仅是多样变化中之一而已。

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

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: 帝国主义殖民集团将与普京和解以乌克兰割地笼络俄罗斯籍此扩大北约一同对付中国 – 从纽约时报五月十九日的一篇重要社论说起
                                     

帝国主义殖民集团将与普京和解以乌克兰割地笼络俄罗斯籍此扩大北约一同对付中国 – 从纽约时报五月十九日的一篇重要社论说起            

李良书简 05-22-2022            

帝国主义殖民集团透过其旗下的一个重要宣传口 - 纽约时报，于五月十九日发布了一篇以“乌克兰战争越来越复杂，美国还没有准备好（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）”为名的重要社论，为当前欧洲的俄乌问题向帝国集团在美的代理人拜登政权传递指令，带起节奏，为未来的世界格局定调。此社论似乎未为大家所注意，有在此一言的必要。            

结论先说：此社论的目的是帝国主义殖民集团中央向美国代理人拜登政权表达了其与普京和解，以乌克兰割地来终结俄乌之争，统合欧洲各国，抹平欧洲内部纠纷；功力了得，是一篇上乘之作。估计其最终目的是要结合俄罗斯，然后北约（NATO，North Atlantic Treaty Organization）扩大为包括俄罗斯在内的环球约（GTO，Global Treaty Organization），成为360度的O型包围圈，无缝围堵与肢解中国。            

这篇社论的结尾数段，写得非常精致而委婉，用具有说服性的语言，表达了此一意愿，罗列如下（中译文见后），大家仔细看：            

“。。。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.          

（与俄罗斯全面开战仍然不符合美国的最佳利益，即使谈判和平可能需要乌克兰做出一些艰难的决定。随着任务的参数似乎发生了变化，美国在这场战争中的目标和战略变得更加难以辨别。            
         

例如，美国是否试图通过解决乌克兰主权以及美俄之间某种关系的解决方案来帮助结束这场冲突？还是美国现在正试图永久削弱俄罗斯？政府的目标是否已转向破坏弗拉基米尔·普京的稳定或让他下台？美国是否打算追究普京先生作为战犯的责任？或者是试图避免一场更广泛的战争的目标——如果是这样，那么提供美国情报以杀死俄罗斯人并击沉他们的一艘船是如何实现这一目标的？            
         

如果不明确这些问题，白宫不仅有可能失去美国人支持乌克兰人的兴趣——他们继续遭受生命和生计的损失——而且还会危及欧洲大陆的长期和平与安全。            
         

美国人对乌克兰的苦难起了激情，但民众对远离美国海岸的战争的支持不会无限期地持续下去。于美国选民来说，通货膨胀是比乌克兰更大的问题，对全球食品和能源市场的破坏可能会加剧。            
         

目前在这场冲突中处于混乱状态，这或许可以解释拜登总统及其内阁不愿设立明确的目标职位。那么，拜登先生更有理由在 11 月之前向美国选民表明，对乌克兰的支持意味着对民主价值观和各国自卫免受侵略的权利的支持——而和平与安全仍然是理想的这场战争的结果。）“          

以上这几段话是自明的，重点在“与俄罗斯全面开战仍然不符合美国的最佳利益，即使谈判和平可能需要乌克兰做出一些艰难的决定“此句，而末尾更引出十一月的美国选举来挟持帝国在美代理人之一的拜登政权，真有画龙点睛之妙。            

此文没有说出口的，李良在这给它补全。此次俄乌两造经历了为时三个月的战事，俄罗斯的底牌已被帝国集团彻底摸清，认为其不足为帝国患，若果稍施恩惠，以割让部分乌克兰土地为饵（反正跟俄罗斯一样，本来就是从前苏联领土），则俄罗斯必然顺服，而其能源与矿产更能为帝国集团所利用，并以此为杠杆，统合和抹平欧洲内部各国的纠纷，并得以网罗属于罗俄罗斯势力范围的中亚五国，让北约（NATO，North Atlantic Treaty Organization）东扩经由中亚，南亚印度，再到达西太平洋的东南亚各国和日韩，成为环球约（GTO，Global Treaty Organization），将原来的印太C型包围圈进阶为O型包围圈，自东南西北360度来无缝围堵与肢解既定的帝国第一敌人中国；这跟目前以无底洞式的金钱援助乌克兰，落得一个分崩离析的欧洲，进而动摇北约的根本相比，比打七伤拳还要蠢蠢，两相比较，实有天渊之别！            

那么，普京跟俄罗斯会不会就范呢？            

李良认为有七成的概率可能会。原因是，俄乌战起，普京本来认为既然跟习近平在今年二月份冬奥后签了那个“不封顶无上限合作“的协议，进军乌克兰必然会得到北京方面的声援，即使不是军事上的输送，口头上的声援不会少，譬如习近平访问莫斯科之类的举手之劳。哪里想得到习近平如此弱势，竟会被帝国集团第五纵队安置在中国的邓小平特遣支队所死死按住，动弹不得，以至于食言而肥。这段因果，还得稍稍道来，作为补充。            

习近平跟普京的“不封顶无上限合作”协议签于2022年二月四日（https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/zyxw/202202/t20220204_10638957.shtml）。其实，早于一年前的2001年一月二日，中国外交部长王毅就已发出“中俄战略合作没有止境，没有禁区，没有上限”的声明，当时王毅是这么说的：            

