Thursday, August 27, 2026

Inside Beijing's mind: How China really sees India



=====
Pallavi Aiyar is a territorially polygamous correspondent, columnist, and author. She has reported from — and raised a family in — China, Belgium, Japan, Indonesia and Spain. She writes about the world with indiscriminate delight and a weakness for the surprising connections between people and places.
=====

Inside Beijing's mind: How China really sees India

https://www.inkl.com/a/EkBPRGfWlBl

By Pallavi Aiyar
August 6, 2026

Beijing: Every communication encounter has an encoder, the speaker trying to convey something, and a decoder, the listener receiving it. Miscommunication happens when the message decoded isn't the one that was sent. India and China have this problem.

There is an undeniable structural asymmetry at the heart of the bilateral relationship. India and China do not think about each other with equivalent intensity. For China, India is a significant regional actor, a nuclear-armed neighbour, a potential irritant - but not a strategic equal. In contrast, China exerts gravitational force on strategic thinking in New Delhi. It is present in every military procurement decision, infrastructure project in the border regions, and calculation about Pakistan.

Also Read: India enters the story as China begins to rewrite the chips playbook

The asymmetry is not merely psychological. In 1990, India and China had broadly comparable per-capita incomes. By 2025, China's $19.4 tn GDP was nearly 5x India's $4.1 tn. As a participant in a recent conversation between Indian journalists and Chinese think-tankers in Beijing put it: India should accept its position of relative weakness without shame, and figure out how to leverage Chinese economic strength pragmatically. It was a reasonable argument. Indians in the closed-door gathering bristled. Pragmatism, encoded by the speaker, was decoded by his audience as condescension.

In the 2000s, Chinese perceptions of India were warm, and - unlike attitudes to Japan - organically so, not state-managed. Older Chinese remembered Raj Kapoor's socialist-era Awaara fondly. There was real respect for India as Buddhism's birthplace, and a kind of collegial regard for India's software outsourcing success, an area where India had outpaced China.

Today's younger Chinese carry less of that warmth and more of a coolly comparative gaze. The developmental gap has widened, and the register has shifted from potential peer to laggard-to-be-advised, or worse, presumptuous rival. Social media does the rest. Narendra Modi's unmet 2019 pledge of a $5 tn economy by 2024 is a recurring, mocking reference point whenever India's Vision 2047 comes up.

Some of this trolling curdles into something uglier, carrying a term most Indians have never heard: Ah San. Understanding it means going back to the treaty ports of late-19th and early-20th c. Shanghai, where Sikh policemen - recruited by the hundreds from Punjab from 1885 onward - made up a third of Shanghai Municipal Police.

Also Read: Despite swadeshi push, anti-dumping duties against Chinese firms crawl

They were cheaper than European officers and considered more reliable than local recruits, which slotted them into a colonial hierarchy as the enforcer's enforcer. Shanghainese called them 'hong tou Ah San' - red-headed number three: red for the turban, 3 for their rank beneath the British (No. 1) and Chinese (No. 2). The term hardened into shorthand for Indians generally, the willing instrument of the White man against fellow Asians.

Indian merchants had their own, less remembered role in this history. Parsi and Marwari traders were commercial intermediaries in the opium trade Britain forced on the Qing empire. By 1831, 41 Parsi merchants operated in Guangzhou's foreign enclave, outnumbering the English and Americans combined.

Marwari firms like Tarachand Ghanshyamdas traded opium futures across the Malwa belt. The fortune of Shiv Narain Birla, grandfather of Gandhi confidant G D Birla, has roots in that trade. Some of that same capital later helped fund India's independence movement. These merchants, junior partners in a system they didn't design, were neither innocent nor sovereign. But in China, the specifics faded while the residue stayed: the Sikh's red turban, the Parsi's opium chest, hardened into an instinct that India is the West's willing instrument.

That instinct still colours how Beijing reads Indian foreign policy today. The 2008 Nuclear Suppliers Group waiver, secured for India by George W Bush, wasn't read in Beijing as recognition of India's weight. It confirmed India had settled into the role of favoured American client. The Quad gets the same treatment. Where India encodes these as sovereign strategic choices, China decodes them, instinctively, as a reprise of the comprador reflex.

The misreading runs both ways. If China sees India through colonial subordination, India sees China through the lens of 1962 - the war that shattered Nehru's Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai idealism and left India, in its own telling, betrayed by a fellow postcolonial power it had trusted.

That wound still shapes how India reads Chinese moves today: Beijing's arming of Pakistan - visibly on display when Chinese-built J-10C fighters faced Indian jets in aerial engagements in May 2025 - reads in Delhi not as ordinary alliance politics but as deliberate encirclement, timed, it often feels, with pointed precision.

