作者： root

Why presidents stumble in this most solemn task

2026-03-07T09:00:35.450Z / CNN Politics

Analysis by

[Zachary B. Wolf]

3 hr ago

PUBLISHED Mar 7, 2026, 4:00 AM ET

The Middle East

[See all topics]

Facebook Tweet[Email]Link Threads

Link Copied!

President Ronald Reagan and Nancy Reagan honor the victims of the bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, on April 23, 1983.

Circa Images/GHI/Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images

After ordering US troops to execute a regime change in Panama in 1989, President George H.W. Bush held a press conference at the precise moment the first US casualties were arriving on US soil.

TV networks showed the events on a split screen.

Bush opened the press conference with a joke about keeping things brief because he had a “[pain in the neck].”

Ad Feedback

He was later asked, “Was it really worth it to send people to their deaths to get (Gen. Manuel) Noriega?”

His answer, according to the [New York Times], “sounded pained, and he paused often. He said: ‘Every human life is precious. And yet I have to answer, yes, it has been worth it.’”

That’s got to be an honest answer for a president, but it’s not empathetic for a politician. Trump has also suggested there is a calculus to the lives of service members.

“We expect casualties,” Trump warned Americans in an interview last Sunday, “[but in the end it’s going to be a great deal for the world].”

By the time H.W. Bush was ordering troops into harm’s way during the first 1991 Gulf War in the Middle East, the Pentagon had changed the rules, largely barring the media from covering the arrival of American remains.

Trump, on the other hand, will travel to Dover, Delaware, on Saturday to attend the arrival of the remains of six service members killed so far during US and Israel’s war on Iran.

The past few decades have seen multiple reversals in how presidents treat the solemn task of bringing back the flag-draped transfer cases that hold remains of troops killed overseas on their watch, which today is referred to as a dignified transfer.

Carter and Reagan met the arrival of the dead at Andrews

---

When eight US commandos were killed in a failed attempt to rescue hostages in Iran during Jimmy Carter’s presidency, Carter stood watch when their remains arrived at what was then called Andrews Air Force Base, according to a timeline from the transparency group [National Security Archive], which works to make government documents public. Carter also [eulogized them] at Arlington National Cemetery.

That failed rescue attempt hurt Carter’s chances at reelection. The hostages were released by the Iranian regime in the moments after Reagan took office in 1981.

When 258 Marines were killed in their barracks by a bomb in Beirut, President Ronald Reagan at Andrews for the arrival of their remains. Iran was suspected of involvement through its support of the terror group Hezbollah. Reagan would later declare Iran to be a state sponsor of terrorism, but that didn’t stop Reagan’s administration from later sending arms to Iran in exchange for hostages held by Hezbollah in Lebanon. The Iran-Contra affair was a major scandal of Reagan’s presidency.

H.W. Bush banned media coverage

---

H.W. Bush’s administration would institute its ban on media coverage of dignified transfers during the first Gulf War, a ban would stay in place for decades, though there were some exceptions.

The ban was expanded during the Middle East wars undertaken by George W. Bush, when the press was largely barred, with some notable exceptions, from covering the arrival of American dead. After a Freedom of Information Act fight over photos of coffins, the second Bush administration largely stopped Pentagon photographers from taking pictures, according to the National Security Archive’s timeline.

W. Bush stayed away; Obama reversed course

---

W. Bush did not attend the arrival of dead troops in Dover, Delaware, on the logic that it would be a distraction for grieving families.

But the criticism of the coverage ban was also correct – that the US public did not see some of the most painful domestic consequences of the war.

President Barack Obama’s Pentagon [changed the policy] not long after he took office in 2009, allowing for photos and coverage of the dignified transfers as long as the family of the fallen service member permitted it.

President Barack Obama salutes during the dignified transfer of Sergeant Dale R. Griffin of Terre Haute, Indiana, at Dover Air Force Base in Dover, Delaware, on October 29, 2009.

Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

Obama would later [attend dignified transfers], setting a precedent followed by Trump and President Joe Biden and offering what Obama called a “sobering reminder” of sacrifice.

Now dignified transfers are part of the ugly political debate

Biden came under intense scrutiny, and criticism from the family members of dead service members, for [repeatedly checking his watch] between salutes at the dignified transfer for service members killed at Abbey Gate as the US withdrew from Afghanistan. Family members also said he spent too much time talking about his own son Beau — a veteran who died of cancer, as opposed to their loved ones, who were killed in action.

Trump seized on that criticism, and the withdrawal from Afghanistan, as a major campaign issue in 2024 and [featured Gold Star family members] at the GOP convention that year.

