2026-04-09T18:00:21.834Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
特约分析：
亚伦·布莱克
发布时间：2026年4月9日，美国东部时间下午2:00
中东 唐纳德·特朗普 亚洲
内森·霍华德/路透社
本周末旨在结束与伊朗战争的谈判，不仅是唐纳德·特朗普任期内风险最高的谈判，也是近期美国历史上风险最高的谈判之一。
但有一个大问题：美国似乎甚至无法就停火协议的内容与伊朗达成一致。
为期两周的休战在周二迅速达成，就在特朗普宣布的美国东部时间晚上8点最后期限前数小时——他曾警告伊朗，若不达成协议，其“整个文明”将面临覆灭。
如果说周二达成的停火协议看起来有些仓促，那么到了今天，这种仓促感就更强烈了。
停火协议生效的头两天不仅进展不顺——霍尔木兹海峡依然拥堵，该地区仍有袭击不断——而且双方在协议条款上还存在重大分歧。
这一切似乎都预示着，就更持久的和平进行谈判的前景相当黯淡。
我们来梳理一下。
黎巴嫩
马尔万·纳阿马尼/图片联盟/德新社/美联社
笼罩在停火协议上空的最大问题或许并非发生在伊朗本土。事实是，以色列周三对黎巴嫩境内伊朗盟友真主党发动了大规模袭击。
伊朗方面称这违反了停火协议；美国和以色列则表示黎巴嫩不在协议范围内。
当巴基斯坦总理夏巴兹·谢里夫周二首次宣布停火协议时，他明确表示黎巴嫩是协议的一部分。
他在X平台上写道，所有各方已“同意在包括黎巴嫩在内的所有地区立即停火，即刻生效”。
但以色列在停火协议宣布后的数小时内就恢复了在黎巴嫩的攻势，并对黎巴嫩属于协议一部分的说法提出了质疑。
周三上午，特朗普在接受《PBS新闻一小时》采访时表示，黎巴嫩并未被纳入停火协议。“因为真主党，他们没有被纳入协议，”他说，并称黎巴嫩发生的情况是一场“单独的小冲突”。
白宫新闻秘书卡罗琳·莱维特当天下午在新闻发布会上也附和称，“黎巴嫩不属于停火协议的一部分”。
但德黑兰仍坚持认为巴基斯坦总理的说法是正确的，多名伊朗高级官员表示，以色列正在违反停火协议。
伊朗总统马苏德·佩泽希基安周四称，针对黎巴嫩的袭击“公然违反了初步停火协议，是欺骗行为和对潜在协议缺乏承诺的危险信号”。
美国副总统J·D·万斯周三试图将这场争端归咎于“合理的误解”。
但重要的是，伊朗得到了巴基斯坦的支持——美国选择巴基斯坦作为调解方。巴基斯坦支持黎巴嫩属于协议一部分的说法，并在周四上午再次重申了这一立场。
巴基斯坦外交部在一份声明中将黎巴嫩发生的情况称为“严重违反停火协议”。
事态甚至变得更加复杂。CNN周四上午证实，特朗普政府高级官员周二全天都在与巴基斯坦就美国对停火协议的诉求进行沟通，并大体认可了谢里夫发布的内容中的具体条款。
有人猜测谢里夫的其中一条推文是由美国起草的，因为该推文最初发布时带有“草稿——巴基斯坦总理在X平台的推文”的标题。白宫否认参与了该推文的撰写，并表示总统在推文发布前并未看过。
目前主要有两种可能的解释。一种是黎巴嫩原本应被纳入协议，但以色列不愿接受。另一种是万斯所说的，这只是一场混淆。
一个有趣的进展是：CNN周四报道称，特朗普和本雅明·内塔尼亚胡周三进行了通话，期间美国总统要求以色列总理减少在黎巴嫩的袭击，并与黎巴嫩就解除真主党武装展开谈判。
霍尔木兹海峡
路透社
停火协议最引人注目的一点是，它似乎让伊朗获得了战争前从未有过的东西：对霍尔木兹海峡的控制权（至少是暂时的）。
正如CNN的法里德·扎卡里亚所指出的，这将是一件意义重大的事。伊朗通过这条关键水道挟持全球经济，展现了其巨大的影响力。
伊朗周二晚间在一份声明中表示，“通过与伊朗武装部队协调，并适当考虑技术限制”，海峡通航将恢复正常。
特朗普似乎也同意了这一点。他周二晚间在Truth Social平台上转发了伊朗的这份声明。虽然他在最初宣布停火协议时表示，协议的条件是“彻底、立即、安全地开放”海峡，但他明确没有要求伊朗放弃控制权。
事实上，在周三上午接受美国广播公司新闻采访时，他谈到了美伊双方将建立“合资企业”，对过往船只收取通行费。
但到了周三下午，在明确海峡远未畅通无阻后，莱维特似乎暗示协议要求海峡完全开放。她表示，美国将进行谈判，“只要霍尔木兹海峡保持开放，没有任何限制或延误”，同时还驳斥了海峡并未开放的说法。
十点计划
安德鲁·哈恩/盖蒂图片社
特朗普周二晚间在声明中援引了伊朗的“十点计划”，称其为“可供谈判的可行基础”。
但随后伊朗公布的十点清单看起来更像是一揽子伊朗的要求——其中很多是美国绝对不可能同意的。
到周三下午，莱维特表示特朗普当时所指的是伊朗提出的另一份更为严肃的十点计划。
“他们向总统及其团队提出了一份更合理、完全不同且经过精简的计划，”莱维特说，“特朗普总统和团队认定，这份新修改的计划是可供谈判并与我们自己的15点提案保持一致的可行基础。”
但莱维特和白宫并未提供这份更新后提案的具体内容。
与此同时，伊朗明确表示，他们认为自己公开分享的十点计划就是特朗普所指的内容。周三下午，伊朗指出美国政府所谓的违反十点计划的行为，包括以色列在黎巴嫩的袭击，以及特朗普政府称伊朗无权浓缩铀。
“如今，这份本应作为谈判‘可行基础’的协议，甚至在谈判开始前就已被公然、明确地违反了，”伊朗议会议长穆罕默德·巴盖尔·加利巴夫周三在X平台上写道，“甚至在谈判开始前。”
