DAVID E. SANGER2025年8月25日本月，在安克雷奇的埃尔门多夫-理查森联合基地，特朗普总统等待迎接俄罗斯总统普京。 Doug Mills/The New York Times“Nothing’s going to happen,” President Trump told reporters on Air Force One in mid-May, “until Putin and I get together.”“在普京和我见面之前，什么都不会发生，”5月中旬，特朗普总统在“空军一号”上告诉记者。Mr. Trump was making the argument that, for a problem as contentious as the Russian war in Ukraine, the only solution was a meeting of the minds of the leaders of the two superpowers, who could strike deals, knock heads and make it happen.特朗普主张，对于像俄罗斯在乌克兰发动战争这样存在巨大争议的问题，唯一的解决方案就是两个超级大国的领导人会面交换看法，他们可以达成协议、敲定细节，并推动落实。Now, nine days after that meeting happened at an American air base in Anchorage, all the outward signs are that any real progress has ground to a stop. Mr. Trump had hinted that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine would meet one on one and then together with Mr. Trump; neither meeting has been scheduled. “The agenda is not ready at all,” Sergey V. Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, said on NBC on Sunday.如今，在安克雷奇的一个美国空军基地举行会晤九天后，所有外在迹象都表明，任何真正的进展都已陷入停滞。特朗普曾暗示，俄罗斯总统普京和乌克兰总统泽连斯基将先举行一对一会晤，然后与特朗普一同举行三方会晤；然而这两场会晤都未确定日期。俄罗斯外长拉夫罗夫周日在NBC节目中表示：“议程根本没有准备好。”And while Mr. Trump insisted to European leaders that Mr. Putin had agreed to allow a peacekeeping force inside Ukraine, by midweek the Russians were describing a very different construct, one in which Russia would participate in security guarantees for the country it invaded in February 2022. If ever there was a geopolitical fox-guarding-the-henhouse problem, that seemed to describe it.特朗普向欧洲领导人坚称，普京已同意在乌克兰境内部署维和部队，而周中俄方的描述却大相径庭，称俄罗斯将参与为这个它在2022年2月入侵的国家提供安全保障。如果说地缘政治上也有“狐狸看守鸡窝”，那这似乎就是最好的写照。On Monday, when asked what the security guarantees would entail, Mr. Trump said “we haven’t even discussed the specifics.”周一，当被问及安全保障将包含哪些内容时，特朗普说：“我们甚至还没有讨论具体细节。”It is all symptomatic of the strategic incoherence of the past 10 days or so. At times, Mr. Trump portrays himself as a mediator, someone who can use his influence to extract concessions from Mr. Putin, then get Mr. Zelensky to offer up some land and strike a deal. In other moments, he sounds like an ally of Ukraine, promising to help secure it from future attack. Last week, he wrote a social media post saying Ukraine had “no chance of winning” without being allowed to attack deep inside of Russia, blaming his predecessor, Joseph R. Biden Jr., for not permitting Ukraine to “fight back, only defend.”这一切都反映了过去大约十天里战略上的混乱。有时，特朗普把自己描绘成一个调停者，可以利用自己的影响力迫使普京作出让步，然后让泽连斯基让出部分土地并达成协议。但在另外一些时候，他听起来又像是乌克兰的盟友，承诺帮助其免受未来攻击。上周，他在社交媒体上发文称，如果不允许乌克兰深入俄罗斯境内发动攻击，它就“没有获胜的机会”，并指责他的前任拜登总统不允许乌克兰“反击，只能防守”。After declaring in Anchorage that Mr. Putin wants peace, he now admits to doubts, and says he will figure out which side is to blame for failure, if it comes to that. “We’ll know which way I’m going, because I’m going to go one way or the other,” he told reporters Friday.在安克雷奇宣称普京想要和平之后，他现在承认对此存疑，并表示如果谈判失败，他将找出责任方。“我们会知道我选择哪条路，因为我肯定会选一条路，”他在周五对记者说。For Mr. Trump, consistency is less important than the trappings of leader-to-leader diplomacy. And he is hardly alone among presidents in believing that his own powers of personal persuasion are the central element of success in American foreign policy — and ending wars. Theodore Roosevelt was convinced of the same, and he brokered an end to the Russo-Japanese war 120 years ago. That conflict ended with the signing of the Treaty of Portsmouth on American soil, and resulted in Roosevelt winning a Nobel Peace Prize, exactly the outcome Mr. Trump has not been shy about saying he is seeking.对特朗普来说，前后一致远不如领导人外交的排场重要。他并非唯一一个相信个人说服力是美国外交政策——以及结束战争——成功关键的总统。120年前，西奥多·罗斯福也深信这一点，他促成了俄日战争的结束。那场冲突以在美国土地上签署《朴茨茅斯条约》而告终，并为罗斯福赢得了诺贝尔和平奖，而特朗普也毫不掩饰地表示，这正是他寻求的结果。