At a joint news conference with her Swedish counterpart on March 13th, Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin announced Finnish short-term plans to decide whether to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Her comments come as the Finnish parliament received a report warning of increased instability in Finnish and European security after the invasion of Ukraine. The report considers the potential effects of NATO membership, including Article 5’s security guarantees and enhanced “stability of the region in the long term.” Both Finland and Sweden suggest they are conducting extensive analyses to determine their next moves.
While Finland and Sweden are formally non-aligned, Putin’s actions have pushed the two countries closer to the NATO alliance. Speaking at the news conference, Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson noted that “the security landscape has completely changed.” Finnish officials agree, and Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto added that the state is worried about Russia’s propensity to “take higher risks than earlier.” However, NATO membership would not be without peril. Russian spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned that if Finland and Sweden join NATO, Russia would be forced to “rebalance the situation.” He has argued Russia may have to move nuclear weapons into the Baltic region to secure its western border against NATO.
Despite the risks of NATO membership, Finland and Sweden should pursue a place in this alliance. Existing members should support their accession and admit them as quickly as is feasible. Putin’s recklessness poses increased danger to both countries, and NATO’s security guarantee would benefit them. Further enlargement of NATO would be a major diplomatic loss for Russia and shows that aggression in Eastern Europe is likely to backfire. However, Helsinki and Stockholm should also be wary of triggering a serious reaction from Moscow. They could pursue a Norway model, whereby each country joins NATO but does not allow foreign military bases inside their borders. Finland and Sweden already have strong militaries and do not need the additional support of foreign bases. The Norway model may prevent a radical response from Russia, although Putin’s actions are hard to predict.
For years, Finland has occupied a difficult position between NATO and Russia. Finland lost a considerable amount of its territory to the Soviet Union during the 1939 Winter War. Helsinki did not join NATO after World War II to prevent another invasion, instead they are following a policy of “active neutrality.” According to Foreign Policy, its politics were mockingly called “Finlandization” outside of the country due to Helsinki’s “quasi-acquiescence to Moscow.” Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Finland has expanded its support for NATO, but the country was still reluctant to join the organization. Prime Minister Marin’s Social Democratic Party has long supported non-alignment. Yet, with the invasion of Ukraine, BBC News reports Finnish public support for joining NATO has shot up from 28% in February to 62% in March.
It seems increasingly likely that both Finland and Sweden will request NATO membership, signifying a major blow for Russia. If Finland moves to join, Sweden will almost certainly follow. While their accession would enhance regional security in the long term, Russia’s reaction to such a request may raise tensions in the short term. Finnish officials are already preparing for potential consequences if they move forward with a NATO application. If NATO expands to the north, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine will have caused the geopolitical situation he was trying to avoid all along.
