Russian threats against Ukraine could put pressure on Finland and Sweden against NATO
Russian military threat to Ukraine and Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinRussia: Nothing less than NATO’s ban on expansion is acceptable Biden talks with a group of senators about tensions between Ukraine and Russia. The United States gives Ukraine another 0 million in military aid in the midst of tensions with Russia MOREs unpredictability is compelling Sweden and Finland to reconsider its policy of freedom of alliance vis-à-vis NATO. If allowed, each would improve security on NATO’s northeast flank and lay Russia with message. Natos open door policies allow nation states to initiate membership plans if they meet the guidelines set out in Article X in the North Atlantic Charter. Finland and Sweden are ideal NATO candidates.
Putin December 2021 requirements that NATO membership dates back to 1997, when there were no new members, is both unrealistic and threatens European security. Putin is asking NATO to accept Russia’s self-proclaimed spheres of influence, which include former members of the Warsaw Pact and former Soviet republics now part of NATO. Put simply, Putin wants to rebuild the Soviet Union.
Finland and Sweden have significant security problems with their larger and aggressive neighbor to the east. Finland has a complicated history with Russia. It averted the Soviet occupation during the Winter War of 1939-1940, but lost one tenth of its territory after it joined Nazi Germany during World War II. Finland 1948 Friendship treaty gave rise to “Finlandisation“, Where Russia would accept Finnish independence in exchange for Finland renouncing military integration with the United States and its allies.
Unlike Finland, Sweden remained neutral during World War II. The case for Swedish membership in NATO gained new relevance after the accession of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in 2004. Sweden’s geopolitical concerns are that the island of Gotland is relatively close to the island of Russia. Kaliningrad Oblast, which has become increasingly militarized and is sandwiched between NATO members Poland and Lithuania. Gotland is crucial for the Swedish military’s ability to conduct and air defense and naval operations and crucial for the defense of Stockholm. If Sweden were to join NATO, its security interests could be addressed.
While Finland and Sweden share a strategic interest in not provoking Russia, everyone has already done so cooperative relations with NATO. The Finnish and Swedish military have implemented military exercises with NATO forces, launched joint projects in Arctic seaand enjoy friendly bilateral relations with the United States, the United Kingdom and Norway. While Finland and Sweden have become deeply intertwined with NATO, their freedom of alliance keeps them far outside NATO’s Article V collective defense guarantee.
NATO’s leadership and control would prefer that Finland and Sweden become members because each would provide significant benefits to the alliance. Sweden will increase defense spending by 40% by 2025 to about 1.5% of GDP, the largest increase in more than 70 years. Finland will soon reach NATO 2% of GDP guidelines for defense spending, a rate of military spending that is greater than some current NATO members.
In addition, all have well-equipped and advanced military interoperable with NATO forces and in line with collective security doctrine. In addition, both advanced and mature advanced democracies are involved strong economies and established defense sectors. In addition, NATO could project more influence into the Arctic Ocean and control Russia’s influence through the North Sea.
Most important of all, with Finland and Sweden in NATO, The Baltic Sea would be transformed into a Euro-Atlantic space and the balance of power would be shifted towards the transatlantic alliance. Russian economic interests would then be exposed Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines to Germany pass through the Baltic Sea as well as Russian commercial shipping. NATO’s naval operations near Poland and the Baltic states would be strengthened and Russian air patrols could be mitigated.
There are some obvious risks with this approach. Russia would increase its military spending and increase the capacity of short-range missiles in its western regions. Russia’s war with Georgia in South Ossetia and Abkhazia in 2008 and the annexation of Crimea and intervention in the Donbas in 2014, combined with cyber operations and disinformation, show the extent to which Vladimir Putin is prioritizing impulsive behavior to run Russia sphere of influence to the west. Russia will not just sit and watch its security deteriorate in the Baltic Sea.
But a Russian military invasion of Ukraine will encourage Finland and Sweden to push for NATO membership at very short notice. Public opinion in both countries has gradually changed in favor of NATO membership. Finnish and Swedish membership of NATO may depend on how well NATO-friendly political parties perform in the forthcoming elections. If they succeed, they can push for national referendums in both countries. If Russia believes it can end NATO’s expansion with an invasion of Ukraine, it can achieve just the opposite.
Chris J. Dolan is Professor of Political Science and Head of the MS Program in Intelligence and Security Studies at Lebanon Valley College.