Neither side fully sees its blind spot. China looks at India and sees Ah San, repositioned for this century. India looks at China and sees 1962's smiling betrayer, advancing pawns beneath the table. In communication theory, the fix for a persistent encoding failure isn't to speak louder. It's to learn the other side's implicit assumptions, not just their words. India and China talk past each other fluently, and with total conviction.

It is never easy for a person to sit with a story that contradicts the one they grew up on. For nations carrying a century's accumulated weight, it is harder still.

(This is an edited version of an article that was first published in Noema Magazine)

=====

Pallavi Aiyar is a territorially polygamous correspondent, columnist, and author. She has reported from — and raised a family in — China, Belgium, Japan, Indonesia and Spain. She writes about the world with indiscriminate delight and a weakness for the surprising connections between people and places.

=====

陶朱公讲堂:SIA /Vistara的眼前困境

陶朱公讲堂:SIA /Vistara的眼前困境
文/戴文雪 
@27/8/26

新航折翼?

2026年,新加坡航空正经历一场严峻考验。刚交出近六年来首份季度亏损成绩单——截至6月底的2027财年第一季净亏7600万新元,昔日“航空业黄金标准”似乎暂失光芒。这场考验的核心,正是那个被寄予厚望却持续失血的战略棋子:印度航空。

战略初心:跳出“小红点”的宿命

新航与印航的渊源可追溯至本世纪初。2001年,新航曾与塔塔集团联手竞购印航股权,却因当地政治与工会阻力放弃。真正的突破始于2013年,新航与塔塔合资成立塔新航空(Vistara),以相对谨慎的方式扎根印度市场。

转折发生在2021年。当塔塔集团从印度政府手中接管连年亏损的印航时,邀请新航担任私有化顾问。彼时新航正深感“单枢纽模式”的脆弱,新冠疫情暴露了新加坡缺乏国内市场的致命伤,边境关闭意味着近乎全面停摆。而印度,这个全球增长最快的航空市场之一,提供了难得的战略纵深。

2024年11月,塔新航空(Vistara)正式并入印航,新航以注资及转让股权方式,持有合并后印航25.1%股份。新航总裁吴俊鹏明言,这笔投资让集团能直接进入印度国内市场并通过印度枢纽辐射国际,与新加坡枢纽互补,实现“单枢纽模式无法充分实现的增长机遇”。

现实困境:完美风暴下的巨额亏损

然而,战略愿景迅速被残酷现实吞噬。截至2026年3月底的财年,印航(含印度快运)录得23.3亿美元巨亏,较前一财年翻倍。新航承担的应占亏损达9.45亿新元,相当于集团全年净利近八成。在财年末,这项投资的账面价值已从20亿新元缩水至11亿。

亏损背后是一连串“完美风暴”:巴基斯坦关闭领空,迫使印航绕道增加成本;中东冲突推高燃油价格并扰乱航线;2025年6月的波音787空难(260人遇难)重创运营与声誉;全球供应链问题拖慢机队翻新;卢比贬值则令美元计价成本雪上加霜。

塔塔集团董事长陈哲(Natarajan Chandrasekaran )坦言,扭亏过程“可能需要长达10年”。如今,印航据报正向两大股东寻求15亿美元注资,新航若按25.1%持股比例出资,需承担约3.76亿美元。

破局之道:可行方案

面对困局,新航并非束手无策。专家提出以下几个方向或可助其守住战略底线,同时控制财务风险:

第一,强化“以专业换权益”的谈判筹码。新航不仅是印航的重要股东,更拥有全球顶级的运营管理经验。目前集团总裁吴俊鹏已出任印航董事会非执行董事。新航可进一步争取在机队规划、收益管理、服务标准等核心环节的更大话语权,确保转型方向符合预期,而非被动承担亏损。

第二,分阶段注资,设定明确止损线。印航此次提出的15亿美元并非一次性到账。新航可坚持按进度分批出资,将每笔注资与可量化的运营改善指标(如客座率、准点率、成本削减进度)挂钩,一旦关键指标未达门槛,有权重新评估后续注资。

第三,加速协同效应变现。新航应推动印航与自身航线网络深度整合,在代码共享、常旅客计划、联合采购等方面挖掘收入协同。利用印度作为国际中转点的潜力,将印度客流引向新航的东南亚及亚太网络,使“多枢纽战略”真正落地而非停留在愿景。

第四,评估独立运营的退出路径。若中长期转型无明显起色,新航应考虑在适当时机出售部分或全部印航股权,即使折价退出,也优于无底洞式的持续注资。星展银行分析师预计印航“未来几年内不会实现盈利”,这一现实必须纳入董事会考量。

小結:

發展中國家的投資市場充斥風險与坑坑,尤其是在印度。但公司若不冒險,利從何來?