Trump’s complicated history with war dead

---

Trump controversially [posted video of himself] visiting graves of Abbey Gate service members at Arlington National Cemetery during the campaign. While Trump was invited by a family member, the visit may also have violated cemetery rules about using the hallowed site for political purposes.

Trump is expected on Saturday to be present for the arrival of the six servicemembers killed by an Iranian drone in Kuwait. He was also present for the arrival of the remains of troops killed in Syria during his presidency.

But he has also faced criticism for his comments about war dead.

President-elect Donald Trump visits section 60 of Arlington National Cemetery, on January 19, 2025, ahead of his presidential inauguration.

Carlos Barria/Reuters

His former Chief of Staff John Kelly, a retired lieutenant general who lost his own son in Iraq, said Trump maligned war dead on multiple occasions. These included a trip to France during his first term when Trump did not want to visit the graves of American soldiers buried in the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris because, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers,” [The Atlantic reported].

During that same trip to France, according to the article, Trump said the 1,800 US Marines killed in the Belleau Wood were “suckers” for getting killed.

Kelly later [confirmed the reporting] to CNN’s Jake Tapper.

Now Trump will have the burden of overseeing the return of remains from a war he ordered.

The Middle East

[See all topics]

Facebook Tweet[Email]Link Threads

Link Copied!

Ad Feedback

Kristi Noem prioritized immigration over everything else in homeland security’s large portfolio. That wasn’t her downfall

Analysis by John Miller
2 hr ago
PUBLISHED Mar 7, 2026, 5:00 AM ET

Kristi Noem’s government jet touched down Wednesday in Nashville, where a motorcade awaited.

Fifteen minutes later, the fleet of SUVs pulled into the loading dock of the Grand Hyatt Nashville, but the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security remained inside, behind the tinted glass.

Big city police union leaders who waited to greet her were told she was on an important call. Around 10 minutes later, Noem emerged and walked down the maze of hallways that lead to a room where those leaders and law enforcement officials had gathered.

“She was taking pictures with us. She was personable and smiling,” said Kenneth Corey, former NYPD chief of department. “You’d have no idea she had just been fired by the president while she was in the car.”

As the police leaders took their seats in the ballroom of the Major Cities Conference, there was a surprise performance by Lee Greenwood, the country singer and Trump favorite for his “God Bless the USA,” the unofficial anthem of MAGA and Trump rallies.

The music blared from the speakers and Greenwood raised his mic.

“If tomorrow all the things were gone that I’d worked for all my life… ”

As Noem waited in the wings, hearing Greenwood sing these words, the bulletins began to flash across the phones in the room that a frustrated Trump had fired her.

The Major Cities Conference is an annual event, sponsored this year by the NYPD Sergeants Benevolent Association and the Seattle Police Officers Guild. The meeting brings police union heads from across the country into dialogue with law enforcement executives and federal officials like Noem. This year, sanctuary cities, and the role of police in immigration enforcement was a main topic.

These accounts of Noem’s movements were told to CNN by multiple local law enforcement officials who attended the conference.

As Noem took the stage, likely realizing everyone in the room knew she had been fired, she began her speech by referring to Trump’s State of the Union address and she describing the mission of DHS.

“It’s to fulfill our duty to protect American citizens, that they should come first under our Constitution and our laws and they should be prioritized, and especially over other people who are from other countries,” she said.

Noem never showed a sign there was anything amiss, said Vincent Vallelong, president of the Sergeants Benevolent Association.

“She stayed focused during the speech, took a number of questions and gave thoughtful answers on how we can all work together,” Vallelong said. “Say what you want about politics, but she kept it together and kept the room together.”

DHS resources shifted in her tenure

---

Noem was confirmed by the Senate as DHS secretary on January 25, 2025, pledging to “work every day to keep all Americans safe and secure. One of my top priorities is achieving President Trump’s mandate from the American people to secure our southern border and fix our broken immigration system.”

While DHS earned high marks under Noem for improving border security and significantly reducing illegal crossings, the immigration enforcement in US cities quickly became a political lightning rod. DHS diverted resources from terrorism cases, human trafficking investigations and Secret Service missions to focus massive resources on what was mostly civil immigration enforcement.

DHS touted targeting the “worst of the worst” but multiple studies found only a small percentage of those rounded up had a conviction for a violent crime. The enforcement sweeps led to protests across the country. Two recent flashpoints were the January confrontations in Minneapolis that ended in fatal shootings by immigration enforcement agents of Renee Good and Alex Pretti within days of each other. Both were protesters and both were American citizens.

