作者：斯蒂芬·科林森
发布于 2026年4月1日，美国东部时间凌晨12:00 / CNN
唐纳德·特朗普总统在3月31日周二于白宫椭圆形办公室签署行政命令后回答记者提问，商务部长霍华德·卢特尼克在一旁聆听。
亚历克斯·布兰登/美联社
唐纳德·特朗普看起来正准备抽身了事。
这位总统告诉美国盟友——他们因未收到提前预警、不愿参战且认为此举违反国际法而没有加入他对伊朗的战争——他们将不得不承担后果。
“去你们自己找石油吧，”他周二在真相社交平台上写道，不久前有消息人士告诉CNN，美国政府无法保证在宣布任务完成前恢复霍尔木兹海峡的自由通航。
总统随后预测这场战争将在两到三周内“结束”。“海峡那边发生的事，我们一概不管，”他在椭圆形办公室对记者表示。
伊朗曾利用这个波斯湾入口的咽喉要道切断关键石油供应，挟持全球经济。如果战争结束时伊朗仍控制着这条关键航道，它将获得一场战略胜利。
国防部长皮特·赫格斯瑟3月31日周二在五角大楼的新闻发布会上对媒体发言。
曼努埃尔·巴尔·塞纳/美联社
在特朗普希望结束战争的新迹象浮现之际，官员们似乎正在为他铺垫说辞，以便他能在不解决战后问题的情况下终止战争。国防部长皮特·赫格斯瑟周二声称美国已在伊朗实现“政权更迭”——尽管该国仍由敌视美国的压迫性伊斯兰激进分子统治。
政府最新的重新定义胜利的尝试，反映了开战一个多月来特朗普面临的棘手选择，以及官员们设定的四到六周战争期限带来的日益增长的压力。此前特朗普曾声称与伊朗正在进行“富有成效的”会谈——尽管德黑兰官员否认了这一说法，也没有公开证据显示外交取得进展。
以伊朗控制海峡的方式结束战争，在国际上会被视为美国的战略失败。伊朗无疑会宣称胜利，并可能认为自己重新建立了对未来打击的威慑力。而且它可能会试图利用其新地位牟利，对通过该航道的油轮征收通行费。这将为重建在美以空袭中被摧毁的军事、导弹甚至核项目提供资金。
所有这些都将考验特朗普将几乎任何事态都包装成胜利的话术能力。但这对总统来说可能仍是更可取的终局，因为任何以武力重新开放海峡的企图都将面临美军重大伤亡的风险，并延长战争，进一步削弱他本已岌岌可危的国内政治权威。
特朗普无法逃脱其决策的后果
3月20日周五，佛罗里达州基韦斯特的一家Circle K加油站显示汽油价格飙升至每加仑4.50美元以上。
珍·戈德贝克/SOPA图片/西帕通讯社/美联社
抽身离去可能会留下混乱，但这符合特朗普的行事风格——实际上，他在打破现状方面比建立新体系更有一套。这也将延伸“美国优先”原则，即美国应始终在其专属国家利益框架内行事。同时这也会纵容特朗普对北约盟友的愤怒，他认为这些盟友在利用美国的安全保障搭便车。
但美国并非存在于特朗普言论定义的真空之中。他将很难摆脱海峡由重振旗鼓的伊朗控制所带来的经济和政治连锁反应。特朗普或许能够通过政治说辞为其撤军辩解，但市场不太可能这么容易被说服。
“尽管美国是全球最大石油生产国，但这并不能让美国消费者免受油价波动影响，因为油价是全球性的，”国防优先智库中东研究项目主任罗斯玛丽·凯拉尼克周二在CNN国际频道接受扎因·阿舍采访时表示。“因此，美国国内乃至全世界的每个人都会受到这场供应冲击的影响。”
这场经济打击有可能引发全球衰退，进而冲击美国本土——可能就在中期选举前数月。届时民主党希望借此大胜，以限制特朗普第二任期的权力。
更广泛地说，伊朗战争的余波还带来了另一个后果：跨大西洋联盟的裂痕进一步加深。这只会凸显欧洲盟友——以及加拿大总理马克·卡尼所称的“中等强国”——加大自身军事投入的必要性，因为美国战后的安全保护伞已变得不可靠。
国务卿马可·卢比奥是特朗普核心圈子中最支持北约的成员之一，他本周在半岛电视台表示，美国盟友对战争的反应“非常令人失望”，并暗示特朗普将在战争结束后“重新审视”美国对它们的承诺。欧洲各地随即响起了警报。
欧洲可能付出的代价
英国首相基尔·斯塔默3月30日周一在伦敦参加一场会议，讨论美以与伊朗的冲突以及对霍尔木兹海峡的影响。
杰米·乔伊/路透社
