【國際關係深度評：突發評論 🇺🇸🇮🇷🇮🇱】 特朗普終於轟炸伊朗核設施：下一步會發生甚麼？
Added 2025-06-22 04:57:16 +0000 UTC美國總統特朗普早前說會用「兩週」時間決定是否轟炸伊朗核設施，結果兩日就作出了按鈕的決定。特朗普表示軍事行動空前成功，已經「完全移除」伊朗核設施，目前外間自然未能求證，但如果屬實，令伊朗未能擁核，相信是國際主流社會的佳音。這次行動也會令特朗普暫時擺脫「TACO」污名，對中俄也有一定震懾作用。
特朗普不久前還在和伊朗「做deal」，接受伊朗擁有一定程度受監管的核技術，忽然變成贊同以色列主張，去摧毀伊朗一切核設施，巨變的關鍵，除了被內塔尼亞胡「set-up」 勢成騎虎（這方面內塔尼亞胡確是大贏家），相信也是因為伊朗距離正式擁核已經無限接近。日前伊朗忽然發出已成為網絡經典的警告，說當晚會發生「幾個世紀後也為人津津樂道的事」，現在看來雖然似是 bluffing，但其實伊朗也的確可能坐言起行，以超高音速導彈、配備有核武成份的彈頭射向以色列。如果一旦付諸行動，而事前美國沒有反應，特朗普需要下台問責，亦不為奇。
好了，特朗普作出了決定，那中東局勢下一步會怎樣？
我們連日談及特朗普一貫迴避戰爭，很不願意美國捲入持久戰，這次的空襲暫時也是「一次性手術」，特別強調美軍完成任務後已經全部離開伊朗領空。這說明特朗普依然以避免美軍直接入侵伊朗為大前提，沒有任何打算派出地面部隊；由於已經行動，內塔尼亞胡也不容易再「勒索」特朗普。除非伊朗發動大規模針對美國的襲擊報復、而報復又有效至足以改變美國當刻民情，才另當別論。
那伊朗有沒有這樣的能力？似乎是沒有的。就算把它的所有附庸加起來，能夠對美國帶來直接損害的招數並不多，極其量是也門胡塞武裝發射導彈襲擊美國商船（其實一直在做）和海軍（成功機會極微），或針對各地美國人發動恐怖襲擊（然而美國近年的反恐頗為成功）。伊朗能反擊以色列的招數則多得多，就算以色列的防空系統再先進，也難以完全防衛所有城市不受伊朗導彈攻擊。
換句話說，雖然伊朗已經大大弱化，但不代表就需要即時接受美國的「立刻投降」條件，若甚麼也不做，為免太難向人民交代。
值得注意的是，特朗普曾強調沒有興趣促成「regime change」，但以色列的戰略目標已經圖窮匕見，公然說要推翻伊朗政權。單靠以軍、就算加上美軍的空襲，而不派出地面部隊，卻是不會直接摧毀伊朗政權的，伊朗對國內異見人士、反抗組織的控制不會弱化，民間要起義的難度依然甚高。
如果以色列真心要達到這個目的，最能期望的不是伊朗人民起義，而是伊朗當權派當中有野心家作反，利用這個時機，清除最高精神領袖哈梅內伊、自任領袖，再以「國家安全」為由和以色列、美國和談。如果以軍、美軍下一步以伊朗最高層為襲擊目標，令伊朗高層人人自危，說不定就有人按耐不住揭竿而起以自保，這正是內塔尼亞胡的算盤。以以色列摩薩德歷史上的往績推斷，伊朗高層當中必然有一些以色列的暗子潛伏，關鍵時刻可以出奇制勝。
如果這些戲劇性場面一個月內還未出現，伊朗又沒有能力進行太大規模的反擊，那時候進退兩難的，就會變成以色列：空襲下去也沒有意思，只會不斷讓國內暴露於危機之中，民意隨時反彈；休兵則變相承認顛覆伊朗政權失敗，已經到了這個地步，相信以色列強硬派不願功敗垂成。
那時候，最符合美國利益的是保持一個弱化得奄奄一息、但還可以控制國內大局的伊朗，逼其簽訂城下之盟；最符合內塔尼亞胡個人利益的卻是製造新危機，讓戰爭長期持續下去，或製造美軍不出動地面部隊就難向國內交代的理由。如果是這兩個選項的角力，正常而言，還是美國有資格一錘定音。
會否真的這樣發展，很快就知道。
Comments
分析好啱，美國一直唔希望伊朗擁有核武，以色列一心想剷除伊朗，伊朗唔敢百分百肯定仲有冇底牌，各自有各自盤算未到最後一刻都唔知發展成點。
Sylvester Choy
2025-06-22 15:13:01 +0000 UTC美國行動應該點到即止，不宜完全捲入中東伊斯蘭世界呢潭渾水，伊拉克同阿富汗就係好好嘅例子。民唔民主化，由返佢哋內部玩啦…
Cyrus Lee
2025-06-22 13:54:06 +0000 UTCIranian leaders, outwardly unfazed by the intensifying conflict, had been sending a very bad signal to a dealmaker because they dared to challenge his patience with no leverage. Iran has no cards up its sleeve to deal with Israel’s air dominance while its own air defense and nuclear facilities are taken apart, and military targets have precisely been neutralized one after another. It also provides no answer to the strong reaction from the US and Israel to its uranium enrichment program while insisting on joining the nuclear club at all costs. The nuclear threat from a theocratic dictatorship is far from over though its nuclear weapons program may have set back for some time. In the near term, depleted missile stockpiles and weakened proxy militias limit Iran’s ability to escalate attacks on Israeli or US interests. They might reluctantly return to the negotiating table