2026-03-09T04:00:33.322Z / 美国有线电视新闻网(CNN)
美国在伊朗战争前夕对盟友的态度，在地缘政治层面上等同于第一夫人梅拉尼娅·特朗普曾臭名昭著地在外套上佩戴的标语：”我真的不在乎。你呢？”
特朗普政府不仅背弃了联盟，未能寻求1990-1991年海湾战争甚至2003年伊拉克入侵时期的外交合法性；它还与以色列一起发动了进攻，甚至没有告知许多朋友。
例如，在访问迪拜期间，意大利政府的一名高级成员遭到了意外对待。意大利政府比欧洲大多数国家更接近特朗普的意识形态。”想想这代表的基本缺乏协调：美国最亲密盟友之一的国防部长在战争开始时就在现场，却一无所知，”一名美国官员说。
九天后，这场战争将世界比以往任何时候都更深地卷入了这个已经在唐纳德·特朗普”推倒重来”政治的急转直下时代中定义了美国生活的令人迷失的漩涡。
美国和以色列的首次打击——杀死了伊朗最高领袖阿里·哈梅内伊——引发了地区大混乱。欧洲和中东政府面临一场突如其来的、并非他们发起也非他们所愿的战争。官员们争先恐后地营救被困在不断扩大的交战区的公民。飙升的能源价格冲击了脆弱的经济，国内政治动荡不安。在海湾地区，美国盟友面临着无人机和导弹齐射，这击碎了从沙漠中崛起的玻璃城市的富丽堂皇的平静，并关闭了全球航空枢纽。
现在，一些盟友在不断上升的经济成本、伊朗崩溃可能引发的移民危机以及公民的脆弱性面前日益感到沮丧。他们还担心接下来可能发生什么。
但尽管政府自鸣得意，批评者决心将美国最新的战争与伊拉克泥潭相提并论，但现在判断这场战争可能如何结束还为时过早。
持续的美国和以色列空袭——军事行动的剧本比政治剧本感觉更周密——很有可能削弱德黑兰威胁邻国的能力。这将使更广泛的中东受益，将特朗普塑造为地区强人，使以色列摆脱生存威胁，并在与伊斯兰共和国近50年的敌对之后改善美国的国家安全。
但如果伊朗政权不发生完全更迭，伊朗人可能仍要付出沉重代价——如果镇压而非反革命随后发生。如果特朗普的战争摧毁伊朗国家并引发内战，难民危机或严重的经济后果可能使世界动荡。
“保持冷静和（不要）羞辱他们”
这场战争为无法与特朗普共存但又离不开他的西方国家和中东国家创造了新的地缘政治现实。
很难理解为什么欧洲和海湾盟友没有预见到这一点。这场战争是美国优先新教义的有力体现，即释放美国力量以推行一种新的美国利益观。就像美国推翻委内瑞拉领导人尼古拉斯·马杜罗一样，这反映了特朗普助手斯蒂芬·米勒去年在CNN上的言论：”世界的铁律”意味着强国可以通过武力统治。这是特朗普火山般的性格、拥抱巨大风险、对战略过敏以及对不受约束权力的狂热的人格化。现代最不可预测的总统现在使世界顶级超级大国成为最令人不安的影响。
一名欧洲外交官告诉CNN，参与军事冲突的主要动机是”保护国家利益”。
另一些人则认为，与特朗普周旋也是一项关键的国家利益。”目前，我们试图保持冷静，不羞辱他们，”一名欧洲外交官解释说敌对可能适得其反，”他说。
欧洲对外关系委员会中东项目主任朱利安·巴恩斯-达西表示，欧洲人”被打了个措手不及”。
“现在，他们在全球范围内对一名正在造成巨大破坏的美国总统的日常心血来潮做出反应，”巴恩斯-达西说。他补充道，”他们左右为难。…一方面，他们希望坚持某种国际法或基于规则的秩序，另一方面，他们拼命试图讨好特朗普。”
尽管欧洲人对特朗普蔑视国际机构感到震惊，但他们自身的军事脆弱性意味着他们必须谨慎对待对其国防至关重要的总统。
“说欧洲人是国际法的明确捍卫者过于简单化。大多数欧洲人的立场是，’我们会谴责你的方法，但宽恕你的动机，’”位于海牙的战略咨询公司CogitoPraxis的首席执行官尼古拉斯·邓根说。
“因此，当以色列和美国继续推进他们发起的战争时，欧洲人试图参与而不实际参与，承诺而不实际承诺，”邓根说。
但特朗普凭借对可怕美国军事力量的掌控而大胆行事，似乎无视欧洲人试图跟上的努力。”我一点也不在乎，”周六当被问及是否需要更多帮助时，他告诉哥伦比亚广播公司（CBS）。”他们可以做任何他们想做的事。”
伊朗战争的冲击波重创了已经因特朗普1月重新提出的格陵兰加入美国的要求而摇摇欲坠的跨大西洋联盟。
在英国最初拒绝允许美国飞行员从其基地执行战斗任务后，特朗普的愤怒反应导致”特殊关系”陷入危机。四面楚歌的首相基尔·斯塔默谴责”空中政权更迭”，并代表一个受伊拉克战争创伤、对特朗普最近轻描淡写后9/11战争中盟军伤亡感到深深冒犯的国家发言。
其他欧洲国家则采取了更有效的平衡策略。法国总统埃马纽埃尔·马克龙不能”批准”在国际法之外的打击。但他向法国利益派遣法国航空母舰的举动引起了特朗普的注意。