盟友们正领教到，在特朗普这个不可预测的时代，他们再也不能依赖美国的安全保障，因为这位美国总统似乎即将将安全保障与无条件支持他的行动绑定。
包括英国在内的一些国家起初拒绝允许美国使用其空军基地对伊朗发动进攻任务。另一些国家，如西班牙，则走得更远。因此，特朗普抨击了与英国的“特殊关系”，并威胁切断与马德里的所有贸易。
但特朗普将这些领导人置于了两难境地。一年来他一直在斥责盟友，包括要求丹麦割让格陵兰岛、实施关税攻击，以及对美国盟友在9·11后战争中付出的牺牲嗤之以鼻——这让他们几乎没有空间既能帮助他，又能保住自己的政治生涯。
但不参战并不能让他们免于付出代价。
高油价和不断攀升的通胀有可能摧毁脆弱的欧洲经济，并引发选民对本已疲弱的中间派政府的政治反弹。一些欧盟国家已经在讨论汽油和柴油配给问题。欧洲大陆还担心，德黑兰中央政府权威的崩溃可能引发又一波大规模难民潮涌向其边境，考验财政和文化断层线。
而且，这些国家不可能简单地——用特朗普的话说——“自己去找石油”。战争暴露了欧洲精简后的军事力量有多薄弱。英国皇家海军花了数周时间才在塞浦路斯附近部署一艘反导弹驱逐舰，以保护英国资产。法国成功派遣了一个航母战斗群来保护其利益和中东盟友的利益。但没有美国的支持，北约国家根本没有能力开放并守住海峡。就连强大的美国海军目前也认为，冒险进入伊朗无人机和导弹的射程过于危险。
和以往关于特朗普的情况一样，最明智的做法是不要全盘相信他的话。在美国可能撤军的迹象出现的前一天，他曾警告，如果德黑兰不满足他的和平要求，他将摧毁伊朗的发电厂甚至海水淡化设施，升级战争的暴力程度。
特朗普的公开宣泄有时是一种策略，旨在迫使较弱的对手就范。卢比奥周五的言论似乎暗示了这一点，他表示“亚洲乃至世界各地的国家都有切身利益，应该大力协助”重新开放霍尔木兹海峡。
伊朗和美国可能没有明确的撤军途径，但美国盟友或许可以在与特朗普的对峙中找到退路。欧洲确实有可用的能力。一些国家拥有美国所缺乏的扫雷能力。法国曾表示愿意与其他海军一起加入国际任务，保护通过海峡的航运——但只有在战斗停止之后。
“我认为他们仍在努力防止美国与伊朗在伊朗问题上的分歧导致跨大西洋关系永久破裂，”前国家安全委员会国防政策与战略高级主任斯蒂芬·弗拉纳根在周二的中东研究所简报会上表示。“但面对特朗普对欧洲迄今为止的反应的严厉批评，这一天比一天困难。”
美国似乎想要更多。
“（特朗普）指出，这是一条国际航道，我们的使用频率比大多数国家都低；事实上，比大多数国家都低得多。因此，全世界都应该关注并准备挺身而出，”国防部长皮特·赫格斯瑟周二表示。
但欧洲并不愿意被拖入又一场美国主导的中东战争，批评者认为这场战争的理由站不住脚，战后也看不到改善局面的途径。
“（……）唐纳德·特朗普指望少数几艘欧洲护卫舰在霍尔木兹海峡完成强大的美国海军都无法完成的任务？”德国国防部长鲍里斯·皮斯托留斯上月表示。
“这不是我们的战争；我们没有发动这场战争。”
但这一立场并不能让盟友免受战争的余波——这一现实反映出特朗普第二任期日益鲜明的特征。
从亚洲到欧洲，从非洲到中东，数亿人没有投票支持他，也无权干涉他的所作所为。
但他的决策仍在深刻地改变着他们的生活。
Trump might end his war — but the rest of the world may pay the price
Analysis by Stephen Collinson
Published Apr 1, 2026, 12:00 AM ET / CNN
President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters after signing an executive order in the Oval Office of the White House on Tuesday, March 31, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick listens.