印度市场的战略价值毋庸置疑,但战略耐心不意味无限容忍。对以审慎著称的新航而言,这或许才是真正的考验:如何在不被“折翼”的前提下,等待这只印度巨鹰重新起飞。

Wednesday, August 26, 2026

xStar恭喜你的单次发评阅读量破500超越70%的用户


xStar

恭喜你的单次发评阅读量破500

超越70%的用户

今日头条

2026-08-26

2134 HR

法治社会,竟然有暴走...

于2026年8月14日发布

India: The painful incompetence of the Indian state


The painful incompetence of the Indian state

Taipei Times 
Thu, Aug 06, 2026 

By Devesh Kapur, professor of South Asian Studies at Johns Hopkins University’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies

=====
The so-called ‘cockroach’ student movement against the government’s continued mishandling of national exams has exposed the nation’s systemic incompetence
=====
 
Recent student-led protests, which forced Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s typically unyielding regime to capitulate on key demands, dented Modi’s personal aura of power and exposed the limits of his government’s ability to curb dissent through heavy-handed repression. However, the protests also exposed a broader and more prosaic characteristic of the Indian state: incompetence.

The catalyst for the protests was a bungled exam process. In India — like in China, Japan, South Korea and Vietnam — students’ futures are decided largely by their performance on one exam. They spend years preparing for these high-stakes tests, which determine whether they gain entrance to one of a limited number of high-quality institutions of higher education or access to coveted government jobs.

Given the scarcity of university places, Indian students who can afford to head to universities abroad increasingly do so: In the past eight years, this figure has tripled, from about 450,000 in 2017 to 1.25 million last year. However, for lower-middle-class youth there are only a few ladders of social mobility, and university entrance exams are invariably the first rung.

=====

As stressful as the exams are, until recently they were conducted reasonably smoothly. In 2017, the growing number of exams (and students taking them) spurred the government to establish a centralized body, the National Testing Agency (NTA), to administer them. There was just one problem: The NTA’s capacity was never up to the job. While more than 10 million students take entrance exams in thousands of centers, hundreds of cities and more than a dozen languages each year, the NTA’s workforce is just 39 people, with a mere 24 in permanent posts.

The agency apparently believed that it could fill the gaps through outsourcing, but errors proliferated: paper leaks, postponed exams, mistakes in questions and delays in announcing exam results. Last year, a parliamentary committee said that the NTA’s performance had “not inspired much confidence.”


This year, allegations of a leak forced millions to retake a grueling medical entrance exam, and grading discrepancies emerged on a different exam. Against a backdrop of high youth unemployment and a gratuitous insult from a Supreme Court justice, students were outraged. They poured into the streets demanding the education minister’s resignation and broader education reform. When heavy-handed tactics failed to quell the movement, the government was forced to offer concessions — an unnerving outcome for Modi’s regime.

The problem extends beyond the NTA. India’s relatively weak state capacity, which lags significantly behind that of East Asian countries, has long hampered the economy’s development. Modi has been promising to address the problem since he came to power in 2014, but while his government’s emphasis on centralizing power and strengthening executive control has improved the “hardware” (infrastructure), it has come at the cost of deteriorating “software” (policies and institutions) — crucial for long-term development.

Improving the state’s bureaucratic machinery, including by attracting talented people, should have been a no-brainer, but by systematically prioritizing loyalty over competence, Modi’s government has inadvertently fostered risk aversion and mediocrity among senior bureaucrats. The fact that the government was caught off-guard by the frustration among India’s youth was not just a failure of discernment; it was an inevitable consequence of shutting out non-partisan sources of information.

Making matters worse, key officials are simply too old to grasp the dynamics of a rapidly changing world, let alone adapt to them. What limited policy changes have been undertaken have mostly been responses to external pressure, whether from US President Donald Trump or the growing threat from China.

Instead, Modi’s government has placed the highest priority on advancing narrow ideological objectives. For the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) — and its ideological parent, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) — controlling the education ministry is vital to propagate Hindutva (Hindu-nationalist) ideology. It is widely believed that academic appointments, from vice chancellors to faculty, must have the RSS’ blessing.

The Modi government has also throttled other essential levers for strengthening the state’s capabilities, from sub-national governments to civil society, mostly due to its deep mistrust and intolerance of anything it cannot control. Without “cooperative federalism,” India cannot meet the many pressing challenges it faces, whether in education, energy or the environment. However, under Modi, states have little authority. As a result, not even the issues that directly affect India’s political elite — such as severe air pollution in Delhi — get resolved.