in an even weaker position, pretending to seek a diplomatic off-ramp from left-leaning European powers and the UN to derail the ongoing Israeli airstrikes in a bid to secure a little breathing space. If successful, they’ll, once recovered, resort to all sorts of asymmetric means, targeting vulnerable American and Israeli personnel and assets at home and abroad as their clandestine form of retaliation. Hence, talking to terrorists with a disproportionate big stick is part and parcel of bringing them to heel. Needless to say, Tehran's resolve to reconstitute its nuclear activities remains unshaken and fervent. The Israeli government strongly believes that this foe—who is dedicated to wiping the Jewish state off the map—isn’t going to let up on their push to get hold of the membership of the nuclear club. Once the arrow has left the bow, it can never return. Netanyahu, for the sake of the nation and himself, must follow the script when facing a real existential threat, whether it endangers only him or the Israeli people. In the short-to-medium term, more actions will emerge to destabilize the regime in an attempt to trigger a rebellious epicenter within its border, particularly by dividing its inner circle of power. The US, Israel, and the West cannot afford another nuclear blackmailer like Kim Jong Un, who has long accustomed to leveraging threats to extract benefits. Agreements with authoritarian regimes—amounting to well-written jokes in their playbooks—often lack credibility. These states routinely devise ways to circumvent commitments before signing. The “peace through strength” doctrine now faces a critical test amid perceptions of waning US influence. While some western leaders and media privately acknowledge Trump’s decision, they often adopt a moralizing stance, publicly condemning his disregard for diplomatic norms and expressing “sympathy” for victims without offering solutions. A great leader is the one who has courage to do the right thing at the right time and never gives a shit about the criticism from talkers, though Trump is still working hard to establish such a yet-to-achieve legacy.
George
2025-06-22 11:27:56 +0000 UTC空襲後內塔尼亞胡都公開認同美軍行動有效，亦留條後路話準備好和談，相信美以兩方對伊朗軍(核)嘅評估應該唔錯得去邊。 p.s. 不過我認同教授一直嘅分析，內塔尼亞胡為咗自保，一定會繼續製造危機。
k
2025-06-22 08:47:29 +0000 UTC感謝詳細中肯的分析🙏🏻
MZ
2025-06-22 06:52:32 +0000 UTC究竟美國是否仲能夠有效控制以色列呢個盟友？如果美國真係任由內塔尼亞胡繼續空襲伊朗，擺特朗普上枱，咁侵侵豈不顏面無存？
MT
2025-06-22 06:43:14 +0000 UTC終於唔TACO 了。個行動有啲「交功課」感覺。問題係，真係已經催毀伊朗所有核設施？如果突然老哈將D底牌打埋出嚟，同以色列黎個「㩜炒」會點收科？
Joe
2025-06-22 06:11:22 +0000 UTC最喜歡你個台，就係呢啲超級有質素嘅突發評論！👍👍快而準多角度分析，加油
Eva Hullau
2025-06-22 05:36:53 +0000 UTC
