冲突 · 费尔福德轰炸机持续报道 · 第 1 篇,共 2 篇
是轮换还是威胁?特朗普的话让费尔福德事件浮出水面
所有美国轰炸机都已离开英国皇家空军费尔福德基地,而政府内部对原因说法不一。总统现在说此举并非偶然,而警方仍没有装置、没有起诉,也没有公开记录在案的证据。
原语言视频
文字实录 · 正在加载
译自英文原文。
持续报道第 7 天
2 篇报道119 家媒体342 个来源107 个视频
完整报道上次报道的后续
车辆方面的发现、确切人数、作出反应的原因,以及与英国皇家空军费尔福德基地的任何关联,均仍未得到证实。
尚无定论车辆方面的发现已经确定:三辆厢式货车、汽油、没有装置,多数媒体现在统计的被捕人数为六人。作出反应的原因,以及与轰炸机撤离是否有关联,仍未得到证实。
美国只是在例行调动飞机,还是躲避一个它不愿说明的威胁?到周一为止,政府的口径是前者。随后总统否定了这一说法。
9月30日我们报道,警方在英国皇家空军费尔福德基地附近发现三辆厢式货车,车内有“一定数量的汽油”,但没有简易爆炸装置。五名伦敦男子已获保释,首相安迪·伯纳姆表示有“强烈迹象”显示伊朗参与其中,但未提供证据。10月4日(周日),五角大楼确认,部署在该基地的所有美国轰炸机已调回美国本土驻地。五角大楼未给出理由。它说,B-1、B-2和B-52机组仍可随时从美国本土发动打击,出于行动安全考虑,无法实时确认兵力动向11。
关键事实
三种互不吻合的解释
把这些说法并排放在一起很容易,而问题正在于此。斯克里普斯新闻转述国务卿马尔科·卢比奥的话,称此举是例行调整部署,并拒绝将其与费尔福德事件联系起来4。《国会山报》报道,五角大楼称轰炸机例行在全球范围内行动,未公开与该阴谋有任何联系6。据BBC报道,副总统JD·万斯称这是“出于高度谨慎”2。《每日电讯报》转述两名匿名官员对《纽约时报》的说法,报道称指挥官在此前24小时内收到了新的具体威胁8。
匿名说法并非单薄无据。《华尔街日报》援引美国官员报道,称存在对一起疑似阴谋的安全担忧14。一名五角大楼官员对《卫报》说,此举是在阴谋调查之后作出的15。一名消息人士对CNN称这是一起“现实世界事件”10。《泰晤士报》的报道补充说,撤离过于仓促,以致部分轰炸机在空中加油机就绪之前就已离开1。NBC的五角大楼消息人士称此事仓促,并说不清楚发生了什么变化7。这些说法均未获公开证实,也没有人描述过这一威胁。
是的,我想可以这么说。我的意思是,它们离开可不是偶然。
这是总统周一被问及是否有具体威胁促成此举时的回答。阿纳多卢通讯社报道他说存在“一些威胁”,并说美国“稍微”调动了一下这些飞机262。多家媒体称他将此与伊朗联系起来;另一些媒体则称威胁并未具体说明261。V2电台的一篇报道称他说华盛顿知道是谁发出了威胁259。这一说法仅见于该媒体。他没有点名任何人。
我的看法是,轮换的说法现在已很难站得住脚。一位总统说这些飞机“离开不是偶然”,就不是在描述一次日程调整。这是一种预防措施,万斯的措辞也表达了同样的意思。但这是针对公众无从评估的威胁而采取的预防措施。这一威胁是否与那五名男子或第六名男子有关,没有任何具名人士予以确认。
调查实际掌握的情况
调查尚未推进到起诉阶段。9月27日被捕的五名男子年龄在23岁至25岁之间,仍在警方保释期内,并受到严格的保释条件限制17。一名英国和伊朗双重国籍男子10月1日在威斯敏斯特因涉嫌准备恐怖行为被捕,并获保释;警方和BBC的多数报道称其年龄为27岁,BBC后来的一篇报道称为25岁19 13。一名26岁男子被依法警告后接受讯问。反恐警察部门的维姬·埃文斯表示,各种可能性都在排查之列,包括外国国家的介入19。伊朗否认参与,但其外交部称,美国使用的英国基地属于正当目标5。
需要更正一点。福克斯的主持人和杰克·基恩上将称,被捕者已获释且无需保释3。其他所有说法都是警方保释,这也是这些男子的实际状况。值得肯定的是,基恩表示自己只是在推测,并不掌握内部消息。
英国方面几乎没有表态。国防部拒绝置评1。唐宁街表示基地是安全的231。BBC获悉,这一决定属于军事而非政治决定,在行动层面作出,并已通报英方对口人员13。《政客》将其置于特朗普政府数月来对英国国防开支不满的背景下来解读234。这是分析,不是官方解释。
外部分析人士对事态的严重程度看法不一。CNN的亚历克斯·皮扎称此举属预防性措施,并指出航母和加油机的部署态势表明战事并不迫近10。布鲁金斯学会的迈克尔·奥汉隆称此举审慎,超出正常轮换,但尚不至于引发跨大西洋危机5。天空新闻的一名安全专家指出,更广泛的趋势是敌对国家招募易受影响或为钱行事的代理人,安全部门很难对其进行监控9。另有一名美国官员称,一艘航母和一个两栖作战群正前往中东,到月底可能形成三艘航母的格局,此事尚未得到证实15。
已知
未知
- 新的威胁是什么,以及它是否与9月27日的抓捕有关。
- 是否有任何证据支持伯纳姆对伊朗的判断,或特朗普称知道谁发出威胁的说法。
- 这些男子在基地附近做什么,以及汽油的用途是什么。
后续
- 警方的任何最新通报或起诉决定,以及伯纳姆承诺的进一步声明。
- 轰炸机是否返回,以及美国航母部署会如何改变局势。
播出原貌 10 行
- On September 30 we reported no explosives found. Now every US bomber has left Fairford.