Meanwhile, the government muzzles non-governmental organizations and think tanks if they dare to question its self-congratulatory messaging. This has impeded efforts to augment the state education system and redress the poor outcomes that have become standard for Indian schoolchildren, jeopardizing their futures and India’s development and prosperity. In addition, draconian laws governing foreign funding have undermined the philanthropic efforts of India’s well-heeled diaspora.

The Modi government has failed to strengthen even the agencies tasked with implementing its own priorities. In 2020, the government unveiled a forward-looking national education policy, aimed at transforming the education system to deliver universal high-quality education. Six years later, nearly two-thirds of staff positions at the country’s two principal higher-education regulators are vacant, stymieing progress.

Modi was propelled to power by popular frustration with the Congress-led government’s corruption and incompetence. However, 12 years later, his government’s record reflects the same pathologies. While the BJP felt untouchable earlier this year, following its unprecedented landslide victory in the West Bengal state elections, India’s young people have now offered it a somber reminder that a pendulum swings back at its apogee.


=====
Devesh Kapur, professor of South Asian Studies at Johns Hopkins University’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, is the co-author (with Arvind Subramanian) of A Sixth of Humanity: Independent India’s Development Odyssey.

Copyright: Project Syndicate






 
 
  

本地人对新一代期待转变越发重视好奇心与创造力

本地人对新一代期待转变
越发重视好奇心与创造力

调查:“负责任”稳居榜首 “孝顺”排序下滑

联合早报
2026-08-26

林美玲 报道


调查显示,七年来,变化最大的是“好奇心”。2020年,只有6.7%的受访者认为这是孩子应具备的重要特质,今年这个比率增至23%,上升16.3个百分点。“创造力”的升幅紧随其后,从2020年的8.6%增至今年的23.2%,上升14.6个百分点。
  本地人对于新一代应具备什么特质的期待正在改变。调查显示,过去七年,人们越来越重视孩子具备“好奇心”和“创造力”,尤其是重视“好奇心”的人增幅超过两倍;相形之下,更重视“礼貌”“孝顺”以及“尊重长辈”等传统价值观的人减少了。

  不过,人们对“负责任”这个核心价值的重视依旧,七年来始终是最多人对新一代的期待;在最新调查中,47%的受访者选择了“责任感”,“同理心”第二,有36%。

  由数码发展及新闻部设立的本地研究机构RySense星期二(8月25日)发布了有关的调查研究结果。这个调研综合分析了从2020年至2026年进行的多项调查。这些由RySense旗下网络平台HappyDot.sg负责的调查共访问了6821名年满15岁的新加坡居民,包括家长和非家长。每一年的受访者都会从同样的15个特质中,选出当今社会的孩子应具备的三项最重要特质。

  这些特质是:负责任、礼貌、同理心、包容、尊重长辈与权威、勤奋、乐于助人、服从、坚持不懈、孝顺、虔诚、独立、创造力、好奇心和谦逊。

  七年来,变化最大的是“好奇心”。2020年,只有6.7%的受访者认为这是孩子应具备的重要特质,今年这个比率增至23%,上升16.3个百分点。

  “创造力”的升幅紧随其后,从2020年的8.6%增至今年的23.2%,上升14.6个百分点;人们对这两项特质的重视今年尤其显著。去年,重视好奇心和创造力的受访者还分别只有11%和8%,今年双双增至约23%。

  RySense认为,这可能反映了一个更广泛的趋势,即环境变化日益加剧,人们越发重视适应能力和持续学习。人工智能(AI)的普及和应用迅速加深加广,也可能进一步加快这一转变,促使人们加紧在工作和生活中更积极地学习和采用新科技。

AI时代更须培养孩子
好奇心与不可取代品格

  资深学前教育工作者、推广华文学习委员会(学前组)副组长林美莲博士受方时说,“负责任”和“同理心”连续多年稳居前二是好事,因为两者均为重要品格。

  至于“尊重长辈与权威”和“孝顺”等传统价值观不再优先,林美莲认为,这可能与年轻一代的成长背景和生活环境不同于上一代有关,也因为这样,年轻一代对于这些价值观的理解和表达也有所不同。

  “对这一代年轻人来说,尊重并不等于盲从。这并不表示他们不尊重长辈,而是他们不会盲目听从长辈的意见。”

  林美莲认为,“创造力”和“好奇心”显著更受重视是可喜现象。在AI时代,培养孩子具备AI无法取代的能力更重要,而好奇心和创造力正是不可或缺的动力。

  她指出,未来许多知识都能轻易通过AI获取,因此孩子更须具备好奇心,而不是单纯接受和复制AI提供的答案。“有好奇心,他就不会只是单一地去复制一个答案,而是会寻找更多答案,比较哪个才是正确的。”