But so far, at least, this negotiation with Russia is not following the Roosevelt model. Instead, Mr. Trump’s session with Mr. Putin in Anchorage is beginning to invite comparisons with his face-to-face diplomacy with Kim Jong-un of North Korea seven years ago: friendly, full of handshakes and made-for-TV moments and warm exchanges — Mr. Putin sent Mr. Trump a photo of their meeting — but not progress. At the end of the day, North Korea gave up not a single nuclear weapon, and has dramatically expanded its nuclear arsenal since.但至少到目前为止，与俄罗斯的这场谈判并没有遵循罗斯福的模式。相反，特朗普与普京在安克雷奇的会面开始让人联想到七年前他与朝鲜领导人金正恩的面对面外交：友好，有许多握手和在镜头前摆姿势的瞬间和热情的交流，普京还特地送给特朗普一张两人会面的照片，但没有进展。最终，朝鲜没有放弃任何核武器，而且自那以后还大幅扩充了核武库。“Trump went into this meeting with a relatively unified Western position, saying there needed to be a cease-fire first,” said Ivo Daalder, a former American ambassador to NATO who is joining the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard. “Then, they finally get together, Trump abandons the position and rather than moving the ball forward, he scores a own goal.”“特朗普是在一个相对统一的西方立场下参加这次会议的，即首先需要停火，”前美国驻北约大使、即将加入哈佛大学贝尔弗科学与国际事务中心的伊沃·达尔德说。“然后，他们终于碰面了，特朗普却放弃了立场，非但没有推动局势向前发展，反而送进一个乌龙球。”“He said he wouldn’t be happy if there wasn’t a cease-fire, that there would be severe consequences, and there were none,” he added.“他说如果没有停火，他会不高兴，还说会有严重后果，但结果什么都没有发生，”他补充道。Mr. Trump said his goal was to “go direct to a Peace Agreement,” he wrote on social media, “which would end the war” because cease-fires “oftentimes do not hold up.”特朗普在社交媒体上写道，他的目标是“直接达成一项和平协议”，“从而结束战争，”因为停火“常常无法维持”。特朗普与普京的会面，令人不禁联想到他在首个期内与朝鲜领导人金正恩的外交互动。Mr. Trump now says he will know in two weeks whether Mr. Putin is serious — the same period of time he gave the Russian leader a few months ago to stop the fighting, a deadline he then ignored. (Two weeks is the standard unit of time for Mr. Trump to demand results, whether it is diplomacy or the creation of a new health care plan. Extensions are routine.)特朗普现在表示，他将在两周内知道普京是否是认真的——几个月前，他也给了俄罗斯领导人同样的停战最后期限，但后来他也无视了这一期限。（两周是特朗普要求看到结果的标准时间单位，无论是外交还是制定新的医疗保健计划。延期是家常便饭。）But in the case of Ukraine, Mr. Trump always leaves himself an out, saying maybe there will be no peace, and maybe the United States will just have to pull back and let the Ukrainians and the Russians fight it out. Washing his hands of the conflict, declaring he can lead Mr. Putin and Mr. Zelensky to the negotiating table but cannot make them agree, gives him an escape hatch if his negotiations collapse.但在乌克兰问题上，特朗普总是给自己留有余地，声称也许不会有和平，也许美国只能退出，让乌克兰人和俄罗斯人自己打下去。如果谈判破裂，他可以摆脱干系，宣称自己可以把普京和泽连斯基带到谈判桌前，但不能迫使他们达成协议。But that creates a huge dissonance, an uncertainty about what the American role is in this effort. Sometimes Mr. Trump and Vice President JD Vance sound like neutral mediators just trying to bring the sides together — as Roosevelt did — and sometimes they sound as if the United States has strong national interests in making sure that Ukraine remains a free, independent nation.但这造成了巨大的不协调，让人不确定美国在这项努力中究竟扮演什么角色。有时，特朗普和副总统万斯听起来像是中立的调解人，只想把双方拉到一起——就像罗斯福那样；有时他们听起来又好像在说，确保乌克兰的自由独立国家地位这件事对美国有着重大的意义。Mr. Trump took the second approach over the past week. He declared that the United States would join European leaders in creating security assurances for Ukraine, though he was quick to add, in interviews, that there would be no American troops on the ground. He said if there were troops they would likely come from “a couple” of countries, including Britain, France and Germany, and the United States might provide intelligence and air support.在过去一周，特朗普采取了第二种做法。他宣布美国将与欧洲领导人一道为乌克兰提供安全保障，尽管他在采访中很快补充说，不会有美国地面部队的参与。他说，如果有部队，那可能来自包括英国、法国和德国的“数个”国家，而美国可能会提供情报和空中支援。But the security assurance essentially means that the United States is committing to come to Ukraine’s defense if Russia attacked again, even if it is not a member of NATO — a move Mr. Trump opposes, as did Mr. Biden.但安全保障实质上意味着美国承诺，如果俄罗斯再次攻击，即使乌克兰不是北约成员国——特朗普和拜登都反对乌克兰加入北约——美国也会出面保卫乌克兰。David E. Sanger报道特朗普政府和一系列国家安全问题。他在时报任职超过40年，著有数本关于美国国家安全挑战的书。翻译：杜然点击查看本文英文版。