Alex Brandon/AP
Donald Trump looks like he’s getting ready to just walk away.
The president is telling US allies — who didn’t join his war in Iran because they got no advance notice, didn’t want it and thought it infringed international law — that they’ll be stuck with the consequences.
“Go get your own oil,” he wrote on Truth Social Tuesday, shortly before sources told CNN that the administration can’t promise to restore free navigation through the Strait of Hormuz before declaring mission accomplished.
The president later predicted the war will be “finished” within two to three weeks. “What happens in the Strait, we’re going to have nothing do with,” he told reporters in the Oval Office
Iran has used the choke point at the mouth of the Persian Gulf to halt crucial oil supplies and to hold the global economy hostage. If the war ends with it in control of the critical waterway, it will chalk up a strategic victory.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks to members of the media during a press briefing at the Pentagon on Tuesday, March 31.
Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP
Amid fresh signs Trump wants the war over, officials seem to be shaping rhetorical cover for him to end it without fixing the aftermath. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday claimed the US had achieved “regime change” in Iran — even though the country is still ruled by repressive Islamic radicals who despise the US.
The latest administration attempts to redefine success reflect unpalatable choices facing Trump more than a month into the war and the growing pressure of a four-to-six-week deadline officials set for its duration. They follow assertions by the president that “productive” talks are taking place with Iran — although officials in Tehran deny this is the case and there’s no public evidence of diplomatic progress.
Ending the war with Iran controlling the strait would be seen internationally as a strategic defeat for the United States. Iran would certainly claim victory and might consider it had reestablished a deterrent to future attacks. And it would likely try to monetize its new position by imposing tolls for tankers transiting the route. This would provide revenues for rebuilding military, missile and even nuclear programs smashed in US and Israeli air attacks.
All this would challenge Trump’s skill at spinning almost anything into a victory. But it might still be a preferable endgame for the president because any attempt to reopen the strait by force would risk heavy US casualties and prolong the war in a way that would further undermine his eroded political authority at home.
Trump can’t escape the consequence of his decisions
Gas prices soar past $4.50 per gallon as seen at a Circle K, on Friday, March 20, in Key West, Floriday.
Jen Golbeck/SOPA Images/Sipa USA/AP
Walking away might leave turmoil. But it would be consistent with Trump’s methodology, which in practice has been more effective in destroying status quos than building new systems. It would also extend the America First principle that the country should act at all times within the confines of its exclusive national interests. And it would indulge Trump’s anger at NATO allies he regards as leeching off American security guarantees.
But America doesn’t exist in a vacuum defined by Trump’s rhetoric. He’d struggle to outrun the economic and political reverberations of keeping the strait under the control of a reinvigorated Iran. Trump may be able to create political spin to explain his exit — but the markets are unlikely to be as easy to convince.
“Even though the United States is the world’s leading oil producer, that doesn’t insulate US consumers from oil prices because oil prices are global,” Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East studies program at the Defense Priorities think tank, told Zain Asher on CNN International on Tuesday. “And so everybody in the United States and everybody in the world is affected by this supply shock.”
That economic blow threatens to set off a global recession that would crash onto US shores — possibly months before the midterm elections, in which Democrats hope to score a big win that will help them rein in Trump’s second-term power.
