2026-06-11T16:51:41.084Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/11/politics/trump-iran-deceiving-analysis
- 唐纳德·特朗普总统曾多次表示与伊朗达成协议指日可待，同时却淡化军事威胁，对伊朗的挑衅行为轻描淡写。
- 他一再放宽最后期限、发出空洞威胁的做法，向德黑兰传递出一个信号：他没有重启敌对行动的意愿。
- 中期选举临近，特朗普面临越来越大的压力，需要解决这场可能已成为共和党政治负担的冲突。
本文由AI生成的摘要经CNN编辑审核。
唐纳德·特朗普总统深谙精心打造脱离现实的叙事之道。
但在过去两个半月左右的时间里，他编造出一个主要目的似乎是为了自欺欺人的幻境。
他将伊朗描绘成迫切希望达成协议的一方，仿佛协议总在眼前触手可及。他还一再选择相信伊朗，放宽自己设定的最后期限，收回威胁言论，并淡化伊朗的挑衅行为以及明显违反停火协议的举动。
这种模式周一再次上演：就在特朗普表示计划攻占哈尔克岛仅数小时后，他再次取消了原定的袭击行动。和以往一样，他声称谈判取得了所谓进展。
这种做法的问题在于，它已经相当明确地表明特朗普无意重回战争——他更希望彻底了结这一切，即便伊朗一直在利用他的犹豫态度。
而越来越明显的是，特朗普一味寄望的乐观态度，只是推迟了不可避免的敌对行动重演——就在特朗普最新声称即将达成协议之前，敌对行动已于本周重新爆发。
特朗普对与伊朗达成潜在协议的不切实际幻想，似乎主要延长了这场战争及其带来的经济痛苦——并让局势更临近2026年中期选举，而伊朗正日益将此次选举作为重要的筹码。
即便过去24小时内敌对行动升级——主要起因是伊朗击落了一架美军阿帕奇直升机，飞行员最终获救——特朗普也几乎是极不情愿地被拖回了战场。
在周二的社交媒体帖子中，他淡化了伊朗击落直升机事件的严重性，同时表示：“尽管如此，美国出于必要，必须对此次袭击作出回应。”当天他在接受《华尔街日报》采访时同样表示，伊朗的袭击“没什么大不了”。周三在谈及报复行动时，他说：“我想我们有权这么做。”
特朗普还夹杂了一些措辞强硬的言论，称他会对伊朗施以重击——甚至在周四的社交媒体上表示，美军很快将“攻占哈尔克岛”，而这场行动可能需要地面部队，还可能造成重大人员伤亡。
但仅仅几分钟后，他就在福克斯新闻频道上淡化了这一可能性，反复提及美国民众对这类军事行动缺乏“兴趣”。
“我不确定全国民众是否有意愿这么做，”特朗普说道。
他很快又重复了一遍：“我不确定全国民众是否有意愿这么做。这没关系，我理解这一点。”
“我不想派地面部队，但如果我想这么做，我们可以派出一小支军队，占领整个地区，”他说。
总统随后补充道：“我不知道美国是否有意愿去做我真正更愿意做的事情。”
但看起来往往是特朗普本人缺乏开战的决心。
战争初期，他一再为伊朗设定最后期限，要求伊朗投降，否则将采取行动，但即便德黑兰未满足他的要求，他还是放宽了期限。（这也被称为虚张声势。）
4月7日，特朗普宣布了一项仓促达成的停火协议，似乎没人同意该协议的条款。随后，尽管伊朗并未做到特朗普坚持要求的一件关键之事，政府仍试图维持停火协议的表面姿态。他最初表示，停火协议“取决于……霍尔木兹海峡的全面、立即和安全开放”——但这一要求从未得到落实。
而当伊朗似乎在其他方面违反停火协议时，特朗普及其政府一再竭力淡化此事。
特朗普也多次释放出强烈希望避免再次开战的信号。例如，上周他两次提及吉米·卡特和伊朗人质危机这个前车之鉴。
“我不想让士兵陷入那种危险，”特朗普在6月3日说道。“我记得吉米·卡特在伊朗人质事件中遇到了不少麻烦。我永远不想让我们的人民陷入那种危险。”
次日，在淡化派遣部队回收高浓缩铀的可能性时，他补充道：“我不想成为吉米·卡特，你懂的——我不想当吉米·卡特。”
换言之，特朗普不愿再次开战的态度已经毫不掩饰。
盟友可能会将特朗普的立场浪漫化为一种姿态或战略布局，但这似乎只会鼓励伊朗坚持要求从和平协议中获得更有利的条款。
事实上，特朗普泄露自己的意图并一再放过对方的做法存在一个问题：这给了伊朗筹码。
这并不意味着特朗普最终不会大举重启战争。
但这不禁让人发问，例如，当明确伊朗未满足特朗普提出的停火协议需重新开放海峡的要求时，政府为何没有做出更强烈的回应。
这似乎是相当严重的违反协议行为，但政府基本对此置之不理。
而美国两个月来试图迁就伊朗并非没有代价。伊朗最大的优势之一就是时间。尽管特朗普可能认为美国对海峡的封锁正在重创伊朗经济，但他自己也处于竞选时钟的压力之下。
随着中期选举临近，共和党可能会向特朗普施加更大压力，要求他结束这场看起来可能成为他们政治负担的冲突——因为通胀仍在飙升。这可能迫使他做出一些非常艰难的抉择——要么重回战争，要么以结束这一糟糕局面为名达成一份并非最优的协议。
而这是特朗普如今越来越无法忽视的一个真实选择。
本文已补充报道内容并更新。
How Trump has deceived himself on Iran
2026-06-11T16:51:41.084Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/11/politics/trump-iran-deceiving-analysis
- President Donald Trump has repeatedly said a deal with Iran is imminent while backing away from military threats and downplaying Iranian provocations.
