2026-04-10T19:26:23.655Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
亚伦·布莱克 撰稿
33分钟前发布
发布于 2026年4月10日 美国东部时间下午3:26
中东 | 唐纳德·特朗普
4月6日周一，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普在白宫南草坪参加白宫复活节滚彩蛋活动后，返回椭圆形办公室。
亚历克斯·布兰登/美联社
本周伊始，唐纳德·特朗普总统发出了前所未有的战争叫嚣。他威胁要犯下明显的战争罪行，并声称如果伊朗不满足其要求，将“彻底摧毁整个文明”。
而本周即将结束时，特朗普看起来正逐渐失去谈判筹码、无计可施——且愈发急切地想要找到体面的下台台阶。
周五发布的经济数据尤其严峻，这削弱了特朗普继续推进对伊战争、并在后续谈判中对伊朗强硬施压的能力。我们简要梳理一下：
- 霍尔木兹海峡持续的航运堵塞引发的石油冲击，仅3月份就推动通胀率上涨0.9%，这是近四年来单月最大涨幅。
- 按年化计算，当前通胀率已达3.3%，为特朗普就任总统以来的最高水平。
- 3月份汽油价格上涨21.2%，创下历史纪录。
- 备受关注的密歇根大学消费者信心指数——衡量美国人对经济信心的指标——刚刚跌至1952年有数据记录以来的历史低点。
而对特朗普来说，或许最令人不安的是，这可能还只是开始。正如CNN的大卫·戈德曼所指出的，石油冲击意味着通胀可能会持续数月攀升，即便战争能快速结束、霍尔木兹海峡重新开放（如果战争持续、海峡未来数周内无法通航，局势可能会变得更加糟糕）。
这意味着黯淡的经济前景可能会在11月大选前逼近，而共和党人原本就面临着保住众议院控制权的艰巨挑战。
毫无疑问，这给特朗普带来了达成协议、结束战争并重新开放海峡的压力。而这也削弱了他在对伊谈判中的筹码——特朗普近期的言行已经印证了这一现实。
周二宣布的停火协议引发了大量争议，人们质疑特朗普是否已经退缩——或者用当下的说法，是“认怂服软”了。他此前设定了美国东部时间晚上8点的最后期限，要求伊朗同意协议并重新开放海峡；否则，他据称将以特朗普所说的“摧毁整个文明”的方式袭击伊朗基础设施。
如今看来，停火协议更像是为了避免兑现这一威胁而仓促达成的。
其一，双方似乎甚至无法就停火协议的条款达成一致。在一些核心问题上，双方给出了截然不同的说法。其中包括：指导谈判的所谓伊朗10点计划具体内容是什么、伊朗是否将暂时控制海峡、以色列是否停止对黎巴嫩真主党的打击是否属于协议内容。
停火协议达成后，特朗普及其团队看起来比伊朗更急于达成协议——他们愿意在两个关键问题上对伊朗做出更多让步，尽管德黑兰官员多次威胁要退出谈判。
第一个问题是以色列持续袭击黎巴嫩真主党，伊朗和巴基斯坦称这违反了停火协议（美国和以色列对此予以否认）。伊朗是真主党的主要赞助者，为这个恐怖组织提供了大量资金和军事援助。
第二个问题是霍尔木兹海峡实际上并未开放——尽管特朗普曾表示停火协议的前提是“霍尔木兹海峡完全、立即且安全地重新开放”。
但双方对这些明显的障碍做出了截然不同的回应。
在黎巴嫩问题上，特朗普政府试图淡化这一争议。副总统J·D·万斯暗示，关于持续袭击是否违反停火协议的争论只是一场“误解”。在伊朗要求以色列停止在黎巴嫩的行动后，特朗普亲自向以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡呼吁缓和局势。
有更多证据表明，伊朗在霍尔木兹海峡问题上直接违反了停火协议条款。但特朗普政府在这一问题上的态度有时相当宽容，完全没有出现本周早些时候总统威胁时的强硬口吻。
停火协议宣布的次日，白宫新闻秘书卡罗琳·利夫特被问及海峡内几乎没有船只通行的情况。她回应称，“私下里”他们看到航运量有“回升”，船只再次大规模通过该航道还“需要时间”。
到周四，特朗普开始感到沮丧，在社交媒体上表示伊朗“在允许石油通过霍尔木兹海峡方面表现非常糟糕，有些人会说是不光彩的”。但即便如此，他也暗示伊朗可能只是未能履行义务，而非公然违反协议。
特朗普周五补充称，伊朗“除了利用国际水道短期勒索世界之外，没有任何底牌。它们今天之所以还能存在，就是为了谈判！”
但如果伊朗真的没有底牌，特朗普政府的表现却恰恰相反。
或许目前局势最能说明问题的一点是，伊朗多次威胁要退出谈判桌，而特朗普政府却并未如此。
周五，尽管伊朗显然未遵守霍尔木兹海峡相关协议，政府仍派遣万斯前往巴基斯坦进行面对面谈判。在万斯乘坐空军二号专机期间，伊朗代表、议会议长穆罕默德·巴盖尔·加利巴夫在X平台上发表声明称，黎巴嫩局势和另一个问题必须在“谈判开始前”得到解决。
综合来看，一方（特朗普）看起来比另一方（伊朗）更急于达成协议。尽管特朗普最初曾表示，战争只会以伊朗“无条件投降”告终。
这在当前背景下是合乎情理的。
伊朗无疑在军事上遭受了重创。但从经济层面来看，它封锁霍尔木兹海峡的能力让该国占据了上风。
事实上，封锁海峡这一先例在理论上对未来针对伊朗的袭击构成了巨大威慑。从战略角度看，德黑兰官员有充分理由坚持立场。
相比之下，这场战争在美国从一开始就受时间限制。美国民众原本就对战争兴趣寥寥（部分原因是特朗普从未费心为战争辩护或争取民众支持）。而美国民众也对特朗普反复要求他们为长期利益承受短期痛苦的说法兴趣寥寥。
随着负面经济消息不断发酵，民众对战争的微薄支持率进一步下滑。共和党人也越来越担心，这场战争的后果会让他们在2026年中期选举中付出沉重代价。