DHS is a massive department that houses over 20 high-profile agencies – including the TSA, the US Coast Guard and, of course, ICE – and has more than a quarter million employees and a budget of over $100 billion. Noem faced heavy criticism for eroding the core capabilities of DHS during her short-lived tenure.

Noem gutted Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the unit focused on protecting the US from cyberattacks, oversaw the dismissal of hundreds of staff from the disaster relief agency FEMA, and proposed reducing the Office of Intelligence and and Analysis staff from 1,000 to 275. Some of the cuts ultimately were reduced but it was clear the focus was immigration enforcement over counterterrorism or disaster relief.

Former DHS officials told CNN the cuts were followed by what they described as “witch hunts” that involved polygraph examinations for staffers who might be talking to the press. Collectively, the officials said, deteriorating morale drove a “brain drain” that caused many experienced professionals to leave DHS.

Noem remained steadfast and unapologetic about the shifts in DHS resources toward immigration enforcement. She defended the flooding of DHS agents into “sanctuary cities” with Democratic mayors because local law or policy barred police engaging in civil immigration enforcement. Trump defended her leadership and Stephen Miller, the president’s deputy chief of staff, continued to pressure DHS weekly for more numbers of people to be rounded up, according to multiple DHS officials.

The first cracks in White House support began to show after the killings of Good and Pretti, whom Noem described as domestic terrorists. But in the end, the political poison dart that ended her reign at DHS may not have had anything to do with how the agency was being run or even her insensitive defense of the killing of two US citizens by her agents. Noem’s downfall may have been a fundamental misunderstanding of what’s most important to the only person whose support mattered.

A $220 million ad campaign launched by Noem drew the attention of Congress, which wanted to hear more about that deal, who approved the cost and who got paid. ProPublica reported last year that the recipient of the lucrative advertising subcontract was the husband of a former DHS spokesperson.

Noem was the star of the TV ads. She was on the screen wearing her cowboy hat and riding a horse while describing the important work DHS was doing under her leadership. The ad showed Noem being greeted by DHS officers and children along the trail. One ad ends with the secretary atop her horse looking over a ridge with Mount Rushmore behind her.

This week, Noem testified under oath before Congress and was asked if Trump had known about the TV ads and what they cost. Noem said Trump did know. The president quickly said he did not. One former DHS senior executive summed it up this way: “You can embarrass the administration. That’s not going to get you fired. But you embarrass the president, that will get you fired.”

In Nashville Thursday, Noem soldiered through her speech and then took questions. Newark, New Jersey, police Capt. John Chrystal III, president of his department’s Superior Officers’ Association, asked Noem how the Trump administration would reconcile federal policies with state policies that bar police from sharing information with DHS about undocumented immigrants wanted for crimes.

Noem said she remained committed to pushing back on state laws blocking DHS access and was committed to talking with state leaders on working together.

“Oh, by the way, are you religious?” Chrystal asked after Noem finished speaking. “Because you’re the answer to all my prayers.”

“I am, sir,” Noem said, giggling. “Who knew?”

The room fell into laughter and applause.

John Miller is the Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst for CNN and served as Deputy Assistant Director of National Intelligence in 2009-2010.

Warner argues there was ‘no imminent threat to the United States’ while Hawley says ground troops would cross his red line

By Leo Briceno
Fox News

Published March 7, 2026 4:00am EST | Updated March 7, 2026 6:00am EST

Debate on Capitol Hill continues to rage over whether President Donald Trump started a “war” with the strikes he carried out against Iran last weekend, a key consideration for whether the president must look to Congress for authority to continue Operation Epic Fury.

Where Republicans see a narrowly-tailored attack designed to prevent a U.S. adversary from securing nuclear capabilities, Democrats see a conflict that could easily spill into a broader conflict.

“Congress is not supposed to be an after-the-fact spectator, the Constitution makes plain,” Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told Fox News Digital.

“President Trump has not said, like in Venezuela, ‘this is a police operation,’ that it’s ‘an arrest,’” Kaine said, comparing the strikes to the January capture of Nicolás Maduro.

Democrats like Kaine have blasted Trump for dragging the U.S. into a conflict that, in their view, looks a lot like a war — something only Congress has the power to declare. It is that determination that makes them believe lawmakers should use the War Powers Act of 1973 to curb Trump’s powers in Iran.

That law prevents the president from continuing hostilities against a foreign power that extends past 60 days.

Republicans like Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., see no reason to invoke the War Powers Act, given the scope of the current conflict.

A measure to kill a Democrat-led war powers resolution aimed at handcuffing Trump’s military operations in Iran passed on Wednesday in a 53-47 Senate vote.