德国总理弗里德里希·默茨在椭圆形办公室的艰难访问中，表达了对伊朗核和导弹计划的共同关切，并谴责其对以色列的威胁。但西班牙首相佩德罗·桑切斯禁止使用美国军事设施对伊朗发动打击，并指责美国在”用数百万人的命运玩俄罗斯轮盘赌”，这危及了至关重要的贸易关系。
当欧洲忙于应对外交和经济的反噬时，海湾地区的局势更为激烈。
伊朗的导弹和无人机齐射在科威特、沙特阿拉伯、阿曼、阿联酋、卡塔尔和巴林——其中一些已成为欧美外籍人士的富裕避风港——造成了令人震惊的景象。卡塔尔液化天然气生产的中断和霍尔木兹海峡（一条重要的石油运输路线）的实际关闭正加剧经济混乱。
然而，令人难以置信的是，特朗普政府似乎对伊朗的报复感到惊讶，这证明了白宫对这场战争的规划的肤浅，也可能是未来不祥的预兆。
一名以色列军方官员表示，战前假设是”冲突爆发后美国在该地区的基地极有可能成为目标”。但该官员承认，以色列和美国没有充分预见到伊朗会打击海湾国家的民用目标。”不幸的是，这已成为他们战略的一部分，”该官员告诉记者。
乔治敦大学驻卡塔尔政府学教授保罗·马斯格雷夫也认为特朗普团队低估了伊朗的反应。”这次行动不像推翻委内瑞拉的马杜罗那样迅速，这让我觉得他们真的以为伊朗在虚张声势，”他说。
“伊朗人扰乱了这里的生活。他们没有摧毁多哈或迪拜，但他们确实兑现了在敌对行动爆发前多次明确发出的承诺。”
尽管伊朗对海湾国家的无人机和导弹袭击强度有所减缓，但伊斯兰共和国的武器库在军事上可能不具决定性，但在政治上仍有影响力。周日，针对科威特国际机场的燃料储存设施发动了袭击，就在几个小时前，该国社会保障机构大楼在无人机袭击中被纵火。在沙特阿拉伯，一枚军用炮弹击中一所住宅设施，造成两人死亡，12人受伤。
这有助于解释地区关切的加剧。周六，卡塔尔埃米尔谢赫塔米姆·本·哈马德·阿勒萨尼在与特朗普的通话中强调了”控制危机和加强外交以结束危机的重要性”。而在特朗普破坏了美伊谈判的阿曼也忧心忡忡。外交大臣巴德尔·布赛迪周日警告称，该地区正处于”危险的转折点”。
三位熟悉此事的消息人士称，海湾国家的一些政府和军方官员开始对政府的夸大其词感到不满。”华盛顿发出的信息几乎是色情的。就像领导人在享受流血，没有明确的最终目标。同时，海湾合作委员会（GCC）的经济受到影响，”一名目前在该地区的前美国高级官员说。
战争的最终结局也将是美国盟友的雷区。
伊朗新任命的最高领袖穆贾塔巴·哈梅内伊（如果他能幸存）领导的重塑神职政权可能构成的外部威胁较小，但需要定期后续军事打击才能将其遏制。任何由伊斯兰革命卫队残余领导的未来政府可能优先考虑国内镇压，但也可能威胁该地区。没有人希望伊朗发生社会崩溃的混乱。而且所有人都知道，特朗普可能会通过宣布胜利、一走了之并让其他人处理后果来效仿他的国内做法。
特朗普政府似乎痴迷于欧洲的弱点。例如，国防部长彼得·黑格斯eth斥责盟友”束手无策、犹豫不决地谈论使用武力”。
欧洲在不妥协原则的情况下修复裂痕的一种方法是自助。
伦敦国王学院战争研究系国家战略与国家安全高级研究员索菲亚·加斯顿表示，美国期望其与英国的联盟带来三件事：战略一致、文化一致和卓越能力。展示有效的国防能力可以使战略和文化上的差异在美国得到原谅。
“像英国这样的国家越多地投资于其主权力量、繁荣和能力，它对美国作为伙伴的吸引力就越大，它就越能抵御这种联盟动荡带来的威胁，”加斯顿说。
在海湾地区，对美国的态度将通过战争的后果以及伊朗的行为折射出来。
“可以说，如果你是海湾地区的普通居民，至少对美国感到愤怒到厌烦，而对以色列更为不满，”马斯格雷夫说。”但向我们开火的不是美国或以色列，伊朗可能有一个策略，旨在增加对海湾国家的压力，试图在它们和美国之间制造裂痕。但最终，向我们开火的是伊朗。”
一些观察家预测，对伊朗的愤怒可能会让一些海湾国家对与以色列关系正常化（特朗普的优先事项）态度更友好。以色列总理本杰明·内塔尼亚胡上周告诉福克斯新闻，他认为这场战争将成为沙特阿拉伯”和平的门户”。
然而，两名与海湾国家保持密切关系的前以色列高级官员表示，他们听到了”对以色列最新军事行动日益增长的担忧”。”在过去两年半中，以色列发动战争并占领了叙利亚、黎巴嫩和加沙的部分地区，并袭击了卡塔尔。以色列政府中有极右翼部长宣称他们希望控制幼发拉底河和底格里斯河（伊拉克的河流）沿岸的领土，”一名官员说。”因此，有些国家在问，他们推翻伊朗是否只是为了让以色列成为新的地区霸权。”
伊朗战争的后果是严重且不断扩大的。它们将使世界发生变化。
特朗普的标志性举动是在看清局势发展和找到某种胜利方式之前，先推倒既定结构。应用于中东，这一策略极具风险，盟友无法预测。
总统在去年4月告诉《大西洋月刊》，在他的第一个任期内，他必须”做两件事：管理国家和生存”。他补充道：”第二次（任期），我管理国家和世界。”
