好莱坞不可能制作出一部比当下在世界各地手机和电脑萤幕上流传的短片更戏剧化的电影。
以美国总统特朗普、副总统万斯和乌克兰总统泽连斯基为主角；原本被宣传为一场公关活动的美乌领袖直播会面，却让观众目瞪口呆、震惊不已的上演。泽连斯基原本计划与美国签署一份矿产协议，作为美国斡旋达成结束乌克兰战争的和平协议前奏。然而，这场备受期待的美国外交政策胜利却以一场争吵告终，让两位总统颜面尽失。这也粉碎了特朗普在总统竞选期间承诺的迅速结束战争的希望。
在美国，总统椭圆形办公室的这场冲突，也在民主党和共和党领导人及支持者之间产生了深刻分歧，前者谴责特朗普及其“霸凌策略”；后者为特朗普辩护，并认为泽连斯基高估自己，不尊重美国和美国对乌克兰生存的贡献。
美乌两国的公开对抗让美国亲乌克兰和反特朗普媒体感到非常不安，以至于这些媒体专栏作家用整篇专栏文章谴责特朗普，而读者则呼吁弹劾并罢免特朗普。
除了美国受其国内政治影响的反应之外，其他地区的政策制定者也应从中得出一个结论，尤其在以下问题方面：
●这事件影响和反响
●赢家和输家
●乌克兰、俄罗斯、欧盟和北约的未来前景
近期和长期影响
对于这事件直接影响，各方几乎没有分歧。泽连斯基被令离开白宫，原本计划的其他活动也被取消。
泽连斯基遭受到的外交羞辱是前所未有的，这对美国在西欧政治领导人和公众以及西方所谓的“自由世界”心目中的地位产生了不利影响。
其他影响也很明显
●泽连斯基得罪了特朗普、万斯和美国国务卿卢比奥。乌克兰现在应该担心的是，这三位美国领袖认为他们的总统不仅不尊重美国，也不尊重他们个人。这三人是至少未来四年美国外交和外交政策制定中最重要的人物。因此，泽连斯基或乌克兰继任领导人就俄乌战争及战后的任何谈判上，须面对著可能会影响谈判结果的个人敌意因素。
●在泽连斯基认错、道歉并回到由美国和俄罗斯主导的谈判桌之前，特朗普和他的同僚不会促成停火或和平协议。
赢家、输家和未来情境
●这次美乌首脑会面不欢而散，赢家毫无疑问是俄罗斯和总统普京。普京现在将确信，乌克兰不仅无法赢得战争，而且如果美国停止军事和财政支持，乌克兰也无法继续战争。
俄罗斯总统将以更强硬的手段参与任何俄乌和平谈判，并且作为解决方案的一部分，目前被俄罗斯军队占领的乌克兰克里米亚地区将由俄罗斯控制。
他还将透过阻止乌克兰加入北约而赢得重大胜利。这是俄罗斯对于任何和平谈判和解决方案下一贯坚持的先决条件。
如果成功的话，这一结果将产生深远政治和战略影响，阻止北约向传统上亲俄罗斯的欧洲东部国家和政府扩张。大多数中立观察家认为，普京在乌克兰采取军事行动的催化剂源自于北约向沿著俄罗斯边境地区的势力和军事扩张。如果谈判桌上，普京取得胜利，西欧国家会把这宣传为新苏联军事扩张，吊诡的是这可能为俄罗斯和西欧国家之间更持久和可持续的和平奠定基础。
●最大的输家是乌克兰。如果看不到休战与和平协议，平民和军事人员伤亡将会持续。尽管俄罗斯也在遭受战争之苦，但无论有没有普京，其承受痛苦的门槛都要比乌克兰高得多。如果没有和平，逃离战争并在其他国家寻求庇护的乌克兰人（估计有700万或战前人口的六分之一）就不太可能返回乌克兰。正如匈牙利总理欧尔班在美乌“灾难性”会面后所观察的，乌克兰拒绝特朗普的和平角色，“基本上乌克兰现在岌岌可危”。
●战争中的另一个关键参与者——欧盟国家——将看到其领导人试图减少损失，尽管目前有传言称欧盟要从特朗普手中夺取和平谈判的控制权。如果没有美国作为俄乌战争主要赞助支持和积极参与，面临大幅增加国内国防预算的压力，以及失去民众对继续进行这场许多欧洲人（也许是大多数人）和世界其他国家都认为无法获胜的战争之支持，欧盟最终将不得不听从美国和俄罗斯所达成的任何和平解决方案。
●另一个大输家是北约。作为这场战争最热心的推动者和前所未有的军事支援者，使战争得以延长，许多观察家认为北约是一个无关紧要的、被认为是冷战残馀的军事联盟，在特朗普与泽连斯基冲突后，北约目前正陷入严重危机。
批评者指出，北约专注于提供针对俄罗斯及其他“自由世界敌人”的军事对抗，其在美国发动的战争中扮演支援角色，并认为北约与其说是促进和平的力量，不如说是一个障碍。
一旦乌克兰在没有北约参与的情况下达成和平解决方案，特朗普在外交政策上的“直接交易方式”和他的“让美国再次伟大”使命将导致北约作为世界政治中一支有影响力的力量进一步衰落。
亚太地区警示
亚太地区不应忽视乌克兰和欧洲正在上演的结局中传达的讯息和教训。尤其是台湾，还有菲律宾、澳洲、日本、韩国、纽西兰、新加坡以及与美国缔结条约和非条约盟友都应该看到不祥之兆。我们已经进入了全球政治和经济的新时代，在特朗普的“让美国再次伟大”政策下，美国盟友的国家利益将变得毫无价值或微不足道。
林德宜《特朗普杠上泽连斯基：亚太地区借鉴》原文：Trump Vs Zelensky: Lessons for Asia Pacific
Hollywood could not have produced a more unlikely and dramatic movie than the one now appearing on handphone and computer screens all over the world.