“I mean, even if you disagree with this, I just don’t think you can dispute [that] they’re complying with the statute. The president has the authority under Article II to do what he has done so far,” Hawley said, referring to the Constitution’s military power granted to the country’s commander in chief.

Last Saturday, the U.S. conducted a series of strikes in collaboration with Israel, targeting the country’s military leadership and killing the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The Trump administration has framed the attack as a necessary campaign to halt Iran’s work towards obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Although Hawley supports the administration’s work so far, he has a firm red line in mind for where the conflict would require Congressional say-so.

“Ground troops would be a different deal,” Hawley said. “But [Trump] just said, ‘We’re not going to do ground troops,’ so, I just say to my Democrat friends — I think they’re just looking for something to vote against the president on.”

Democrats remain unconvinced.

Some Democrats noted that the language the administration has used suggests it views the conflict as something more than isolated strikes.

“The president and the secretary of state have called it a war. So have the generals. If we’re at war, Congress has to provide authorization,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said.

Other Democrats, like Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., attacked the administration’s stated reason for the attack.

“There was no imminent threat to the United States. There were threats to Israel, but in terms of an imminent threat, there was not one. Consequently, this is the president’s war of choice,” Warner said.

“You have to come before Congress,” Warner added.

To Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the consideration should deal less with technicalities and more with consideration of the cost that could come with Trump’s attacks.

“The American people make the decision on going to war because it’s their sons and daughters that will lose their lives. I still think that’s the case, regardless of who the president might be,” Durbin said.

Leo Briceno is a politics reporter for the congressional team at Fox News Digital. He was previously a reporter with World Magazine.

Trump’s demands for ending Iran war shift as US military works through its target list

PUBLISHED Mar 7, 2026, 3:00 AM ET / UPDATED Wed, Mar 7, 2026 7:05 AM EST

By Kevin Liptak, Natasha Bertrand, Zachary Cohen, Kylie Atwood, CNN

President Donald Trump during a roundtable in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on Friday.

Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Inside the Oval Office this week, after a crowd of jostling reporters departed into the Rose Garden, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz tried to get an answer from President Donald Trump: how, exactly, did he envision the war with Iran ending?

Despite some pressing by the chancellor, the answer from the president — as it has been since the conflict began a week ago — wasn’t quite clear, according to a person familiar.

As the US military operation against Iran shifts into a new phase following last Saturday’s opening salvo, how the war ends remains the top question for many officials, lawmakers and US allies.

In briefings with lawmakers and congressional staff in recent days, Pentagon officials have leaned into the US military mission being narrowly focused on destroying Iran’s ballistic missile launchers, people who attended the briefings said, rather than on targeting Iranian nuclear facilities or taking out regime figures or military personnel. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has spoken dismissively of repeating the “nation building” exercises of past administrations.

At the same time, Trump has offered far more expansive goals that appear to extend beyond the military’s stated remit. On Friday, he lumped in the “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER” of Iran’s current regime as an additional requirement for the war to conclude.

The apparent disconnect has only fueled questions about where the conflict, which is already broadly unpopular among Americans, is headed. In conversations with their US counterparts, Arab and European officials say they haven’t detected what exactly Trump’s endgame looks like, or if it exists at all.

Emerging from briefings with senior administration officials this week, lawmakers similarly professed little understanding of how Trump will know he has achieved all his goals in Iran, or whether he has a plan for what comes afterward. Some lawmakers also appeared unnerved by the fact that Hegseth would not rule out putting US troops on the ground in Iran.

Who will take over?

The US has so far rejected Iranian overtures to begin talks that could suss out ways to end the conflict. Iranian intelligence sent word this week to the US it could be prepared to open talks on how to end the war, according to people familiar with the indirect messages, but US officials say there were no negotiations underway and that potential “off-ramps” are unlikely to materialize in the near term.

“Since this thing went kinetic, we’ve had a number of reach-outs,” a senior Trump administration official said this week, putting the number of nations at nearly a dozen. “It’s not dissimilar to what we had before, people wanting to see if they can help solve it, and we’ve talked to them.”

To date, that has not resulted in any robust exchange of messages between the United States and Iran. “We’re not using anyone as an interlocutor. This is a military action, and it’s got to run its course,” the official said.

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said Trump alone would determine when Iran was in a state of “unconditional surrender.”

“What the president means is that when he, as commander in chief of the US Armed Forces, determines that Iran no longer poses a threat to the United States of America and the goals of Operation Epic Fury has been fully realized, then Iran will essentially be in a place of unconditional surrender, whether they say it themselves or not,” she told reporters on Friday in the White House driveway.

