Sweden is following Finland into NATO despite years of skepticism
On May 17, Finnish President Sauli Niinisto is scheduled to arrive in Sweden. He will meet King Carl XVI Gustaf and the Swedish government before leaving the next day. And sometime during his visit, Sweden and Finland are expected to announce that they are both applying for NATO membership. Finland has – remarkably enough – taken the lead, and Sweden will probably follow suit, simply because if Finland joins, there is really no reason not to do the same. Sweden is in fact the happiest member of NATO ever, a country that has been swept into the alliance without having to lobby for membership and without its government even expressing a desire to join.
When Russia invaded Ukraine, the Finns took note. By April 11, support for NATO membership had soared from its usual domains of close to 20-28 percent to 68 percent. Many seem to have distanced themselves from Niinisto and Prime Minister Sanna Marin, who in her clearly coordinated New Year’s speeches highlighted Finland’s right to decide its own fate. In mid-April, the Finnish government presented a report to the Riksdag on the pros and cons of NATO membership (there were mostly advantages), and Marin traveled to Stockholm for a meeting and press conference with Sweden’s Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson. Finland’s decision to apply for membership will be “a matter of weeks”, she said declared.
The Social Democrats have long argued that Sweden can not join NATO without Finland, in the knowledge that Finland was extremely unlikely to join.
On May 17, Finnish President Sauli Niinisto is scheduled to arrive in Sweden. He will meet King Carl XVI Gustaf and the Swedish government before leaving the next day. And sometime during his visit, Sweden and Finland are expected to announce that they are both applying for NATO membership. Finland has – remarkably enough – taken the lead, and Sweden will probably follow suit, simply because if Finland joins, there is really no reason not to do the same. Sweden is in fact the happiest member of NATO ever, a country that has been swept into the alliance without having to lobby for membership and without its government even expressing a desire to join.
When Russia invaded Ukraine, the Finns took note. By April 11, support for NATO membership had soared from its usual domains of close to 20-28 percent to 68 percent. Many seem to have distanced themselves from Niinisto and Prime Minister Sanna Marin, who in her clearly coordinated New Year’s speeches highlighted Finland’s right to decide its own fate. In mid-April, the Finnish government presented a report to the Riksdag on the pros and cons of NATO membership (there were mostly advantages), and Marin traveled to Stockholm for a meeting and press conference with Sweden’s Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson. Finland’s decision to apply for membership will be “a matter of weeks”, she said declared.
The Swedish government – a minority government that consisted only of the long-ruling Social Democrats – was more cautious. The Social Democrats have a long history of being opposed to NATO. Their most brilliant representative, Prime Minister Olof Palme, actually marched in the Cold War against the US military before being assassinated in February 1986, even when Sweden secretly collaborated with NATO military, including the US. In fact, the Social Democrats have for a long time made Swedish exceptionalism a cornerstone of their foreign and security policy and portrayed Sweden as a moral superpower.
Internally, they have torn between a left-wing camp, which maintains a long-standing belief in peace and Sweden’s role as a moral superpower, and a centrist wing, which has had virtually no fundamental objections to NATO membership. To bridge this insurmountable gap, the Social Democrats have instead argued that Sweden can not join NATO without Finland, in the knowledge that Finland was extremely unlikely to join.
As recently as mid-February, the current Swedish government claimed to the Riksdag that Sweden would not apply for membership in NATO. And when Russia invaded Ukraine at the end of February and Helsinki sailed towards NATO headquarters, Andersson vaguely announced that NATO membership would be investigated. (Sweden has already had two such investigations in recent years.)
As the general election approached in September, she might have hoped that the difficult issue would subside by October. “The difference between Sweden and Finland is that Finland has long had what Finns call its NATO capability, which their governments have consistently communicated to the public, to Russia, to NATO,” said Pal Jonson, chairman of the Swedish Parliament’s Defense Committee. and member of the center-right Moderates.
– The Swedish Social Democrats, on the other hand, have kept the door closed and believed that we can go other ways, he says. “For Sweden, not joining NATO has been a matter of identity, while for Finland it has been a matter of geopolitics.” Jonson wrote his Ph.D. dissertation in war studies on the European Union’s common security and defense policy. Perhaps as a result of his discoveries – he concluded that European efforts are being undermined by the difference between the goals of the member states – he is a staunch supporter of NATO membership.
A former Swedish ambassador, who asked to remain anonymous, made a similar assessment: “Sweden’s attitude to the NATO issue has been dominated by its self-image, both Sweden’s self-image in general and that of the Social Democrats. NATO membership has been a threat to the cohesion of the Social Democrats. And in peacetime, it was always easy to say, ‘There is no threat, what’s the point of joining?’ while you are in crisis, you can argue that joining would be escalating. ” (It is a sign of the Social Democrats’ tormented attitude towards NATO that a leading representative I contacted felt unable to comment publicly.)
Changing one’s identity is clearly more difficult than changing a geopolitical stance. It was not only the Finns’ rapid change of mind and the government’s willingness to act accordingly that hindered Andersson’s caution. Swedes also warmed up to the prospect of joining NATO. Several surveys since the Russian invasion began have shown support around 50 percent. The latest, from April 25, showed 47 percent of Swedes who support an offer of membership in NATO, with 21 percent against – and a remarkable 59 percent now support accession if Finland also joins. Among the Social Democrats, a record 36 percent support Sweden joining NATO.
In fact, there has never been a more opportune time to join the alliance. Russia shows the importance of the alliance, Finland takes the lead in terms of membership and thus most of the plateau that will surely come from Moscow, and NATO only happens to have a summit in June where invitations to two new members could conveniently take place. announced.
“Finland seems to be close to activating its NATO alternative,” Jonson said. “Being the only Nordic country outside NATO would make us politically marginalized and more vulnerable.” If Stockholm announces on 17 or 18 May that it will apply for membership together with Finland, it may qualify as the most half-hearted membership offer in the alliance’s history. Andersson’s approach will not impress those such as Estonia and Poland, who have spent years lobbying and enticing to receive an invitation.
But like Finland, Sweden would be a useful member of NATO, making it virtually guaranteed that the countries will receive their official invitation in time for the Alliance’s summit in Madrid at the end of June. “It has long been clear that Finland and Sweden will be shoo-ins,” Lauri Lepik, a former Estonian ambassador to NATO, said. But becoming a member, he noted, is not as easy as “applying on a Wednesday, joining that Friday,” as a US general has promised the two countries. “There is a bureaucratic process ahead of us, which can see Finland and Sweden join the alliance after the war that has caused their apparent reversal of NATO membership to end,” Lepik said.
Unfortunately, at this time, the Ukraine war probably seems to be going beyond Sweden’s and Finland’s presumptive NATO accession process. And when they join, both countries will be significant assets: Finland with its large armed forces, huge reserves, history of defending a land border with Russia and first-class military intelligence; Sweden with, among other things, its skilled fleet, one of the Baltic Sea’s largest. Of course, both countries are already strongly integrated with NATO; last month, they participated in the Alliance’s exercise Cold Response 2022. And both belong to the British-led Joint Expeditionary Force, which consists of northern European countries.
But if Sweden were to join, Andersson’s government would be wise to abolish its “assume that we must” attitude. “We should use this unique opportunity and, for example, deepen our military cooperation with our Nordic and Baltic neighbors and strengthen the transatlantic link,” Jonson said. He may well have the opportunity to implement his proposals. If the opposition wins the parliamentary election in September, Jonson is a strong candidate to become defense minister.