普京不久将访问北京，与中国领导人习近平会面，届时几乎不会出现对中俄无上限伙伴关系持怀疑态度的人所说的分歧。    "The accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO constitutes a test of loyalty to the western bloc, in particular to the US and Great Britain, which are the real geopolitical and geostrategic beneficiaries of the ongoing conflict," said Dr. Tiberio Graziani, chairman of Vision & Global Trends International Institute for Global Analyses.,The two Nordic countries' neutrality differs. Sweden had not joined a military alliance or participated in any war since 1814, with its neutrality being flexible, self-declared and not enshrined in law, as the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars noted in its 2 February 2022 study.,In contrast, Finland's neutrality was stipulated by the Paris Peace Treaty of 1947 which was signed after the end of the Second World War between the Allied powers - including the USSR, the UK, the US and France - and former Nazi Germany allies, such as Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Finland.,"This definitely appears to be a violation of Finland’s international agreements signed after WWII with the Soviet Union then later Russia," said Earl Rasmussen, executive vice-president of Eurasia Group, citing the 1947 treaty as well as the 1992 Russo-Finnish treaty.,It raises questions as to whether benefits from the abandoned neutrality will outweigh potential security risks for the two Nordic states.,"I am puzzled by how this inclusion will provide increased security, it appears it will likely further deteriorate relations between Russia and the EU and more specifically with Finland and Sweden," Rasmussen said. "Strategically, I am not sure what the real impact will be. Essentially, both Finland and Sweden are de facto NATO members to include coordination and joint exercises. However, tensions will likely increase and increased defensive measures will likely occur in Russia’s northern regions as well as Kaliningrad.",Why Finland & Sweden’s NATO Admission Is So Important to the US16 May, 19:17 GMT,What Do Finns and Swedes Think About NATO Membership?,Meanwhile, popular support for NATO membership in both Nordic states has never been high.,According to a 2021 poll commissioned by EVA Finnish Business and Policy Forum, around 26% of Finns were in favor of joining NATO, 40% against and 33% remained undecided. A January 2022 Demoskop survey showed 42% of Swedes supporting NATO accession and 37% of respondents opposed it.,The Russian special operation in Ukraine is said to have invigorated NATO proponents in both Nordic countries. Rasmussen noted that recent surveys in Finland have shown a spike in support up to 76%. However, in Sweden, support to join NATO has remained relatively low, climbing to just 47%, according to him.,Meanwhile, unlike Sweden, Finland shares a 1,340 km (830 mi) border with Russia and has maintained longstanding economic relations with Moscow for decades. As of 2019, Finland imported around 60% of its energy from Russia with the latter being the fourth largest importer of Finnish goods in 2017, according to the Wilson Center. Furthermore, Russian speakers constitute the third largest ethnic group in the Nordic country.,Putin: If NATO Infrastructure is Deployed to Finland & Sweden, Russia Will Respond in ‘Mirror Way’01:02 GMT,"Even during the Cold War, both states were neutral and non-NATO members, with Finland developing strong economic and trade relations with Russia," the Eurasia Group vice-president explained. "As trade degrades and energy sharing diminishes there will likely be a strain placed on the economies, mostly with Finland.",Moscow has repeatedly underscored that Russia harbors no hostile intentions against either Nordic country, yet also signaling that the latest NATO expansion will not make the continent more stable or secure. Earlier this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized that the Kremlin has "nothing that could worry us in terms of Finland or Sweden's membership in NATO," adding, however, that if military equipment or troops are deployed along the border, Moscow will have to "respond in a mirror manner and create the same threats in the territories from which they threaten us.",There is yet another controversy surrounding Sweden and Finland's accession to the western military bloc: neither Nordic state has held a popular referendum to find out whether the public has really weighed all the pros and cons of NATO membership.,"Political leadership in both countries is taking a certain degree of risk to push forward the joining without a public referendum," Rasmussen said. "I am sure Washington and Brussels realize that risk.",In addition to that, NATO accession may increase political polarization in both Nordic states, according to the Eurasia Group vice-president. In particular, "the Finnish government is made up of several political parties with no single party having a clear majority, hence requiring partnerships being established," he noted, adding that worsening economic conditions could "potentially create divisions politically and thus alignments could easily change.",Meanwhile, the Swedish left has lashed out at the government and the Social Democrats over Stockholm's NATO admission deal with Ankara. According to Expressen, the Greens and the Left Party are mooting a no-confidence vote against Foreign Minister Ann Linde.,Bank of England Head: UK To Face More Inflation Than Other Major Economies10:47 GMT,Why NATO's 2% Requirement Appears Unrealistic Today,NATO rules may trigger further controversy as they will require Sweden and Finland to spend 2% of gross domestic product (GDP) on their defense budgets. Even though the Nordic countries have committed to reaching the benchmark by 2024, the long-term viability of their promises is in question, given skyrocketing inflation in Europe.,Inflation in Finland has recently risen to its highest level in over 30 years, hitting 7.1% in May. In April, the country's consumer price index (CPI), a popular gauge for inflation, stood at 5.7%, according to Statistics Finland.,Likewise, annual inflation in Sweden jumped from 6.4% in April to 7.3% in May, according to the country's Consumer Price Index with fixed interest rate (CPIF).,"To this end, just as the Ukrainian people are sacrificed, so the economies of European countries will be sacrificed, including Finland and Sweden," forecast Graziani. "Very difficult economic and social months await us in Europe. It will be a very hot autumn. Political crises in various countries of the European Union are likely to be hypothesized.",EU member states, the UK and the US are taking efforts to tame galloping inflation which throws their capability of adhering to NATO requirements into question. To complicate matters further, the UK is calling to step up funding and arming of Ukraine "until victory" amid the Russian special operation.,"The US and UK are using the conflict in Ukraine to pressure greater EU involvement and support to include NATO contributions," said Rasmussen. "While it is being projected that member states will meet their 2% objectives by 2024, based on developing economic conditions and a pending recession, I question the realism of that projection. Increasing real contributions for defense along with rising tensions between the EU and Russia may prove challenging as economic conditions worsen resulting in political disruptions across Europe.",Meanwhile, the US is not in its best shape either, according to Rasmussen. The country steadily moves forward into a potentially deep recession; increased tensions with China; emerging challenges in Latin America; tensions with Iran; and economic challenges at home. The scholar believes that it is likely one will see a major political change in the US in 2022 midterms, in 2024 and beyond.,What’s more, as the Republican Party becomes increasingly influenced by MAGA supporters, Trump's skepticism towards the NATO alliance may get a second wind in 2024. And this raises further questions about the future of the Cold War-era military bloc.。