“Frankly,” she went on, “they don’t have a lot of people to say that for them, because the United States and the state of Israel have completely wiped out near more than 50 leaders of the former terrorist regime, including the supreme leader himself.”

Trump said he expects to be heavily involved in choosing Iran’s next leader. But US intelligence agencies have long warned it is difficult to assess the outcome of a regime change scenario, and some US and European officials do not see a clear option for replacing the current regime.

Multiple sources said Trump appears content with allowing an Iranian government led by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — a similar model to what the administration used in Venezuela in replacing Nicolás Maduro with his Vice President Delcy Rodríguez.

“It’s gonna work very easily. It’s going to work like did in Venezuela,” Trump told CNN’s Dana Bash in a brief phone interview on Friday.

But that option risks installing a potentially more extreme power center — something Trump suggested earlier this week would amount to the “worst case scenario.” US and foreign officials have also cast doubt on the viability of establishing some kind of coalition government, believing that option could quickly turn Iran into a failed state akin to Iraq in the early 2000s, sources said.

“We’ve heard…mixed messages about what the strategy is here, what the endgame is here, and how we’re going to get out of Iran,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said this week. “No one in the free world misses the ayatollah,” the New Hampshire Democrat said. “But what is not clear is how long this is going to go on, the extent to which it’s escalating.”

And across the board, the Trump administration has not clearly articulated an end game or an off-ramp, according to four sources from allied countries.

“We have no idea what they actually want to accomplish when this war is over. It doesn’t seem like Trump even knows,” said one European diplomat.

That has fed concerns the war could drag on for weeks or months — a timeline the president, in many telephone calls to news outlets this week, hasn’t explicitly shrugged off.

Instead, Trump has focused on the immediate successes, including degrading Iran’s missile capabilities, sinking its ships and taking out its senior leaders.

Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters on Wednesday that as the war enters a new phase, the US will begin “striking progressively deeper into Iranian territory and (create) additional freedom of maneuver for US forces.”

Caine also claimed that Iran’s ballistic missile launches have plummeted by 86% since the operation began, and that their one-way attack drone launches are down 73%. One person familiar with the matter, however, said those drops can largely be attributed to the US’ destruction of Iranian command and control centers in the opening hours of the war.

But while the US military is narrowly focused, there is also an increasing recognition among military planners that destroying Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, which Iran would need to produce a nuclear weapon, would require US forces on the ground to find, exfiltrate and destroy it since it is buried so deeply underground — out of reach even of US bunker-buster bombs, sources said.

There are no plans for that right now, so sources said the administration has steered clear of discussing it.

Kurdish involvement

At the same time, the Trump administration has quietly tried to enlist the help of Iranian and Iraqi Kurdish opposition groups. For months, the CIA has been in discussions with multiple Iranian Kurdish groups about carrying out a potential ground offensive intended to help foment a popular uprising inside the country, multiple sources told CNN.

The CIA is working to arm some of those groups and the US has discussed providing air-support for Kurdish ground forces if they were to launch an offensive, CNN previously reported.

Discussions between the CIA and Iranian Kurdish groups have also included political proposals for if the regime ultimately does collapse, according to Amir Karimi, co-chair of the PJAK, which is one of the Kurdish groups in talks with the US.

PJAK is supportive of the US-Israeli operations but has reinforced to the CIA that overthrowing the regime can’t be done by military force alone, Karimi told CNN in an interview this week. The group has also told the CIA it wants a political relationship with the US and Trump administration — which includes having a say in who would ultimately become Iran’s next leader.

“We believe it is a legitimate war, however we want support for forces on the ground who are fighting for democracy in Iran. This is not something that can be done by bombardment alone,” Karimi said, adding that the US could help unite Kurdish groups so they can fight the regime together.

Trump appears to be working to do that, holding multiple calls with the leaders of Iraqi and Iranian Kurdish groups in recent days. But during at least two recent calls, he’s grown frustrated with the Iraqi Kurdish leaders — who are keenly aware that participating in a US-backed offensive carries significant risks — telling them to “pick a side,” according to a source familiar with the discussions.

Karimi also said his group has made clear to the Trump administration they do not believe anyone from outside Iran should be “helicoptered in to lead this fight,” and voiced strong opposition to any efforts that involve backing exiled Iranian activist Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last shah, in the short or long term.

Trump himself downplayed him as an option earlier this week, saying, “It would seem to me that somebody from within maybe would be more appropriate.”

This story has been updated with additional developments Wednesday.

