In the smoke of conflict between Russia and Ukraine,
Russia's Victory Day military parade was held as scheduled.
After 77 years, different times, the same background.
Russia and Ukraine fought side by side from World War II to now drawing swords against each other.
What kind of signals did the Presidents of the two countries Victory Day send out?
The war in Ukraine is over, NATO's eastward expansion continues
Russia's neighboring country Finland wants to join hands with Sweden to "go against the wind" and join the group
How should Russia, facing the situation of outflanking, break the situation?
"See the World Today"
Join now!
Finland's declaration of "joining the Treaty" touched the nerves of the world
After the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, Finland and Sweden in Northern Europe accelerated the process of applying to join NATO. On May 12, Finland's president and prime minister issued a joint statement saying that Finland must "immediately" apply to join NATO, marking a historic shift in the country's security policy and triggering warnings of retaliation from Russia.
After the Finnish leaders issued a joint statement, Russian Presidential Press Secretary Peskov said that Russia would "certainly" regard Finland's membership of NATO as a threat. "We have stated many times that the expansion of NATO and its alliance's moves closer to our borders will not make the European continent and the world more stable and secure. " Peskov stressed, "Everything will depend on how this process is carried out, it depends Due to how far the military infrastructure has moved towards our borders.”
Finland has been pursuing a policy of military non-alignment since the end of World War II, and Sweden has a history of military non-alignment for more than 200 years. However, the war between Russia and Ukraine has rapidly impacted the geographical structure of Europe, and the "neutrality" policy pursued by the two countries for a long time is also undergoing drastic changes.
Just in January this year, Finnish Prime Minister Marin also made it clear that Finland would not join NATO. But by the end of February, more than 50,000 people in Finland petitioned for a referendum on "NATO membership." Then on March 5, the President of Finland visited the United States to discuss the issue of NATO membership. On April 3, Prime Minister Marin changed his tune and stated that changes in Russia-Finland relations forced Finland to "re-evaluate its attitude towards NATO."
NATO can’t wait to extend an olive branch. NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said that NATO’s door will always be open to Finland and Sweden. NATO will "try to accommodate Finland and Sweden relatively quickly" if they apply to join.
Special current affairs commentator Zhang Bin:
If Finland wants to join NATO, it is not a big problem in its country, and there are not too many obstacles. From the administrative, legislative, political level, and the will of the people, it should be said that it is basically smooth. But it will have obstacles from Europe, because different NATO member states have different intentions for Finland to join NATO, and the United States wants to accept Finland as a member of NATO. The purpose is different, and it is even said to be contradictory.
Zhang Bin: Because most countries in NATO are willing to accept Finland as a NATO country, it is based on the security of the entire Europe and the political and military confrontation with Russia, and uses the power of the entire system to obtain the highest and greatest security guarantee. NATO should be on the defensive and collectively confront Russia. So the United States wants to absorb Finland. While providing security guarantees to Finland, Finland also needs to become the forefront of confrontation or even attack on Russia. In other words, Finland will eventually assume part of Ukraine's role.
Zhang Bin: The United States wants to transform NATO into an offensive organization and tool, but Europe does not recognize this. This means that Europe has to pay a price and become a victim of the United States.Some of the existing NATO member states may come out to oppose this matter. They do not just raise objections, but use existing NATO mechanisms to deny Finland's request to join NATO. This is the most important obstacle for Finland to join NATO.
Compared with NATO's delay and perfunctory approach to Ukraine, NATO's sincere welcome to Finland is visible to the naked eye. Perhaps from the perspective of NATO, Ukraine was, is, and will be a mess, but Finland is different. Finland's per capita GDP in 2021 is as high as 53,523 US dollars, which is a moderately developed country. Moreover, Finland is originally a member of the European Union. If it joins NATO, the border between Russia and NATO countries will increase by more than 1,300 kilometers.
More importantly, the Russian-Finnish border is only 180 kilometers away from St. Petersburg, Russia's second largest city. St. Petersburg is not only Russia's economic center, industrial center, and waterway transportation core hub, but also the headquarters of the Russian Federation Navy Fleet. Its strategic value to Russia is self-evident. Not only that, the addition of Sweden and Finland will further strengthen NATO's presence in the Baltic Sea region. Both countries will bring advanced and well-trained military forces to NATO.
In the tense atmosphere on the European continent, what is a bit "black humor" is that the war between Russia and Ukraine started because of "NATO's eastward expansion." In the early days of the war, one of the mediation plans of all parties was to make Ukraine "neutral" and gradually "Finnish". However, if NATO uses this to "expand northward", the final result may be the "Ukrainization" of Finland. This will undoubtedly intensify the confrontation between NATO and Russia, leading to a spiral deterioration of the European security situation.
The historical "Soviet-Finnish War" In addition to the impact of the Russo-Ukrainian war, Finland's extremely sensitive response to security threats and "unfriendly" memories of Russia also come from the traumatic memory of the "Soviet-Finnish War" during World War II. In December 1917, shortly after the October Revolution, Finland, which had been ruled by Tsarist Russia for more than 100 years, declared its independence. After Finland became independent, relations with the Soviet Union continued to be tense. The Soviet Union had always believed that Leningrad (St. Petersburg) would be threatened by Finland, and Finland also regarded the Soviet Union as its only imaginary enemy. Therefore, on November 30, 1939, the Soviet Union and Finland broke out for the first time in the "Soviet-Finnish War", also known as the "Winter War ".
