Why NATO should quickly admit Sweden and Finland
For Finland and Sweden to join nato is a rebuke to the anti-nato Russian President Vladimir Putin’s argument. Two countries that are proud of their long history of military freedom of alliance believe that the risk of antagonizing their neighbor to the east is outweighed by the security they will receive. It is the direct result of the invasion of Ukraine, which Putin apparently ordered to prevent natos expansion.
Finland and Sweden submitted their applications on 18 May. Despite Turkey’s suspensive tactics, over Kurdish militants and possibly American warplanes, their recognition is likely. They will add enormous capabilities to Arctic warfare and, in the case of Finland, the largest artillery force in Europe. Membership will more than double the length of natothe border with Russia. It will also make it easier for the Baltic states to defend.
Putin’s regime has responded by cutting off electricity supplies to Finland and threatening “military-technical” actions, whatever that means. He is not the first Russian leader to protest against enlargement. In the 1990s, Boris Yeltsin complained when members of the old Warsaw Pact applied to join the alliance. Over the years, this hardened to the argumentation put forward by Putin as a justification for invading Ukraine.
Russia’s president says enlargement violates a commitment made by James Baker, then US Secretary of State, to the Soviet Union in February 1990. Many Western commentators have argued that enlargement was unwise, as Russia would feel threatened. The West had other ways to increase security, such as the Partnership for Peace, which aims to strengthen relations between the Alliance and non-members.
These arguments do not hold. Mr Baker spoke about East Germany. His words were surpassed by the collapse of the Warsaw Pact almost 18 months later. nato and Russia signed an agreement in 1997 which did not contain any restrictions on new members, although enlargement had been discussed. The Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland joined almost two years later. The commitment that has been violated is Russia’s promise to Ukraine not to use economic or military coercion, which was given in 1994 when the country handed over nuclear weapons based on its land.
Actually nato has every right to expand. According to the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, signed by the Soviet Union, countries are free to choose their own allies. The Warsaw Pact suffered severely under Soviet rule. Why should not its former members seek refuge? For many years, mainly Finns and Swedes opposed joining nato. This changed after the invasion of Ukraine in February. In fact, the right of sovereign states to decide their own destinies is one of the many things currently at stake in Ukraine.
But was nato in terms of expansion? A spiral of mutual suspicion between Russia and Russia nato obviously exists, but to blame nato expansion to trigger it is hardly credible. Putin has increasingly used nationalism and orthodox religion to support his government. He needs enemies abroad to convince his people that they and their civilization are threatened. That is why he took territory in Georgia in 2008 and in Ukraine in 2014. In addition, Russia has a long history as an imperialist power. Like most declining empires, it was likely to resist as its periphery drifted off, regardless of nato expansion.
Finland and Sweden are both long-term members of the Partnership for Peace. If one of them was attacked, nato would have no obligation to intervene. Nor would American and British nuclear weapons cover them. Their choice to join nato suggests that the partnership could not handle Russian aggression. Likewise to deny Central and Eastern Europe membership of nato would have created a security vacuum that Russia may well have been tempted to fill. Finland and Sweden are right in concluding that Putin is dangerous and unpredictable – not because of that nato, but in the way he controls Russia. Their applications should be approved quickly. ■
Read more about our latest coverage of the Ukraine crisis