Featuring Donald Trump, US president; JD Vance, US vice president; and Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine president; the live meeting before a disbelieving and shell shocked audience took place over what had been touted as a public relations event. Zelensky would sign a mineral agreement with the US as prelude to a US brokered peace agreement to end the war in Ukraine. Instead this much anticipated American foreign policy triumph ended in a shouting match leaving both presidents with egg on their faces. It also shattered hopes of a quick end to the war promised by Trump during his presidential campaign.
American Take On The Clash
In the US, the Oval Office clash has produced an unsurprising deep divide between Democrat and Republican leaders and supporters with the former upbraiding Trump and his “bully tactics”; and the latter defending Trump and agreeing that Zelensky had overplayed his card and disrespected the US and American contribution to Ukraine’s survival.
The public confrontation has unnerved American pro Ukraine and anti Trump media so much that its columnists have devoted entire columns excoriating Trump whilst its readers are calling for his impeachment and removal from office.
Away from the American response influenced by its domestic politics, policy makers in our part of the world should draw their own conclusions especially in relation to the following concerns:
● Impact and repercussions
● Winners and losers
● Scenarios for Ukraine, Russia, the European Union and NATO going forward
Immediate and Longer Term Impact
There is little disagreement about its immediate impact. Zelensky was ordered out of the White House and with the remaining events of his program cancelled.
The diplomatic humiliation of Zelensky is unprecedented and has adverse repercussions on the standing of the US in the eyes of political leaders and public in Western Europe and what the West regards as the “free world”.
Other outcomes are also apparent
● Zelensky has made an enemy in Trump, Vance and Mario Rubio, the US Secretary of State. The Ukrainian concern now should be that their president is perceived by the three leaders as not only disrespectful of the US but also of them personally. The trio are the most important figures in US diplomacy and foreign policy making for at least the next 4 years. Any negotiations by Zelensky and/or replacement Ukrainian leaders on the war and its aftermath will have to live with this cloud of personal animosity that could well influence the outcome.
● Trump and company will not broker a ceasefire or peace agreement until Zelensky eats humble pie, apologises and returns to a negotiation table set up and dominated by the US and Russia.
Winners, Losers and Future Scenarios
● The undoubted winner from the meeting debacle is Russia and President Vladimir Putin. Putin will now be sure that not only cannot Ukraine win the war but also that if the US stops its military and financial support, Ukraine cannot continue the war.
The Russian president will go into any peace negotiations with a much stronger hand and with the prospect of the Crimean part of Ukraine now occupied by Russian forces likely to remain in Russian control as part of the settlement.
He will also have won a significant victory by stopping Ukraine from NATO membership. This has been a consistent and non-negotiable Russian precondition for any peace talk and settlement.
If successful, this outcome will have political and strategic implications by forestalling NATO expansion into the eastern flank of Europe with its traditionally pro Russian countries and governments. Most neutral observers maintain that the catalyst for Putin’s military action in Ukraine stems from NATO’s duplicitous membership and military expansion drive along the Russian border. If brought to the negotiation table, Putin’s victory paradoxically could provide the basis for a more durable and sustainable peace between Russia and Western European countries propagandized into belief of the impending military expansion of a new Soviet Union.
● The biggest loser is Ukraine. Without a truce and peace agreement in sight, it will see its civilian and military casualties mount. Although Russia is also suffering from the war, its threshold for pain - with or without Putin - is much higher. Ukrainians who have fled the war and sought refuge in other countries - an estimated 7 million or one sixth of the pre-war population has left the country - are unlikely to return if there is no peace. In rejecting Trump’s peace role, Ukraine is, as the Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, observed after the disastrous meeting “essentially now on a ventilator”.
● The other key player in the war - European Union (EU) countries - will see an attempt by their leaders to cut their losses although for now there is talk about wresting control over the peace negotiations away from Trump. Without the support and active participation of the US as the war’s main sponsor, facing increased pressure to significantly ramp up their domestic defence budgets, and confronting the loss of public support for the continuation of what many Europeans (perhaps the majority) and the rest of the world recognize as an unwinnable war, the EU will have to defer to US and Russia shape and have the final say on whatever peace settlement is reached.
● Another big loser is NATO. The most enthusiastic advocate of the war and provider of an unprecedented level of military support that has prolonged it, many observers see NATO as an irrelevant and discredited military alliance remnant from the cold war that is now in deep crisis following the Trump Zelensky clash.
Fixated on providing a military counterpoint against Russia and other ‘free world enemies’, critics of NATO have pointed to its support role in wars waged by the US and argue that the organization is an obstacle rather than a force for peace.
Once a peace settlement is reached in Ukraine without NATO'S involvement, Trump with his direct transactional approach to foreign policy and his MAGA mission will see NATO decline further as an influential force in world politics.
Asia Pacific Region Served Notice
The message and lessons to be learnt from Ukraine and the end game unfolding in Europe should not be lost to the Asia Pacific region. Taiwan especially but also the Philippines, Australia, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Singapore and other treaty and non-treaty allies of the US should see the writing on the wall. We have entered into a new era of global politics and economics in which the national interests of US allies will count for nothing or little in Trump’s MAGA.
要看最快最熱資訊，請來Follow我們 《東方日報》WhatsApp Channel.
_10.jpeg/0506dad4be499e61d637dc9d73d4d631.jpeg)