中东战火致全球油气短缺 亚洲下游市场吃紧

2026年3月7日 18:27 / 联合早报

在巴基斯坦的卡拉奇，许多民众在油站大排长龙等着添油。中东战事爆发导致原油供应线被勒紧，开始显现在下游市场各个能源产品的库存和价格。 （法新社）

（孟买／新加坡／莫斯科综合电）中东战火升级导致全球能源供应紧张，依赖进口能源的亚洲各地真切感受到冲击，库存开始吃紧，一些国家开始限制外输、配给贩售及节约使用，一些供应商则调高零售价。

美伊冲突爆发一周以来，布伦特原油价格已上涨20%，截至星期五（3月6日）每桶报87.44美元（约111.46新元）。业界警告，上看100美元恐怕指日可待。在亚洲下游能源市场，油气供应短缺已导致电力分销商和炼油厂的库存吃紧。

为了因应情况，新加坡的船舶燃油供应商已实施配给制，中国政府也要求炼油厂限制出口以保障国内库存。

在巴基斯坦，急需天然气进行染色的布料制造商申诉，能源急缺已导致投入成本增加35%。泰国清迈的农产品公司称，虽然政府已下令冻结柴油价格两周，但市场高度不确定，许多油站已耗尽库存，价格可能上涨15%。

伊朗官方星期五否认已全面封锁霍尔木兹海峡，也没有这样的计划，并称袭击目标只是美国和以色列船只。不过，线上船舶追踪平台MarineTraffic数据显示，星期一（2日）以来，只有九艘油轮、散货和集装箱船穿越这条石油运输要道，凸显中东油运被战火掐脖情况严峻。

尽管美国和法国政府都承诺派出军舰保护油轮和货船，不过专家指出，军舰目前多忙于军事行动，而伊朗可使用多种武器包括导弹、无人机、小型潜艇，甚至浮动地雷等袭击商船，让实际防御难上加难。

买家涌向俄原油 价格首超布伦特

印度上月才同美国达成协议，承诺不购买俄罗斯石油，而转向中东购油，没曾想这么快就被战事搞乱。印度已有至少一家炼油厂停止出口，一个炼油设施因库存几近耗尽而关闭。有消息称，经营全球最大炼油设施的印度信实工业（Reliance Industries）设了一个监测中心，全天候追踪中东局势发展，并找寻其他油供来源。

虽然印度获美国批准，可在未来30天购买俄罗斯石油，但它如今须支付的价格已大涨。被欧美制裁的俄罗斯石油如今是渔翁得利，它顶级的乌拉尔石油价格比布伦特原油更高。

克里姆林宫发言人佩斯科夫星期五证实，美伊冲突使俄罗斯油气需求大增。他说：“俄罗斯依旧是可靠的供应商。”

据石油交易员，乌拉尔原油交付给印度的售价已首次高于国际基准的布伦特原油。在美以2月28日对伊朗发动袭击前，每桶乌拉尔原油通常比布伦特油价低10至13美元，如今在3月或4月初交付的乌拉尔已比布伦特高出4至5美元。

分析指出，美伊冲突虽然长期而言可能导致俄罗斯丧失地缘政治影响力，但短期内无疑让莫斯科国库成了大赢家。

中东战火致全球油气短缺 亚洲下游市场吃紧

2026年3月7日 18:27 / 联合早报

在巴基斯坦的卡拉奇，许多民众在油站大排长龙等着添油。中东战事爆发导致原油供应线被勒紧，开始显现在下游市场各个能源产品的库存和价格。 （法新社）

（孟买／新加坡／莫斯科综合电）中东战火升级导致全球能源供应紧张，依赖进口能源的亚洲各地真切感受到冲击，库存开始吃紧，一些国家开始限制外输、配给贩售及节约使用，一些供应商则调高零售价。

美伊冲突爆发一周以来，布伦特原油价格已上涨20%，截至星期五（3月6日）每桶报87.44美元（约111.46新元）。业界警告，上看100美元恐怕指日可待。在亚洲下游能源市场，油气供应短缺已导致电力分销商和炼油厂的库存吃紧。

为了因应情况，新加坡的船舶燃油供应商已实施配给制，中国政府也要求炼油厂限制出口以保障国内库存。

在巴基斯坦，急需天然气进行染色的布料制造商申诉，能源急缺已导致投入成本增加35%。泰国清迈的农产品公司称，虽然政府已下令冻结柴油价格两周，但市场高度不确定，许多油站已耗尽库存，价格可能上涨15%。

伊朗官方星期五否认已全面封锁霍尔木兹海峡，也没有这样的计划，并称袭击目标只是美国和以色列船只。不过，线上船舶追踪平台MarineTraffic数据显示，星期一（2日）以来，只有九艘油轮、散货和集装箱船穿越这条石油运输要道，凸显中东油运被战火掐脖情况严峻。