事实上，这场旨在结束战争的重大协议的所谓“可行基础”，看起来似乎根本就不可行。
What’s in the Iran war ceasefire? The two sides can’t seem to even agree on that.
2026-04-09T18:00:21.834Z / CNN
Analysis by
Aaron Blake
PUBLISHED Apr 9, 2026, 2:00 PM ET
The Middle East Donald Trump Asia
Demonstrators outside the White House protest against military action in Iran after President Donald Trump said that he had agreed to a two-week ceasefire.
Nathan Howard/Reuters
This weekend’s talks to end the war with Iran are some of the most high-stakes negotiations not just of Donald Trump’s presidencies, but of recent American history.
One big problem, though: The US can’t even seem to agree with Iran on what they agreed to for the ceasefire.
The two-week truce seemed to come together rapidly on Tuesday, just hours before Trump’s 8 p.m. ET deadline for Iran to make a deal or else face the death of its “whole civilization.”
And if the ceasefire seemed a bit hasty on Tuesday, it looks a lot more so today.
The first two days of the truce not only haven’t gone smoothly — the Strait of Hormuz has remained a logjam, and attacks are still raining in the region — but they’ve also been marked by major disagreements about the terms of the agreement.
All of which would seem to augur quite poorly for negotiations over a more permanent peace.
Let’s recap.
Lebanon
People inspect the aftermath of Israeli strikes on Beirut on Thursday.
Marwan Naamani/picture-alliance/dpa/AP
Perhaps the biggest problem looming over the ceasefire isn’t what’s happening in Iran. It’s the fact that Israel unleashed extensive attacks against Iran’s Hezbollah allies in Lebanon on Wednesday.
Iran says this violates the ceasefire; the United States and Israel say Lebanon wasn’t part of the deal.
When Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif first announced the ceasefire on Tuesday, he specified that Lebanon was a part of it.
He wrote on X that all parties had “agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere [including Lebanon and elsewhere], EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.”
But Israel resumed its offensive in Lebanon in the hours after the ceasefire was announced and disputed that Lebanon was part of the deal.