  她也强调社交能力的重要,因为这关系到孩子未来如何与他人沟通和合作。至于道德观和品格,如诚实、关怀和尊重等,这些同样是AI无法取代的品格,必须从小培养。

林美玲 报道

Local People's Expectations of the New Generation Are Changing-Increasingly Placing Greater Importance on Curiosity and Creativity

Local People's Expectations of the New Generation Are Changing
----
Increasingly Placing Greater Importance on Curiosity and Creativity

Survey: “Responsibility” Remains at the Top; “Filial Piety” Drops in Ranking

Translated by ChatGPT 

Lianhe Zaobao
2026-08-26

Reported by Lim Mei Ling (林美玲)

A survey showed that over the past seven years, the biggest change has been in “curiosity”. In 2020, only 6.7 per cent of respondents considered this an important trait that children should possess. This year, the proportion increased to 23 per cent, an increase of 16.3 percentage points. “Creativity” followed closely, rising from 8.6 per cent in 2020 to 23.2 per cent this year, an increase of 14.6 percentage points.

Local people's expectations of what traits the new generation should possess are changing. The survey showed that over the past seven years, people have increasingly placed importance on children possessing “curiosity” and “creativity”, with the proportion of people who place importance on “curiosity” more than doubling. In contrast, fewer people place greater importance on traditional values such as “politeness”, “filial piety” and “respect for elders”.

However, people's emphasis on “responsibility”, a core value, remains unchanged. For seven consecutive years, it has been the trait most people expect the new generation to possess. In the latest survey, 47 per cent of respondents selected “a sense of responsibility”, while “empathy” came second, at 36 per cent.

RySense, a local research organisation established by the Ministry of Digital Development and Information, released the findings of the survey research on Tuesday (August 25). The study analysed multiple surveys conducted from 2020 to 2026. These surveys, conducted by RySense's online platform HappyDot.sg, interviewed 6,821 Singapore residents aged 15 and above, including parents and non-parents. Each year, respondents selected the three most important traits, from the same list of 15 traits, that children in today's society should possess.

The traits are: responsibility, politeness, empathy, inclusiveness, respect for elders and authority, diligence, helpfulness, obedience, perseverance, filial piety, piety, independence, creativity, curiosity and humility.

Over the past seven years, the biggest change has been in “curiosity”. In 2020, only 6.7 per cent of respondents considered this an important trait that children should possess. This year, the proportion increased to 23 per cent, an increase of 16.3 percentage points.

“Creativity” followed closely, rising from 8.6 per cent in 2020 to 23.2 per cent this year, an increase of 14.6 percentage points. People's emphasis on these two traits was particularly pronounced this year. Last year, only 11 per cent and 8 per cent of respondents respectively placed importance on curiosity and creativity; this year, both increased to about 23 per cent.

RySense believes that this may reflect a broader trend in which, as environmental changes intensify, people are placing increasing importance on adaptability and continuous learning. The rapid expansion and deepening application of artificial intelligence (AI) may also further accelerate this shift, prompting people to learn and adopt new technologies more actively in their work and daily lives.

In the AI Era, Children Need Even More Curiosity and Irreplaceable Qualities

Dr Connie Lum, a veteran early childhood education practitioner and deputy head of the preschool group of the Committee to Promote Chinese Language Learning, said that it is a positive development that “responsibility” and “empathy” have remained in the top two positions for many consecutive years, because both are important qualities.

As for traditional values such as “respect for elders and authority” and “filial piety” no longer being given priority, Dr Connie Lum believes this may be related to the fact that the younger generation has grown up in a different background and living environment from the previous generation. As a result, the younger generation's understanding and expression of these values are also different.

“For this generation of young people, respect does not mean blind obedience. This does not mean that they do not respect their elders, but rather that they will not blindly follow their elders' opinions.”

Dr Connie Lum believes that the significantly greater emphasis placed on “creativity” and “curiosity” is encouraging. In the AI era, it is more important to cultivate abilities in children that AI cannot replace, and curiosity and creativity are precisely indispensable driving forces.

She pointed out that in the future, much knowledge will be easily accessible through AI, so children will need to possess curiosity even more, rather than simply accepting and copying the answers provided by AI. “When he is curious, he will not simply copy one answer, but will look for more answers and compare which one is correct.”

She also emphasised the importance of social skills, because these affect how children will communicate and cooperate with others in the future. As for moral values and character, such as honesty, care and respect, these are likewise qualities that AI cannot replace and must be cultivated from a young age.


