- Neither Europe nor the world will become more stable, Kremlin spokesman Peskov warned
- Already this summer, the alliance could number 32 countries
NATO could expand to two more countries in two weeks, which is likely to provoke outrage with unexpected consequences for Vladimir Putin, Newsweek magazine predicts.
On Thursday, Finnish President Sauli Niinisto gave the green light to join the alliance, and the Swedish government plans to apply for membership next week.
The two Scandinavian countries, whose neutrality has been sacred for decades, will change the geostrategic map of the world. Thus, the war in Ukraine, which Russia said broke out over the Western military pact to the east, led to the Kremlin’s most frightening outcome: the pact is expanding to 32 countries this summer.
Moscow immediately threatened with a “military-technical response” and “all measures that will be necessary to ensure the legitimate interests of our defense.”
“Undoubtedly, the Finnish government’s support for NATO membership is a threat to Russia that will neither make Europe nor the world more stable,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned, speaking of a “symmetrical” response.
Applying for membership from the two Nordic countries will be a historic turning point for them. Sweden has been wary of any military alliances for 200 years, and Finland has been wary since it was defeated by the Soviet Union in World War II. The Finns now have reasons to draw parallels with 1939, when the Red Army took over their homeland and for 3 months the Finnish army resisted, although it was much smaller. The country is at odds with the occupation, but is losing 10% of its territory. “Could it happen to us again?” Locals ask the aggressive neighbor.
Finland, which has 1340 km border with Russia,
is more assertive. There, the parliamentary defense committee has already given a positive opinion on the alliance’s membership, as did President Sauli Niinisto, who was one of the Western leaders with the best relations with the Kremlin before the invasion. In Sweden, the fluctuations are greater and will obviously continue until the last moment. But if both ruling parties give the green light over the weekend to join the alliance, there will be a sufficient majority in parliaments in favor of NATO membership, which will effectively pave the way for the formal procedure to begin immediately. The Finnish Social Democrats, led by young Prime Minister Sana Marin, are willing to support membership.
Their Swedish counterparts in the Social Democratic Party have always opposed any commitment, but their leader and current head of government, Magdalena Anderson, said there was “a clear distinction between before and after February 24” (the date Russia invaded Ukraine).
However, the women’s organization of the party is strongly opposed. “Our interest will be best served if we remain militarily neutral,” said its chairwoman, Annika Strandall, environment and climate minister. “Sweden has traditionally been a strong voice for peace and disarmament.” Unlike Finland, Sweden does not have a common border with Russia, but it feels no less insecure since the beginning of events in Ukraine. Especially after its airspace has been violated several times in recent weeks by Russian planes, some of them
wore on your board and nuclear weapons
Neither Helsinki nor Stockholm intend to hold referendums for fear that the polls could become the first target of Russian intervention, which will certainly include cyberattacks to falsify the results.
For years, the support of Finns for joining NATO was about 20-25%. After the Russian invasion, it rose to a record 76%, writes the BBC.
“The only person we have to thank for this is Putin, he is the reason we join,” said former Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb. 57% of Swedes also want membership.
The United States has promised security for both sides between the application and de facto membership. On Wednesday, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson visited the Scandinavian capitals to discuss measures for their “border security”.
Finland and Sweden have long been actively cooperating with NATO and are involved in many of its exercises, so that their armies are compatible with those of the alliance. According to Newsweek magazine, their membership could be completed in two weeks.
What are the advantages and risks for Europe since the end of the neutrality of the two Scandinavian EU member states?
Arguments for
From a military point of view, the addition of the Swedish and Finnish armed forces to the alliance will strengthen its defensive power in northern Europe, where the Russian army has a superiority in numbers, the BBC notes. The Finnish army is made up of 280,000 soldiers and a total of 900,000 reservists. Helsinki bought 64 American fighter jets in 1992. Earlier this year, a deal was finalized to buy 64 state-of-the-art F-35s to be delivered by 2030.
In the 1990s, Sweden took a different approach. It has greatly reduced the size of its army and focused on peacekeeping missions around the world. However, after the annexation of Crimea, it began to raise defense spending sharply. The recruitment service, which was abolished in 2010, was restored in 2017. Last year, Sweden became the first non-NATO country to acquire the Patriot anti-missile system. The country also owns the strategic island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea, from where the distance to Kaliningrad – the headquarters of the Baltic Russian Fleet, is only 300 km.
Finland has already met the requirement to spend 2% on defense, and Sweden is fast approaching it. The military forces of both countries have valuable experience in conducting hostilities in the Arctic region, considered by Moscow to be its strategic priority. By adding Finland to its ranks, NATO is doubling its borders with Russia.
From a political point of view, the membership of both countries will be a new clear signal to Putin that Europe is united in not accepting the Russian invasion of a sovereign state.
The arguments “Against”
Such a large-scale expansion of NATO under the very nose of Russia will undoubtedly lead to Putin’s fury, the form of which is difficult to predict.
The threat of a “military-technical response” could be interpreted as the transfer of troops and nuclear missiles to the Kaliningrad enclave (former Prime Minister and President Dmitry Medvedev warned) – closer to the West.
–