这并不意味着特朗普会妥协——有很多理由表明这场冲突可能会持续下去。他最终可能还是会觉得有必要强硬谈判。其中首要原因是他与以色列的关系，以色列不会希望一个敌对的地区强国轻易脱身。
但随着美国官员前往巴基斯坦进行谈判，看起来特朗普那些非同寻常的威胁并未为他换来想要的谈判筹码。
Grim new economic numbers highlight how Trump is losing leverage against Iran
2026-04-10T19:26:23.655Z / CNN
Analysis by
Aaron Blake
33 min ago
PUBLISHED Apr 10, 2026, 3:26 PM ET
The Middle East Donald Trump
President Donald Trump walks back into the Oval Office after participating in the White House Easter Egg Roll on the South Lawn of the White House, on Monday, April 6.
Alex Brandon/AP
The week began with President Donald Trump saber-rattling like we’ve never seen before. He threatened apparent war crimes and to end a “whole civilization” if Iran didn’t meet his demands.
It is ending with Trump looking like he’s losing leverage, out of ideas — and increasingly anxious for an offramp.
The economic news Friday was especially grim for Trump’s ability to keep prosecuting this war and drive a hard bargain with Iran in upcoming negotiations. Let’s briefly recap:
- The oil shock created by the ongoing logjam in the Strait of Hormuz pushed inflation up 0.9% in March alone, which was the highest one-month jump in nearly four years.
- Inflation is now at 3.3% on an annualized basis, which is the highest rate since Trump became president.
- The price of gasoline rose 21.2% in March, which was a record.
- The much-watched University of Michigan consumer sentiment index — a measure of how confident Americans are in the economy — just hit a record low, in data stretching back to 1952.
And perhaps most troubling for Trump, this could just be the beginning. As CNN’s David Goldman notes, the oil shock means inflation is likely to keep rising for months, even if the war is brought to a quick end and the Strait of Hormuz is reopened (if the war continues and the strait doesn’t open in the next several weeks, this could get much uglier).
That means a gloomy economic outlook could come dangerously close to the November election, when Republicans already face an uphill battle to keep control of the House.
Undoubtedly, that creates pressure on Trump to cut a deal to end the war and reopen the strait. And that reduces his leverage in Iran negotiations — a reality that’s been reflected by Trump’s recent behavior.