Lim Mei Ling
Reported by

Tuesday, August 25, 2026

An ‘Economic D-Day’ That Must Overcome a Troubled History


新闻分析

特朗普试图扼杀伊朗经济,而这取决于中国是否合作

An ‘Economic D-Day’ That Must Overcome a Troubled History

DAVID E. SANGER
在周一宣布“经济弃儿行动”时,特朗普政府表示,该行动将切断所有向德黑兰输送资金的交易。
在周一宣布“经济弃儿行动”时,特朗普政府表示,该行动将切断所有向德黑兰输送资金的交易。 Doug Mills/The New York Times
In declaring a new “economic D-Day” for Iran on Monday, President Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent are reaching for yet another strategy to grope their way out of a military adventure gone wrong. Along the way they are reversing the usual approach to coercing adversaries to bend to American will.
周一,特朗普总统和财政部长斯科特·贝森特宣布对伊朗实施新的“经济D日”,再一次试图在一场失败的军事冒险中摸索脱身之法。与此同时,这也是对他们胁迫对手屈从美国意志的惯常手段的一次背离。

Ordinarily, Washington approaches a problem like dismantling Iran’s nuclear program with straightforward diplomacy. If that goes nowhere, officials mix in escalating economic sanctions, adding an element of coercion. Military action is a last resort, and only if the president determines that risking American lives is worth the possible benefit.
通常,华盛顿在处理像废止伊朗核计划这样的问题时,会先采用直截了当的外交途径。若外交无果,官员们便会逐步升级经济制裁,加入一层威胁的意味。军事行动是最后手段,且仅在总统认定让美国人冒生命危险可能带来足够收益时才会动用。

But Mr. Trump leaped from a brief round of diplomacy straight to bombing runs, meant to force the country to give up its stockpiles of 11 tons of enriched uranium — including a batch that was nearly bomb-ready — and perhaps collapse the government. The attacks failed at both objectives, at the cost of 18 American lives, hundreds or thousands of Iranians dead, and a price tag that independent analysts put at over $100 billion, though the Pentagon’s estimates are lower.
但特朗普在经过一段短暂的外交往来之后,直接跳到了轰炸这一步,意在迫使伊朗放弃其11吨浓缩铀储备——其中一部分接近武器级——也许还能推翻该国政府。这两项目标均未达成,却付出了18名美国人丧生、成百上千伊朗人死亡的代价,此外独立分析人士估算总花费超过1000亿美元,尽管五角大楼的估计没这么高。

And only now are Mr. Trump and Mr. Bessent trying one more grand experiment, named Operation Economic Outcast, that the White House described as “an unprecedented campaign to sever every remaining economic lifeline sustaining the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
直到现在,特朗普和贝森特才尝试又一项宏大试验,名为“经济弃儿行动”,白宫称其为“一场前所未有的运动,旨在切断维系伊朗伊斯兰共和国的每一条经济生命线”。
The plan is not implausible. As described by Mr. Bessent, it involves choking off every last transaction that funnels money to Tehran, whether it is well-disguised digital transactions, or ship-to-ship transfers of oil, or the movement of gold around the globe. “This is a sustained operation to collapse every last option for Iran,” Mr. Bessent, who has become the public face of the effort at economic strangulation said at a news conference at the Treasury on Monday.
该计划并非不切实际。正如贝森特所述,它涉及截断所有向德黑兰输送资金的交易,无论是有妥善伪装的数字交易、船对船的石油转运,还是全球范围内的黄金流动。贝森特周一在财政部新闻发布会上表示:“这是一项持续行动,旨在摧毁伊朗的所有选项。”他已成为这场经济扼杀行动的形象代言人。


But the effort raises a series of questions that the White House has not answered. First among them is why, if sanctions as airtight as these are possible, they were not employed before Mr. Trump ordered the U.S. military into battle, exposing shortages of key munitions and the limits of American military power? And now that the military has, in Mr. Bessent’s words, “laid the groundwork” for success, what about China — which purchased more than 80 percent of Iran’s oil exports in 2025? Is the administration willing to risk another direct confrontation with Beijing, with which it is already at odds over artificial intelligence, Taiwan, a rapid nuclear expansion and a huge production overhang that threatens the global economy?
但此举引发了一系列白宫尚未回答的问题。首先,如果如此严密的制裁可行,为何不在特朗普命令美军开战之前采用?这场战斗暴露了关键弹药短缺和美国军力的局限。其次,既然军方已如贝森特所言“奠定了基础”,那么中国呢——2025年中国购买了伊朗超过80%的石油出口。美国政府是否愿意冒险与北京再次直接对抗?双方在人工智能、台湾问题、快速核扩张以及威胁全球经济的巨大产能过剩等方面已存在分歧。