这场战争向世界展示了这种立场将如何动荡不安。
Trump’s Iran war drags the world into his tear-it-down politics
2026-03-09T04:00:33.322Z / CNN
America’s attitude toward allies leading up to the Iran war was the geopolitical equivalent of a slogan on a jacket once notoriously sported by first lady Melania Trump: “I Really Don’t Care. Do U?”
The Trump administration not only spurned coalitions and failed to seek the diplomatic legitimacy that marked the 1990-91 Gulf War or even the Iraq invasion in 2003; it launched its onslaught, along with Israel, without even telling many of its friends.
Take, for instance, the blindsiding during a trip to Dubai of a senior member of Italy’s government, which is closer to Trump’s ideology than most in Europe. “Think about the fundamental lack of coordination that represents: One of the US’ closest allies’ defense minister was in the theater when it kicked off, and had no idea,” said a US official.
Ad Feedback
Nine days later, the war has pulled the world more deeply than ever into the disorienting vortex that has already defined American life in the whiplash era of Donald Trump’s tear-it-down politics.
The US’ and Israel’s opening strikes — which killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — sent off a regional pandemonium. European and Middle Eastern governments were confronted with a sudden war that wasn’t theirs and that most didn’t want. Officials scrambled to rescue citizens trapped in a widening combat zone. Soaring energy prices battered fragile economies and uproar rocked domestic politics. In the Gulf, US allies faced a drone and missile barrage that shattered the opulent calm of gleaming glass cities springing from the desert and shut down a global aviation crossroads.
Now, some allies are growing frustrated amid rising economic costs, fears of a migrant crisis if Iran implodes, and their citizens’ vulnerability. And they worry about what might come next.