The ceasefire announcement Tuesday spurred plenty of debate about whether Trump had backed down — or, in the parlance of the day, TACO’d. He had set a deadline for 8 p.m. ET for Iran to agree to a deal and reopen the strait; otherwise, he was supposedly going to attack Iranian infrastructure in ways that, as Trump put it, would end a civilization.
It’s looking more and more like the ceasefire was rather hastily assembled in the name of avoiding making good on that promise.
For one, the two sides can’t even seem to agree on the terms of the ceasefire. They’ve offered very different versions of events on some of the central issues. That includes what Iranian 10-point plan is supposed to guide the negotiations, whether Iran gets temporary control of the strait and if Israel stopping its strikes on Hezbollah in Lebanon were part of the deal.
In the aftermath, Trump and his team have appeared more anxious than Iran is to cut a deal — willing to give Iran more leeway on two major problems, as Tehran officials repeatedly threaten to walk away.
One is that Israel kept hitting Hezbollah in Lebanon, which Iran and Pakistan say violates the ceasefire (the US and Israel dispute this). Iran is the primary sponsor of Hezbollah, providing the terrorist group with substantial financial and military assistance.
Second is that the Strait of Hormuz is decidedly not very open – despite Trump’s having said the ceasefire was contingent on “the COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz.”
But the two sides have responded to these apparent stumbling blocks in very different ways.
On Lebanon, the Trump administration has tried to massage the issue away. Vice President JD Vance suggested the dispute over whether those continued attacks were violating the ceasefire was a mere “misunderstanding.” And after Iran demanded that Israel back down in Lebanon, Trump personally appealed to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to smooth things over.
There’s more evidence that Iran has directly flouted the terms of the ceasefire when it comes to the Strait of Hormuz. Yet the Trump administration’s tone on the issue has been fairly forgiving at times and certainly hasn’t approached the tenor of the president’s threats earlier this week.
The day after the ceasefire was announced, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked about nearly nonexistent traffic through the strait. She replied that “privately” they had seen an “uptick” and that it would “take time” for ships to begin crossing the waterway in large numbers again.
By Thursday, Trump was starting to get frustrated, saying on social media that Iran was “doing a very poor job, dishonorable some would say, of allowing Oil to go through the Strait of Hormuz.” But even that allows that maybe Iran is just failing rather than flouting the deal.
Trump added Friday that the Iranians “have no cards, other than a short term extortion of the World by using International Waterways. The only reason they are alive today is to negotiate!”
But if Iran has no cards, the Trump administration has a funny way of showing it.
Perhaps the most telling aspect of the situation right now is that Iran has repeatedly threatened to walk away from the negotiating table in ways the Trump administration has not.
On Friday, the administration was still sending Vance to Pakistan for in-person negotiations, despite Iran’s apparent noncompliance in the Strait of Hormuz. While Vance was aboard Air Force Two, the Iranian representative, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said in a statement on X that the Lebanon situation and another issue must be solved “before negotiations begin.”
The combined picture is that one side (Trump) appears a lot more anxious to negotiate a deal than the other side (Iran) does. This despite Trump initially having said the war would only end with Iran’s “unconditional surrender.”
It makes sense in context.
Iran has surely taken a beating militarily. But economically, its ability to shut down the Strait of Hormuz gives the country an upper hand.
In fact, setting the precedent of locking down the strait is theoretically a huge deterrent for future attacks against the country. Strategically, Tehran officials have good reason to dig in.
By contrast, this war was always on the clock in the United States. The American people never had much interest in it in the first place (in part because Trump never bothered to make the case for it or build a base of support). And Americans have shown little interest in Trump’s repeated demands that they embrace short-term pain for long-term gain.
The meager support for the war has only lessened as negative economic news compounds. And Republicans are increasingly worried about the fallout costing them dearly in the 2026 midterms.
That doesn’t mean Trump will fold — and there are plenty of reasons this could drag on. He might ultimately feel compelled to drive a hard bargain. At the top of that list is his relationship with Israel, which won’t want to let an antagonistic regional power get off easy.
But as US officials head to Pakistan for negotiations, it doesn’t look like Trump’s extraordinary threats bought him the leverage he wanted.
发表回复