- Fairford was the main forward base for B-1 strikes on Iran, roughly 3,500 miles away. Last time, police had found only petrol in three vans, and five London men were out on bail. Now the bombers are gone, no reason has been given, and the president's words contradict his own Secretary of State's. Was this routine rotation, or a reaction to a threat nobody has described?
- The Pentagon gave no reason for the exit. It confirmed on October 4 that all bombers deployed to Fairford had redeployed to US home stations, and said B-1, B-2 and B-52 crews remain ready to strike from the continental United States, anywhere, anytime. The count varies: about a dozen B-1s in most accounts, all twelve in some, at least ten of twelve flying out that day in one. Officials describe the departure as rushed, and one account says some bombers left before refuelling tankers were ready, a detail that is unconfirmed. Flying the aircraft all the way home, rather than to another regional base, is unusual.
- Three explanations, none matching. Secretary of State Marco Rubio calls it routine reallocation and rotation, and will not directly tie it to the Fairford incident. The Pentagon says bombers routinely operate worldwide and does not publicly link the move to the plot. Vice President JD Vance calls it an abundance of caution to protect American personnel, and says Iran is doing what it has done for 49 years: engaging in acts of terrorism. Anonymous US officials go further, saying commanders received fresh, specific threats in the 24 hours before the exit, and that the threat was Iranian-based. Neither the Pentagon nor UK authorities has confirmed that on the record.
- The president says the bombers did not leave by accident. Asked on October 5 whether a specific threat prompted the move, he said yes. He said there were some threats, and that rather than tempting the enemy, the US moved the aircraft around a little bit. One account has him adding that Washington knows the people who made the threat. He named no one, described no threat, and suggested a possible Iran link. The routine-rotation line is hard to square with that.
- Britain is saying far less. The Ministry of Defence declined comment, saying it does not discuss other nations' operations. Downing Street says RAF Fairford is safe. The decision was military rather than political, taken at operational level and passed to British counterparts, and Whitehall sources did not dispute that it was linked to the Gloucestershire incident. One analysis sets the move against months of Trump administration frustration over British defence spending. That is analysis, not an official explanation, and the political consequences are unclear.
- Nobody has been charged. The five men arrested on September 27 remain on police bail with strict conditions. A dual UK-Iranian national, aged 27 in police and most reporting and 25 in one later account, was arrested in Westminster on October 1 and also bailed; a 26-year-old was questioned under caution. Most counts now put the arrests at six. Police found petrol but no explosive device. Prime Minister Andy Burnham said there were strong indications Iran played a part, offering no evidence. Iran denies involvement, though its foreign ministry says UK bases used by the US are legitimate targets. A claim that the men were released without bail is wrong: every account that checks says police bail. What the men intended, and what the petrol was for, remains unknown.
- Analysts disagree on how alarming the move is. Alex Pizza calls it precautionary, saying hostilities with Iran do not look imminent given carrier and tanker posture. Michael O'Hanlon of Brookings calls it prudent, more than normal rotation but short of a transatlantic crisis, and unlikely to change the strategic picture on Iran. Retired General Jack Keane, who says he is speculating without inside information, believes a threat to the base is real. Talk of a US scaling-down of Iran operations is speculation; nothing establishes it. Striking from the US mainland means longer distances, but it is feasible with refuelling aircraft.
- A security expert warns hostile states are seen recruiting vulnerable or cash-motivated proxies, as with car sabotage in Germany, and that such people are hard for UK and European security services to monitor. Separately, a US official says a carrier and an amphibious readiness group are heading to the Middle East, which could bring three carriers to the region by the end of October. That is a possibility, not confirmed.
- So was it rotation or a threat? The record does not settle it. Confirmed: every bomber is gone, and the Pentagon says it can still strike from the US. Unknown: what the new threat is, whether it connects to the September 27 arrests, whether the bombers return, and whether anyone will be charged. The president says threats were real and known to him, Downing Street says the base is safe, and neither government has put evidence on the record.
来源
264 个来源106 家媒体71 个视频6 篇通稿
来源地图
追溯本篇报道的依据。图谱展示其关联;下方链接可打开本文引用的来源。
来源图谱将在您阅读时加载。
译文更新于
修订记录
- r1首次发布。