- His pattern of relaxed deadlines and hollow threats has signaled to Tehran that he lacks the will to resume hostilities.
- With midterm elections approaching, Trump faces mounting pressure to resolve a conflict that may have become a political liability for Republicans.
AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.
President Donald Trump is nothing if not studied at crafting elaborate alternate realities.
But for the last two and a half months or so, he conjured one that seemed primarily aimed at deceiving himself.
He painted Iran as desperate to cut a deal, which always seemed to be right around the corner. And he repeatedly gave Tehran the benefit of the doubt, relaxed his own deadlines, walked back his threats and downplayed Iran’s provocations and apparent ceasefire violations.
The pattern played out again Monday, when Trump yet again backed off on threatened attacks just hours after saying he planned to take over Kharg Island. As he has before, he cited supposed progress in negotiating an agreement.
The problem with this approach is that it has made it pretty clear that Trump lacks the will to go back to war — that he prefers to just be done with it all, even as Iran plays on his reluctance.
And it increasingly appears as though Trump hoping against hope just delayed an inevitable return to the kind of hostilities that resumed this week before Trump’s latest claim of an imminent bargain.
Trump’s fanciful treatment of a potential deal with Iran appears to have mostly prolonged the war and its economic pain — and brought the situation closer to the 2026 midterm elections, which increasingly loom as a major leverage point for Iran.
Even as hostilities intensified over the last 24 hours — largely in the wake of Iran downing a US Army Apache helicopter whose pilots had to be saved — Trump was almost begrudging about being dragged back in.
In a Tuesday social media post, he downplayed the severity of Iran downing the helicopter while saying, “Nevertheless, the United States must, of necessity, respond to this attack.” He told the Wall Street Journal the same day that Iran’s attack “wasn’t a big deal.” While talking about retaliation, he said Wednesday, “I guess we have the right to do that.”
Trump has also mixed in some very tough talk about how hard he would hit Iran — even saying on social media on Thursday that the US military would soon “be taking Kharg Island,” an operation that would likely require ground troops and could risk significant casualties.
But just minutes later, there he was on Fox News downplaying that possibility by repeatedly citing Americans’ lack of “appetite” for such military action.
“I’m not sure the country has the appetite for it,” Trump said.
“I’m not sure the country has the appetite for it,” he soon repeated. “And that’s okay, I understand that.”
“I don’t want to have boots on the ground, but if I wanted to, we could put a small group of soldiers and take over the whole place,” he said.
The president later added: “I don’t know that America has the appetite to do what I would really much prefer doing.”
But it often looks like it’s Trump who lacks the stomach.
Early in the war, he repeatedly set deadlines for Iran to capitulate or else, only to relax them despite Tehran not meeting his demands. (This is also known as bluffing.)
Trump on April 7 announced a hastily assembled ceasefire whose terms nobody seemed to agree on. Then the administration tried to keep the appearance of the truce going even though Iran didn’t do the one major thing Trump insisted it had to. He initially said the ceasefire was “subject to … the COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz” — which never happened.
And when Iran seemed to violate the ceasefire in other ways, Trump and his administration repeatedly strained to downplay it.
Trump has also sent signals that he’d very much like to avoid going back to war. Last week, for example, he twice cited the cautionary tale that was Jimmy Carter and the Iran hostage crisis.
“I don’t want to put men in that kind of danger,” Trump said on June 3. “I remember Jimmy Carter had some bad problems in Iran with the hostages. I don’t want to ever put our people in that kind of danger.”
He added the next day, while downplaying the possibility of sending in troops to recover highly enriched uranium: “I didn’t want to be Jimmy Carter, you know — I didn’t feel like being Jimmy Carter.”
In other words, Trump’s reluctance to go back to war hasn’t been subtle.
Allies might fancifully view Trump’s position as posturing or some strategic play. But it seems to have only encouraged Iran to hold out for more favorable terms from a peace deal.
Indeed, that’s the problem with Trump telegraphing what he wants to do and repeatedly giving the other side a pass: It gives Iran leverage.
That doesn’t mean Trump won’t ultimately go big in restarting the war.
But it begs the question why the administration didn’t respond more strongly, for instance, when it became clear Iran wasn’t satisfying Trump’s demand that the ceasefire include reopening the strait.
That seemed a pretty big violation, but the administration basically ignored it.
And the US trying to accommodate Iran for two months has not been without a cost. One of Iran’s biggest assets is the passage of time. While Trump might view the US blockade of the strait as bleeding the Iranian economy, he’s on the clock too.
As the midterm elections approach, Republicans will likely be putting more pressure on Trump to wrap up what looks like a potential political albatross for them thanks to still-spiking inflation. That could force some very difficult decisions — i.e. whether to go back to war or to cut a suboptimal deal in the name of bringing this ugly chapter to a close.
And that’s a real potential choice Trump increasingly can’t ignore.
This story has been updated with additional reporting.
发表回复