But despite the administration’s triumphalism and the determination of his critics to compare America’s newest war to the Iraq quagmire, it’s too early to fairly judge how the war might end.
Relentless US and Israeli air attacks — in a military playbook that feels far more planned out than the political one — stand a strong chance of neutering Tehran’s power to threaten its neighbors. This would benefit the wider Middle East, bill Trump as a regional strongman, deliver Israel from an existential threat, and improve US national security after a near 50-year feud with the Islamic Republic.
But without full regime change, Iranians might still pay a heavy price if crackdowns rather than counter-revolution follow. And if Trump’s war shatters the Iranian state and sparks civil war, a refugee crisis or grave economic consequence could destabilize the world.
‘Keep calm and (don’t) humiliate them’
The war has coined new geopolitical truths for Western and Middle East nations that can’t live with Trump but can’t live without him.
It’s hard to understand why European and Gulf allies didn’t see this coming. This war is the muscular epitome of a new America First doctrine of unleashing US might to enforce a novel view of US interests. Like the US toppling of Venezuelan leader Nicholás Maduro, it reflects Trump lieutenant Stephen Miller’s statement on CNN last year that the “iron laws of the world” mean strong nations can rule by force. It’s the personification of Trump’s volcanic temperament, embrace of huge risks, allergy to strategy and zeal for unchecked power. The most unpredictable president of the modern age has now made the world’s top superpower its most unsettling influence.
One European diplomat told CNN the main impulse for contributing militarily to the conflict is to “protect national interests.”
Others argued that managing Trump is also a key national interest. “For now, we are trying to keep calm and not humiliate them,” said a European diplomat, explaining that hostility could backfire.
Julien Barnes-Dacey, program director for the Middle East at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said Europeans “have been caught cold.”
“They are, globally now, responding to the daily whims of a US president who is causing immense disruption,” Barnes-Dacey said. He added, “They are caught between a rock and a hard place. … On the one hand, they want to cling on to some sense of international law, or the rules-based order, and then on the other hand, they are desperately trying to keep themselves in Trump’s good books.”
Shocked as Europeans are by Trump’s contempt for international institutions, their own military fragility means they must tread carefully with a president who is critical for their defense.
“It’s too simplistic to say that the Europeans are unequivocal champions of international law. Where most of the Europeans are coming out is, ‘We’ll condemn your methods but condone your motives,’” said Nicholas Dungan, CEO of CogitoPraxis, a strategic consultancy based in The Hague.
“So as Israel and the United States pursue the war they started, the Europeans try to engage without engaging and commit without committing,” Dungan said.
But Trump, emboldened by his command of fearsome US military power, seems oblivious to European efforts to catch up. “I couldn’t care less,” he told CBS on Saturday when asked whether he wanted more help. “They can do whatever they want.”
The Iran war shock waves pummeled a transatlantic alliance already reeling from Trump’s renewed demands in January that Greenland join the United States.
The “special relationship” is in crisis after Trump reacted angrily to Britain’s initial refusal to let US pilots fly combat sorties from its bases. Beleaguered Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned “regime change from the skies” and spoke for a nation traumatized by the Iraq War and deeply offended by Trump’s recent slighting of Allied casualties of the post-9/11 wars.
Other European states performed a more effective balancing act. French President Emmanuel Macron could not “approve” of strikes “outside of international law.” But he caught Trump’s eye by sending France’s aircraft carrier to protect French interests.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz navigated a tricky Oval Office visit by voicing shared concerns about Iran’s nuclear and missile programs and condemning its threats against Israel. But Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez risked vital trade ties by forbidding the use of US military facilities for strikes on Iran and accusing the US of playing “Russian roulette with the destiny of millions.”
While Europe raced to address diplomatic and economic blowback, the situation in the Gulf was more kinetic.
Iranian missile and drone barrages created a jarring spectacle in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain, some of which have become wealthy havens for European and American ex-pats. The cutoff of liquified national gas production in Qatar and the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz — a vital oil transit point — are spiking economic mayhem.
Yet incredibly, the Trump administration seemed surprised by Iran’s reprisals, a testament to the superficiality of the White House’s planning for the war, and perhaps an ill omen for what lies ahead.
An Israeli military official said the prewar assumption was that there was a “high likelihood that US bases in the region would be targeted” once conflict broke out. But the official acknowledged that Israel and the US did not fully anticipate the extent to which Iran would strike civilian targets in Gulf states. “Unfortunately, that has become part of their strategy,” the official told reporters.