尽管美国和法国政府都承诺派出军舰保护油轮和货船，不过专家指出，军舰目前多忙于军事行动，而伊朗可使用多种武器包括导弹、无人机、小型潜艇，甚至浮动地雷等袭击商船，让实际防御难上加难。

买家涌向俄原油 价格首超布伦特

印度上月才同美国达成协议，承诺不购买俄罗斯石油，而转向中东购油，没曾想这么快就被战事搞乱。印度已有至少一家炼油厂停止出口，一个炼油设施因库存几近耗尽而关闭。有消息称，经营全球最大炼油设施的印度信实工业（Reliance Industries）设了一个监测中心，全天候追踪中东局势发展，并找寻其他油供来源。

虽然印度获美国批准，可在未来30天购买俄罗斯石油，但它如今须支付的价格已大涨。被欧美制裁的俄罗斯石油如今是渔翁得利，它顶级的乌拉尔石油价格比布伦特原油更高。

克里姆林宫发言人佩斯科夫星期五证实，美伊冲突使俄罗斯油气需求大增。他说：“俄罗斯依旧是可靠的供应商。”

据石油交易员，乌拉尔原油交付给印度的售价已首次高于国际基准的布伦特原油。在美以2月28日对伊朗发动袭击前，每桶乌拉尔原油通常比布伦特油价低10至13美元，如今在3月或4月初交付的乌拉尔已比布伦特高出4至5美元。

分析指出，美伊冲突虽然长期而言可能导致俄罗斯丧失地缘政治影响力，但短期内无疑让莫斯科国库成了大赢家。

法国批中国对日出口管制 中使馆：反对经贸双重标准 | 联合早报

发布/2026年3月7日 15:35

法国批中国对日出口管制 中使馆：反对经贸双重标准

中国驻法国大使馆说，中国是西方国家经济胁迫的受害者，反对在国际经贸问题上实行双重标准。图为位于深圳赤湾集装箱码头的起重机和集装箱。 （彭博社）

针对法国外交部副发言人批评中国对日本实施出口管制，中国驻法国大使馆回应称，相关措施旨在遏制日本再军事化，并强调中国才是西方国家经济胁迫的受害者，反对在国际经贸问题上实行双重标准。

中国驻法国大使馆星期六（3月7日）在官网发布通稿称，有记者提问，法国外交部副发言人星期三（3月4日）就中国对日本的出口管制措施说，法国反对任何形式的经济胁迫以及将出口管制武器化的做法，并对中国的决定表示遗憾。中国使馆对此有何评论？

使馆发言人回应说，中国日前依法依规将日本有关实体列入出口管制管控名单和关注名单，旨在维护国家安全和利益、履行防扩散等国际义务，并遏制日本扩军步伐，制止日本“再军事化”和拥核企图，相关举措完全正当、合理、合法。

发言人称，中国始终坚持维护多边贸易体系，致力于维护全球产业链和供应链安全稳定，并执行公正、合理、非歧视的出口管制措施。此次列入清单的仅是少数日本军工企业，相关措施主要针对两用物项，不影响中日正常经贸往来，更不会影响全球产供链稳定。

发言人还说，中国才是西方国家经济胁迫的受害者，“我们反对在国际经贸问题上实行‘双重标准’。”

延伸阅读

---

中国反制升级 20家日本实体被列军民两用管控名单 日使馆年度招待会罕见无中国高官出席 大使称日中关系必破冰

今年2月，中国政府将参与“提升日本军事实力”的20家日本实体，列入军民两用物项出口管制清单。日本政府随即提出强烈抗议，要求中国撤回有关措施。

立即订阅《联合早报》，了解中国时政动态，把握大中华区经济发展脉搏，解锁地区热点评析。

---

特别优惠

早报数码配套个人版（每年付费）

每月S$9.90S$4.95

立即订阅
*第一年S$59.40，第二年起每年S$118.80

[](https://www.zaobao.com.sg/news/china/story20260307-8695061)

中日关系中法关系贸易

上一篇 韩学者：应以习特会为契机 推动四方发表结束朝鲜战争宣言下一篇 中国大陆军机时隔八日重现台海

购买此文章

中国大陆军机时隔八日重现台海

2026-03-07 15:38 / 联合早报

时隔八天，台湾国防部再次侦获到中国大陆军机在台海周边活动。

根据台湾国防部的监控资料，自2月27日开始至星期五（3月6日）早上6时，台湾已连续八天未侦获大陆军机出海或穿越台湾海峡中线，仅维持数艘军舰及公务船在台湾周边海域活动，罕见的“空中静默”现象引发关注。