Although the Soviet Union won, it was a "tragic victory"
At that time, the Soviet Union had strong military strength: there were as many as 5 million troops, of which more than 500,000 Soviet troops had been deployed on the Soviet-Finnish border. Finland's total population is only 3.7 million, and its standing army is only over 30,000. The Soviet Air Force and Navy dispatched 2,300 aircraft, while the Finnish Army only had 114 aircraft. The Soviet Union completely crushed Finland in terms of land area, total population, and standing armed forces.
Faced with such a typical battle of disparity in power and the strong bullying the weak, I originally thought it would be one-sided. However, after the Soviet army entered Finland, they discovered that this was an extremely difficult war. Finland actually inflicted heavy casualties on the Soviet behemoth.
First of all, Finland is almost the coldest country in the world, and the winter of 1939 was particularly harsh. The Soviets were unprepared for this "absolute advantage" war. Many soldiers came from Ukraine and Belarus in the south and had never been trained for the winter war. There is also a serious shortage of military equipment in winter. The lubricants for heavy equipment such as artillery, tanks, and trucks freeze at temperatures as low as minus 30 degrees, and artillery shells and bullets frequently malfunction.
On the other hand, the "Ice and Snow Kingdom" Finland's army has sufficient winter training and winter logistics equipment. The soldiers fighting at home all have skiing skills. Compared with the Soviet army, which is prone to freezing and breaking down trucks, the Finnish troops, which mainly rely on horses, reindeer and skis, are more mobile in the snow.
Secondly, Finnish snipers also had very outstanding results in this war. According to statistics, an average of 25,000 rounds of ammunition were needed to kill a soldier during World War II. During the Vietnam War , an average of 200,000 rounds were needed to kill a soldier. However, the Finnish snipers headed by Simon Heyer formed a ski unit, but only averaged 1.3 rounds.
Most of them are professional hunters who are very familiar with the geographical environment of the mountains and forests. They wear white camouflage clothes that are as white as snow, and slide sleds in the wilderness where the roads are blocked by heavy snow. Simon Haye alone killed 542 Soviet soldiers and won the title of " White Death ".
Finnish sniper Simon Haye
Perhaps due to the strong fear of the "White Death", when Finnish snipers shot at the hungry and exhausted Soviet soldiers beside the campfire on a snowy night, they were so desperate that they "turned a blind eye" to the sudden death of their comrades around them, and calmly waited for their own bullet.
The severe cold caused huge casualties to the Soviet army. Often in a battle, thousands of soldiers froze to death in their positions and had to be evacuated due to frostbite. In the end, although the Soviet Union won, it was a miserable victory. This war cost the Soviet Union a high price: 273,000 people died - more than 10 times the death toll in Finland, and 500,000 people were injured or missing; in addition, hundreds of aircraft were lost.
When a Soviet general was asked what he gained from this war, he said sadly: "In this war, we gained 57,000 square kilometers of land, which is enough to bury our fallen comrades."
The "neutral" stance has won Finland room for development
But the balance pattern may undergo a "historic" change
After World War II, the war-torn Finns secretly set two goals: one is to strengthen national defense, and the other is to deal with the relationship with the Soviet Union. Thanks to the efforts of the two leaders Basikivi and Tikkonen, Finland agreed to adopt a policy that would not threaten the Soviet Union's strategic and security interests. That is to say, it fully understood the Soviet Union's strategic and geographical concerns and used actions to prove that it was "trustworthy."
The Soviet Union's "trust" gave Finland room for development. Although under the post-Cold War narrative dominated by Europe and the United States, the term "Finnishization" which refers to "neutrality" has a derogatory connotation and has even been ridiculed as a synonym for "surviving in the cracks" and "abandoning dignity" of a small country. However, looking back on the historical context, after the war, Finnish leaders relied on sophisticated and complex internal and external operations to strengthen ties with the Western camp while maintaining good relations with the Soviet Union. In the end, Finland did not join NATO, nor did it become a Soviet satellite country.
's "neutral" stance has brought Finland independence and economic growth. Although Finland today has a population of only 6 million, it provides high-quality education to everyone. It is precisely because of its excellent education system that Finland's literacy rate, mathematics level and number of engineers are among the best in the world, and it also leads the world in technological innovation.
But now, the calm may come to an abrupt end, and the European security architecture is undergoing a historic change. This means that Europe's diverse security demands are becoming "unified," and the European security landscape may be completely placed under the NATO system. Caught between the lessons of historical wars and real-world geopolitical challenges, Finland must also prepare for the worst-case scenarios such as the spillover of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Special current affairs commentator Zhang Bin:
A change in political ecology is occurring in Europe. Of course, it first comes from real security threats and Russia’s use of force in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, but it also comes from Finnish politics, which is also the so-called "New Europe" politics in Europe, is increasingly leaning toward "ideology" and "values politics." Europe's new political force uses this to make decisions and lacks calm and realistic comprehensive consideration and layout. This is a very dangerous signal.
Zhang Bin: If Finland joins NATO, it will mean a change in the defensive nature of NATO. In the future, it will show more of the offensive nature of NATO that the United States wants, and even lead to the possibility of a larger-scale war in Europe. The turmoil in Europe is bound to trigger a profound and subversive change in the global landscape, and the consequences of this may be similar to the impact of a world war .
Moderator: Lu Chen
More about Russia’s Victory Day military parade
Russia and Poland ’s grudges Waiting for exciting content
Please lock in: Tonight at 20:30
Phoenix TV Chinese Channel "See the World Today"
Editor: Yang Yufei