Wednesday morning, Trump told PBS News Hour that Lebanon was not included in the ceasefire. “Because of Hezbollah, they were not included in the deal,” he said, calling what was happening in Lebanon a “separate skirmish.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed that “Lebanon is not part of the ceasefire” from the briefing room podium that afternoon.
But Tehran is still insisting that what Pakistan’s prime minister said was right, with multiple high-ranking Iranian officials saying Israel is violating the ceasefire.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Thursday called the Lebanon strikes “a flagrant violation of the initial ceasefire agreement and a dangerous indicator of deceit and lack of commitment to potential accords.”
Vice President JD Vance on Wednesday tried to chalk up the dispute to “a legitimate misunderstanding.”
But importantly, Iran is getting some backup from Pakistan — the intermediary the United States chose to work through. Pakistan is standing by the claim that Lebanon was part of the deal. And it continued to do so Thursday morning.
In a statement, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs cast what’s happening in Lebanon as “serious violations of the ceasefire.”
And the plot has thickened even more. CNN confirmed Thursday morning that top Trump administration officials had been in contact with Pakistan throughout the day Tuesday about what the US wanted to see from a ceasefire and had largely signed off on specific elements of Sharif’s post.
Some had speculated that one of Sharif’s posts was drafted by the United States, given it was initially posted with the header “Draft – Pakistan’s PM Message on X.” The White House denies it was involved in writing the post and said the president didn’t see it until it was released.
There are two main possible explanations. One is that Lebanon was originally supposed to be part of the deal, but Israel didn’t want that. The other is that Vance is right that this is a mix-up.
One interesting development: CNN reported Thursday that Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu spoke on Wednesday, during which the US president asked the Israeli prime minister to scale back attacks in Lebanon and enter into negotiations with Lebanon about disarming Hezbollah.
The Strait of Hormuz
Vessels and boats are off the coast of Musandam governorate in Oman, overlooking the Strait of Hormuz, on Wednesday.
Reuters
One of the most striking aspects of the ceasefire was that it seemed to give Iran something it never had before the war: control of the Strait of Hormuz (at least temporarily).
As CNN’s Fareed Zakaria noted, that would be a very big deal. Iran has shown just how much leverage it has by holding the world economy hostage in the critical waterway.
Iran said in a statement Tuesday night that passage through the strait “will be possible via coordination with Iran’s Armed Forces and with due consideration of technical limitations.”
And Trump seemed to agree to that. He posted Iran’s statement to Truth Social Tuesday night. And while he said in his initial announcement of the ceasefire that it was conditional on the “complete, immediate, and safe opening” of the strait, he notably didn’t demand that Iran relinquish control.
Indeed, in an interview with ABC News on Wednesday morning, he spoke about “a joint venture” in which the US and Iran would charge tolls for ships to pass.
But by Wednesday afternoon, after it became clear that the strait was anything but free-flowing, Leavitt seemed to suggest the deal was that it be completely open. She said the US would negotiate “so long as the Strait of Hormuz remains open with no limitations or delays,” while also disputing that the strait wasn’t open.
The 10-point plan
President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the White House on Monday.
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
Trump in his statement Tuesday night cited “a 10-point proposal from Iran,” which he called “a workable basis on which to negotiate.”
But then Iran began sharing a 10-point list that looked a whole lot like a grab bag of Iranian demands — the kinds of things the United States could never agree to.
By Wednesday afternoon, Leavitt said Trump had been referring to a different 10-point proposal from Iran that was more serious.
“They put forward a more reasonable and entirely different and condensed plan to the president and his team,” Leavitt said. “President Trump and the team determined the new modified plan was a workable basis on which to negotiate and to align it with our own 15-point proposal.”
But Leavitt and the White House have not offered details about what is supposedly in this updated proposal.
And meanwhile, Iran keeps making clear it believes the 10 points it shared publicly are what Trump was referring to. On Wednesday afternoon, it pointed to supposed violations of the 10-point proposal, including via Israel’s strikes in Lebanon and the Trump administration saying Iran will have no right to enrich uranium.
“Now, the very ‘workable basis on which to negotiate’ has been openly and clearly violated,” read a message posted by Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf on Wednesday, “even before the negotiations began.”
Indeed, it’s looking more like the supposed “workable basis” for a big deal to end the war wasn’t very workable at all.
发表回复