The original D-Day, on the shores of Normandy, did not require Chinese participation. This economic D-Day does, and there is no indication so far that it is forthcoming, a month before President Xi Jinping is scheduled to arrive in Washington for his first state visit in more than a decade.
在诺曼底海岸上的原版D日并不需要中国参与。而这次经济D日需要,但目前没有任何迹象表明中国会配合,而此时距离中国国家主席习近平计划抵达华盛顿进行十多年来首次国事访问仅剩一个月。

“This will be tricky,” Peter Harrell, a visiting scholar at Georgetown Law School who has written extensively on the limits of economic sanctions, said on Monday.
“这将很棘手,”乔治城大学法学院访问学者彼得·哈雷尔周一表示,他就经济制裁的局限性写了大量文章。

上月在德黑兰塔吉里什集市附近。财政部长斯科特·贝森特已威胁对所有继续与伊朗做生意的国家实施所谓的“次级制裁”。
上月在德黑兰塔吉里什集市附近。财政部长斯科特·贝森特已威胁对所有继续与伊朗做生意的国家实施所谓的“次级制裁”。 Arash Khamooshi/Polaris for The New York Times
Earlier this year, in deciding how to bring Iran to its knees, Mr. Trump “had a choice to really come down hard on the Chinese, which he didn’t want to do because of his own economic agenda with Xi, or put the naval blockade on the Iranian tankers,” Mr. Harrell noted.
哈雷尔指出,今年早些时候,在决定如何让伊朗屈服时,特朗普“曾有两个选择:一是真正对中国下重手施压,但由于他与习近平的经济议程,他不想这么做;二是对伊朗油轮实施海上封锁”。

“It turned out it was politically easier to put the blockade on all the Iranian tanks than to tell the Chinese ‘We will sanction your big companies’ if they continued their trade with Iran.”
“结果看来,对伊朗油轮实施封锁在政治上要比告诉中国‘再和伊朗贸易,我们就制裁你们的大公司’容易一些。

=====

It is still a delicate issue. Mr. Bessent threatened what are called “secondary sanctions” on all nations that continued to do business with Iran.
这仍是一个微妙问题。贝森特威胁对所有继续与伊朗做生意的国家实施所谓“次级制裁”。

But in an opinion article for The Financial Times over the weekend and at his news conference on Monday, Mr. Bessent never uttered the word “China.” He was going out of his way to avoid angering the world’s second-largest economy, and the one nation that may well determine whether this new White House strategy has a chance.
但在周末为《金融时报》撰写的评论文章以及周一的新闻发布会上,贝森特始终没有提及“中国”一词。他正刻意避免激怒世界第二大经济体,而中国恰恰是可能决定白宫这一新战略成败的国家。

Of course, there is nothing new in trying to make Iran an economic outcast. The first serious efforts to impose sanctions on Iran for its nuclear program date back to the George W. Bush administration. When the Obama administration was trying to push Iran into negotiations in 2009, the secretary of state at the time, Hillary Rodham Clinton, promised “crippling sanctions” unless the country entered negotiations.
当然,试图让伊朗成为经济弃儿并非新鲜事。最早真正动手对伊朗核计划实施制裁的是小布什政府。2009年奥巴马政府试图推动伊朗进行谈判时,时任国务卿希拉里·罗德姆·克林顿曾承诺,除非伊朗进入谈判,否则将实施“毁灭性制裁”。

It took years to generate results, but many experts contend that the escalating sanctions that followed helped compel Iran to agree to the 2015 nuclear accord, sharply limiting its nuclear work in return for a lifting of financial and oil sanctions. Mr. Trump ripped up that agreement in 2018, declaring it deeply flawed.
尽管花费数年才见成效,但许多专家认为,随后逐步升级的制裁有助于迫使伊朗同意2015年核协议,该协议大幅限制伊朗核活动,以换取金融和石油制裁的解除。特朗普于2018年撕毁该协议,宣称其存在严重缺陷。
At that time, he began reimposing sanctions, and he and his secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, predicted that the economic pressure would be too much for Iran’s leaders to take.
那时,他开始重新实施制裁,他和时任国务卿迈克·庞皮欧预测,经济压力将让伊朗领导人难以承受。

“The Trump administration is pursuing a ‘maximum pressure’ campaign designed to choke off revenues that the regime — and particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, part of Iran’s military that is directly beholden to the Supreme Leader — uses to fund violence,’’ Mr. Pompeo wrote in Foreign Affairs in late 2018. “Yet President Trump does not want another long-term U.S. military engagement in the Middle East.”
特朗普政府正在推行‘极限施压’,旨在切断该政权——特别是伊斯兰革命卫队(伊朗军队中直接听命于最高领袖的一部分)——用于资助暴力活动的收入,”庞皮欧于2018年底在《外交事务》中写道。“然而,特朗普总统不希望美国在中东再有长期军事介入。”