但台湾国防部官网星期六（7日）公布的解放军进入台海周边空域活动示意图显示，星期五6时至星期六6时的24小时内，在西南空域侦获大陆军机两架次、大陆舰艇六艘及公务船一艘，持续在台海周边活动。台军运用任务机、舰及岸置导弹系统严密监控与应处。

相较过去几乎每日数十架次军机在台海活动的常态，罕见的“空中静默”现象引发台湾舆论诸多揣测。

据台湾联合新闻网报道，台湾国防部长顾立雄星期五对此表示，虽然大陆没有出海，但每天仍维持五艘以上军舰围绕台湾，企图营造“台海内水化”的法律战行动，并没有退却。

他强调，大陆军方的扰台动作不能只看军机有没有来，还是要看各种症候。

长和子公司向巴拿马政府索赔20亿美元

2026年3月7日 15:38 / 联合早报

香港长和集团子公司巴拿马港口公司已向国际仲裁机构提出仲裁申请，要求巴拿马政府赔偿至少20亿美元（25.5亿新元），原因是该国对两个争议港口实施了“非法的国家接管”。

据彭博社，巴拿马港口公司星期五（3月6日）声明，港口运营商已依据国际商会仲裁规则提交索赔，并表示巴拿马当局在公开评论中错误陈述了索赔金额。

该公司还对政府执行2月23日的行政法令提出质疑，该法令授权当局查封巴拿马港口公司资产并扣押受保护文件。公司也在声明中要求归还被“非法扣押”的资料。

声明称，巴拿马港口公司和长江和记“不会退让，也不会仅寻求象征性补偿”，他们将主张所有应得的权利和损害赔偿，因为巴拿马政府存在“严重违约和反投资者行为”。

在美国总统特朗普的施压下，巴拿马政府上月接管了原本由巴拿马港口公司运营的两个战略港口，长和也因此失去了对这两个港口的控制权。

这两个港口属于长和去年3月宣布出售的全球43个港口设施的一部分，买方为由美国投资公司贝莱德所支持的财团。

今年1月，巴拿马高院裁定，巴拿马港口公司在当地经营的港口合约违宪。2月23日，巴拿马政府强行接管这两个港口并撤销巴拿马公司的经营权。

另一方面，长和的港口出售计划也陷入了僵局。彭博社在另一篇报道中引述知情人士称，尽管与买方财团的谈判近几个月来进展甚微，但交易并未泡汤。

知情人士称，各方希望计划中的美中元首峰会将取得政治突破，从而为这笔交易的完成铺平道路。但他们也表示，不能保证在3月31日至4月2日特朗普访华期间，这笔交易会是优先讨论事项。

拉父一起捞偏门九个月赚逾万元佣金 “卜基”判监罚款

2026年3月7日 15:43 / 新明日报

男子当“卜基”，还拉父亲加入一起捞偏门，九个月内助收22万元地下赌资，父子赚进1万2000元佣金。

被告郑顺旺（33岁）面对三项妨碍司法公正和抵触赌博管制法令及版权法令的控状。他承认其中两项，法官将另一项纳入考量后，判他监禁52周及罚款5000元。

父已去世

另一名涉案者郑顺章是被告的父亲，他已于2024年5月31日去世。

案情显示，被告在2023年6月前，在一家咖啡店认识名叫“迈克”的男子，对方事后通过通讯应用Telegram与被告联系。

同年6月，“迈克”邀请被告担任代理，俗称“卜基”，协助收取万字和多多赌注，并承诺让被告从赌注总额中抽取5%佣金。此外，被告若自己下注，也可获得7%至8%的回扣，且若他经手的赌客中奖，他还可获得数百元的额外酬劳。

被告随后开始替“迈克”工作，并招募朋友向他下注。渐渐地，他手下至少有六名赌客。被告会把赌客的下注资料通过Telegram转发给“迈克”，并向赌客收取现金，再按指示交给一名身份不明的上游代理。

对方每周都会派人来收取赌注。若赌客中奖，被告也负责分发奖金。

2023年下半年，被告把有关非法赌博活动告诉父亲，父亲随后“加入”他的活动，两人开始分工合作。父亲负责把收集到的现金交给上游代理，而被告则负责整理两人名下赌客的下注资料，一并转发给“迈克”。

调查显示，被告在2023年6月26日至2024年3月11日期间，持续经营上述非法赌博活动，每周至少三至四天收注。期间共收集约22万2641元的非法赌注，从中获利约5000元，父亲则赚取约6000元至7000元。