“2021年对中俄关系是有特殊意义的一年，两国都将迈入新的发展阶段。中俄战略合作没有止境，没有禁区，没有上限。双方将以落实两国元首共识为核心任务，以共同庆祝《中俄睦邻友好合作条约》签署20周年为契机，重温世代友好、合作共赢的缔约初心，坚持互为战略依托，互为外交优先，互为发展机遇，互为全球伙伴，在更高起点、更大范围、更深层次上推进双方合作，继续为大国睦邻友好作出中俄表率，为世界经济复苏注入中俄动力，为全球战略稳定打造中俄支柱。”（http://www.xinhuanet.com/2021-01/02/c_1126937927.htm）            

俄罗斯总统普京今年2月4日赴华出席北京冬奥会开幕式，并与中国国家主席习近平举行会谈。他是国际上极少数亲自出席北京冬奥开幕式的大国最高领导人之一。中俄事后发表联合声明，强调两国“友好没有止境，合作没有禁区”。中国副外长乐玉成当时还评价，中俄关系“上不封顶”，不断攀登新高。（https://www.zaobao.com.sg/realtime/china/story20220325-1256051 ）            

2022年2月4日，中俄双方的正式签署以文字表述的协约，基本上落实了习近平关于跟俄罗斯作为战略伙伴的意愿；签约之事，是为时至少一年前习近平的意旨拍案定调。            

因被帝国主义殖民集团旗下的北约东扩所迫，为了国家的生存，2月24日普京毅然以  “使乌克兰非军事化和去纳粹化” 为名，进军乌克兰。战事伊始，二十万大军却兵分四路进入乌东，乌西，乌南，与乌北；兵力分散，犯了孙子兵法上  “十则围之，五则攻之”  的大忌，且自绑手脚，困于有乌克兰人民参与乌军行动而不能果断进行饱和式的火力攻击的宋襄公之仁，加上战线延长以致补给难为。於是整个战事踟蹰不前，一开始乌西已逞败像，乌东乌北乌南则陷入苦战；仅一个乌南的马里乌波尔钢铁厂，因为碍于亚述营挟持平民在内，绑手绑脚（其实效法当年秦将白起水灌大梁的故技，将亚述海水pump入，一弹不发，一天就解决了），打了三个月还没能攻下，直到本月21日由于乌军在厂内弹尽粮绝，出厂投降，才能结束；此期间俄军损兵折将，焦头烂额，俄军，已不复有当年二战时期的意气了。            

在此期间，如果北京方面即时出面，向全世界宣称中国无条件支持俄罗斯的正义斗争，并以习近平普京的二月协议为基础，自军事与物资两面出手援助，中俄联手，以此攻城，何城不克？情况立马可以逆转。但事与愿违，习近平受到帝国集团第五纵队安置在中国的邓小平特遣支队所阻，以致跟普京所签下的不封顶协约形同废纸。透过这个帝国集团第五纵队安置在中国的邓小平特遣支队，北京还有意无意之间，配合帝国对俄罗斯在金融上的制裁。习近平不但被这个邓小平特遣支队所掣肘，还被透过其走卒驻美大使秦刚，公开声称于无上限之下须“有底线”（https://www.zaobao.com.sg/realtime/china/story20220325-1256051 ），此底线即是要尊重各国领土主权完整的联合国宪章。秦刚此举，无非是要让习-普的二月不封顶协议见光死，非常狠毒。但秦刚也是个奉命而为的可怜虫，就此带过，可从帝国集团过去的历史来看，帝国的的个各国代理人前后屠伊拉克，兵临阿富汗，戮利比亚，毁叙利亚，从来有理会过这“联合国宪章“并把它当回事吗？秦刚这个帝国集团第五纵队安置在中国的邓小平特遣支队手下的走狗，无非是欲加之罪，何患无辞，不能不要贯彻帝国殖民集团的意志来捣毁哪个可能会是中国复兴途径之一的习-普协议而已。          

於是习近平只能望这个“不封顶协约“而兴叹，还被迫跟帝国的美国代理人总统拜登和英国的代理人首相约翰孙通话交心表态，明确表达反俄乌之战的立场，强调了“国际社会应真正劝和促谈，为政治解决乌克兰问题创造条件，推动乌克兰早日回归和平”（http://www.kzaobao.com/shiju/20220326/113458.html ）；於是插头被拔，普京无望。这几天来普京借其手下将领，学者，或媒体之口，频频表达一些关于俄乌战事的灰色论调，不为无因，无非是想找机会就坡下驴而已。          

种种迹象，说白了，就是帝国集团通过其第五纵队安置在中国的邓小平特遣支队，间接地撕毁了习-普的二月协议，给普京倒冷水，并否定了中俄之间可以作为战略伙伴的可能，去了心腹的大患。          

在普京一方而言，至少是认为在为习近平办的冬奥捧场之后签订，且又相互信誓旦旦的不封顶协议已被无情地背叛，被北京过河拆桥，其内心哪能不因此而悲愤？所以其后如果帝国殖民集团稍示恩惠，在普京疲兵之余，压下乌克兰政府，越俎代庖，答允不挑战俄罗斯在乌东已控土地的主权，并以共同肢解中国得利后分享等为条件，来引诱俄罗斯加入扩大后的北约（NATO）或环球约（GTO），普京或任何俄罗斯的后继领导人，大利当前，加上对北京背叛的怨怼，岂有不加盟之理？若然，则在O型围堵下，孤家寡人的中国，未来将伊于胡底？李良为中国人民悲。          

帝国主义殖民集团一石数鸟，既以北约东扩威胁俄罗斯的生存为套，迫使普京无法不出兵乌克兰，再以制裁为名以及透过其第五纵队派驻中国的邓小平特遣支队取消了习-普的让中俄联手的二月协议，完美地离间和孤立了中俄两国，于普京急于解脱困境之时，趁机网罗利诱俄罗斯加入北约扩大后的环球约，为己所用，看来天衣无缝，不是吗？

转载