=====
Mr. Pompeo, now estranged from Mr. Trump, sounded many of the themes repeated by Mr. Bessent on Monday. The exception is that the United States is now committed to a military presence off Iran’s coast for an indeterminate amount of time, but certainly as long as Iran threatens shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
如今与特朗普疏远的庞皮欧当时提出的许多主题周一又被贝森特提及。不同之处在于,美国现在已在伊朗海岸外维持军事存在,且不知何时能结束——只要伊朗还在威胁霍尔木兹海峡航运,这种存在就会持续。

The record of these past sanctions is unimpressive: Iran kept shipping two million to three million barrels of oil a day despite them. Those numbers have now come down to a trickle, thanks to the naval blockade now in place.
此前的制裁成效上乏善可陈:伊朗仍每天出口200万至300万桶石油。如今,由于海上封锁,这个数字已经降到很低。

But the nuclear material has not moved out of its rubble-covered storage sites since the United States bombed those areas in June 2025, satellite photographs indicate. And the government survives, though under different management after Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the opening strikes of the war in February. His son, considered more of a hard-liner, now holds the post, even though he has not been seen or heard from directly.
但自2025年6月美国轰炸以来,卫星照片显示核材料并未从覆满瓦砾的储存设施移出。政府仍在运转,尽管在2月战争首轮袭击中阿亚图拉阿里·哈梅内伊被击毙后,领导层已变更。现已继任的哈梅内伊之子被认为更为强硬,尽管他本人尚未公开露面或发声。
=====
=====
贝森特周一在财政部。他已成为美国对伊朗的经济扼杀行动的形象代言人。
贝森特周一在财政部。他已成为美国对伊朗的经济扼杀行动的形象代言人。 Julia Demaree Nikhinson/Associated Press

=====
=====
As a result, one of the more curious elements of Mr. Bessent’s speech on Monday came when he returned to a promise made by Mr. Trump nearly six months ago: that he would establish the conditions for regime change.
因此,贝森特周一讲话中格外奇怪的一点是,他重提了特朗普近六个月前的承诺:为政权更迭创造条件。

At the time, Mr. Trump thought the military battle would last a few days or weeks, before Iran offered what the president called “unconditional surrender.” He urged the Iranian people to rise up, and take over their government, after the smoke of the American bombing cleared. Mr. Trump soon abandoned that effort, acknowledging in an interview with The New York Times in June that the Iranian people simply did not have the guns or organization to make that happen.
当时,特朗普以为军事行动只会持续数天或数周,之后伊朗便会提出他所称的“无条件投降”。他敦促伊朗人民在美国轰炸的硝烟散去后奋起接管政府。但特朗普很快放弃了这一努力,在6月接受《纽约时报》采访时承认,伊朗人民根本没有武器或组织来实现这一目标。

Mr. Bessent tried a slightly different approach on Monday.
贝森特周一尝试了略有不同的方式。
===✓=

=====
“To the ordinary soldiers supporting this regime,” Mr. Bessent said, “as more and more of your paychecks stop or are supposedly just delayed, ask whether your commanders are leading your country to triumph or to ruin, and recall that the Berlin Wall fell when ordinary soldiers decided not to shoot at their own people.”
“致支持这个政权的普通士兵,”贝森特说,“当你们的薪水越来越多地停发或被告知只是延迟时,问问你们的指挥官,是带领国家走向胜利还是毁灭,并回想柏林墙倒塌之时,正是普通士兵决定不对自己人民开枪的时刻。”

Of course, the circumstances when the wall fell were entirely different than they are in Iran. There was no external, active war going on, just the accelerating pressure of the Cold War. And the Soviet Union and its satellites saw little hope in putting down the local uprisings, including the one in East Germany that led to Mr. Bessent’s historical analogy.
柏林墙的倒塌当然是和伊朗截然不同的情形。当时没有外部正在进行的热战,只有冷战加速的压力。苏联及其卫星国对镇压当地起义(包括促成了贝森特提及的柏林墙倒塌的那场东德起义)几乎不抱希望。

Yet that is Mr. Trump’s big bet right now. His decision in February to forgo the kind of sanctions announced on Monday, and to move right to military force, was in some ways an acknowledgment that economic sanctions move slowly, and that history suggests they often fail to work.
然而,这正是特朗普眼下的大赌注。他在2月决定放弃周一宣布的那种制裁,直接转向军事力量,在某种程度上是承认经济制裁见效缓慢,且历史表明它们往往失败。

Today, he is back to that plan, for absence of many other viable choices.
如今,由于缺乏其他可行选择,他又回到了这个计划。

免费下载 纽约时报中文网
iOS 和 Android App

点击下载iOS App点击下载Android App
© 2026 The New York Times Company.