Paul Musgrave, a Qatar-based professor of government at Georgetown University, agreed that Trump’s team underestimated the Iranian response. The administration’s “surprise” that this operation wasn’t as swift as the ouster of Maduro in Venezuela “all seemed to point to me that they really thought that the Iranians were bluffing,” he said.
“The Iranians have disrupted life here. They haven’t leveled Doha or Dubai, but they have very much made good on promises that they made loud and clear repeatedly before hostilities broke out.”
While the intensity of Iranian drone and missile strikes on Gulf states has slowed, the Islamic Republic’s arsenal remains politically potent if not militarily decisive. Attacks targeted fuel storage at Kuwait International Airport on Sunday, hours after the country’s Public Institution for Social Security building was set on fire in a drone strike. In Saudi Arabia, two people were killed and 12 others injured when a military projectile slammed into a residential facility.
This helps explain growing regional concern. In a call with Trump on Saturday, Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani stressed the “importance of containing the crisis and intensifying diplomacy to end it.” And Oman, which was mediating US-Iran talks that Trump blew up, is also worried. Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi warned Sunday the region was at a “dangerous turning point.”
Some government and military officials in Gulf nations are beginning to chafe at the administration’s bombastic tone, three sources familiar with the matter said. “The messaging coming out of DC is almost pornographic. It is like leaders are enjoying the bloodshed, with no clear endgame. While the economies in the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) are being impacted,” said a former senior US official currently in the region.
The war’s endgame will also be a minefield for US allies.
A remodeled clerical regime in Iran — under the newly anointed Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, if he survives — may present less of an outside threat but require regular follow-up military strikes to keep it in a box. Any future government led by remnants of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps may prioritize domestic repression but also threaten the region. No one wants the chaos of a societal meltdown in Iran. And everyone knows Trump might just mirror his domestic approach by declaring victory, walking away and leaving everyone else to deal with the consequences.
The Trump administration appears obsessed with European weakness. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, for instance, chided allies who “wring their hands and clutch their pearls” while “hemming and hawing about the use of force.”
One way for Europe to repair the breach without compromising its principles would be to help itself.
Sophia Gaston, senior research fellow at the Centre for Statecraft and National Security in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London, said the US expects three things from its alliance with Britain: strategic alignment, cultural alignment and exceptional capabilities. A demonstration of an effective defense capacity could make differences on strategy and culture excusable in Washington.
“The more a country like Britain invests in its sovereign strength, prosperity and capability, the more attractive it also then becomes for the United States as a partner, but also the more it can defend its own interests against the turbulence of such an alliance,” Gaston said.
In the Gulf, attitudes toward the US will be refracted through the war’s aftermath but also Iran’s behavior.
“I think it is fair to say that if you’re the average resident of the Gulf, you are angry to annoyed, at a minimum, with the United States, and more so with Israel,” Musgrave said. “But the people shooting at us are not America or Israel, and Iran might have a strategy that they’ve calibrated to raise the pressure on the Gulf states, to try to drag a wedge between them and the United States. But ultimately, it’s Iran that’s shooting at us.”
Some observers predict anger at Iran might make some Gulf states look more kindly on the normalizing relations with Israel — a Trump priority. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Fox News last week that he believes the war will be a “gateway for peace” in Saudi Arabia.
However, two former senior Israeli officials who maintain a close relationship with the Gulf states said they are hearing “growing concern” about Israel’s latest military endeavors. “In the past two and a half years, Israel went to war and seized parts of Syria, Lebanon and Gaza and struck Qatar. And there are far-right ministers in the Israeli government who declare that they want to control territory to the Euphrates and the Tigris,” one official said, referencing rivers in Iraq. “So there are countries who are asking if they are taking down Iran just to have Israel rise as the new regional hegemony instead.”
Consequences of the Iran war are grave and ever-widening. They will leave the world changed.
Trump’s signature move is to tear down established structures before seeing where the pieces fall and finding some way to declare a win. Applied to the Middle East, this strategy is extraordinarily risky and impossible for allies to predict.
The president told The Atlantic last April that in his first term he had to “two things to do: run the country and survive.” He added: “And the second time, I run the country and the world.”
This war shows the rest of the world how tumultuous that stance will be.