B | 然而，普京的优先事项很可能会与东道国的优先事项发生冲突，克莱蒙特麦肯纳学院政府学教授裴敏欣为彭博社撰文指出。

这位教授认为，普京现在别无选择，只能从短期考虑，即乌克兰的失败将对他的统治构成生存威胁。因此，他完全有理由迫使中国为他的战争提供更多实质性的军事支持。

裴敏欣指出：”值得注意的是，俄罗斯决定在中国高官最近对法国进行国事访问之际宣布进行挑衅性核演习。这让北京感到尴尬，而北京正面临着来自欧洲的越来越大的压力，迫使其利用自己的影响力结束战争。普京此举发出了一个并不含蓄的信息：中国在战争问题上保持中立已不再可行。

C | ”

这位教授认为，中国可能不会介意给予普京更多支持，但中国在短期内面临严重制约，需要争取时间。

D | 自2023年3月与普京的上一次会晤以来，北京的处境恶化，这主要是由于中国经济下滑以及与西方的关系持续紧张。

E |

裴敏欣称：”这两个因素是相互关联的。尽管在技术和贸易方面出现了一些初步分离，但与普京干预之前的俄罗斯经济相比，中国经济与美国和欧洲的交织程度仍然要深得多。2023年，中国对美国的商品出口总额为4270亿美元，对欧盟的商品出口总额约为5500亿美元。”

在他看来，中国政府在关键领域实现自给自足的战略可能会减少对西方市场的过度依赖，但至少在未来几年，中国将不得不依靠出口来克服经济困难。

“由于中国无法断绝与西方的经济联系，北京必须谨慎对待向普京提供多少援助及何种援助。

F | 美国显然了解中国的脆弱性。”这位教授说。

“两位领导人可能会在会议上宣布一系列新的协议，以防止普京空手而归（最重要的是他们能否就”西伯利亚电力2号”天然气管道签署协议）。但北京不太可能向普京提供那种越过西方红线的军事支持。”这位教授认为。

裴敏欣称：”未来两三年，中俄之间的主要紧张关系仍将存在，如果普京再次在战场上失利，这种紧张关系可能会变得更加难以控制。

G | ”