More broadly, the fallout of the Iran war now threatens another consequence: an even deeper fracture in the transatlantic alliance. This would only underscore the need for European allies — and those Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney calls “middle powers” — to invest more in their own militaries with the understanding that America’s post-World War II security umbrella has become unreliable.
Warning bells reverberated throughout Europe when Secretary of State Marco Rubio, one of the most pro-NATO members of Trump’s inner circle, said on Al Jazeera this week that US allies’ response to the war was “very disappointing” — and hinted Trump would “reexamine” US commitments to them when it ends.
How Europe might pay the price
Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer attends a meeting to discuss the US-Israeli conflict with Iran and the impact on the Strait of Hormuz, in London, on Monday, March 30.
Jaimi Joy/Reuters
Allied leaders are learning in the unpredictable age of Trump that they can no longer rely on US security guarantees since an American president appears close to making them conditional on blanket support for his actions.
Some, like Britain, initially withheld permission for the US to use air bases for offensive missions in Iran. Others, like Spain, went much further. As a result, Trump lambasted the “special relationship” with London and threatened to cut off all trade with Madrid.
But Trump put those leaders in an impossible position. His year of berating allies, including his demands that Denmark hand over Greenland; tariff assaults; and disdain for the sacrifices of America’s friends in post-9/11 wars meant they had little room to both help him and save their own political careers.
But staying out of the war won’t spare them from paying its costs.
High energy prices and rising inflation threaten to crush fragile economies and cause political blowback among electorates to already-weak centrist governments in Europe. There’s talk of rationing gasoline and diesel already in some EU nations. And there are fears on the continent that a collapse of central government authority in Tehran could trigger yet another mass refugee exodus towards its borders and test fiscal and cultural fault lines.
And it’s not credible that these countries could simply — in Trump’s words — go get their own oil. Slimmed-down European militaries have been exposed by the war. It took several weeks for Britain’s Royal Navy to get an anti-missile destroyer stationed off Cyprus to protect UK assets. France managed to dispatch an aircraft carrier battle group to look after its interests and those of Middle East allies. But without the support of the US, there’s no chance NATO powers could open the strait and keep it open. Even the mighty US Navy currently considers it too dangerous to venture in range of Iranian drones and missiles.
As always with Trump, it’s wise not to take everything he says at face value. Indications the US may walk away from the war came a day after he warned that he’d obliterate Iranian electrical plants and even desalination facilities in a violent escalation of the war if Tehran failed to satisfy his demands for peace.
Trump’s public venting is sometimes a ruse to force the hands of weaker counterparts. Rubio hinted that this might be the case when he said on Friday that “countries in Asia and all over the world have a lot at stake and should contribute greatly” to an effort to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
There may be no clear off-ramp for Iran and the US — but maybe there’s one for US allies in their showdown with Trump. Europe does have the capacity to be useful. Some countries have minesweeping capabilities that the US lacks. France has said it would be willing to join an international mission with other navies to protect shipping through the strait — but only after fighting stops.
“I think they’re still working to prevent these differences with the United States on Iran from causing a permanent rupture to the transatlantic relationship,” Stephen Flanagan, a former senior director for defense policy and strategy at the National Security Council, said at a Middle East Institute briefing Tuesday. “But this has become difficult every day in the face of Trump’s withering criticisms of how the Europeans have responded so far.”
The US seems to want more.
“(Trump is) pointing out this is an international waterway that we use less than most; in fact, dramatically less than most. So the world ought pay attention and be prepared to stand up,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Tuesday.
But there’s no appetite in Europe for being dragged into yet another American war in the Middle East with what critics regard as a questionable rationale and no path to a better situation after the fighting.
“What does (…) Donald Trump expect a handful or two handfuls of European frigates to do in the Strait of Hormuz that the powerful US Navy cannot do?” German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said last month.
“This is not our war; we have not started it.”
But this position will not spare allies from the war’s fallout — a reality that reflects what is becoming a defining characteristic of Trump’s second term.
Hundreds of millions of people from Asia to Europe and Africa to the Middle East didn’t vote for him and have no say in what he does.
But his decisions are changing their lives in profound ways nonetheless.