If the Russian government, with its tough demands in the run-up to the talks this week, wanted to pave the way for more consideration for Russian interests, then it has achieved the opposite, at least in Finland and Sweden. Unlike their Nordic neighbors Norway and Denmark, Finland and Sweden are not members of NATO. The states have cooperated closely with NATO in recent years, but they have a long tradition of freedom of association, which they have so far proudly defended.
The increasingly aggressive Russian stance towards Ukraine and Moscow’s catalog of demands that became known in December are now considered “security explosives” in both Finland and Sweden (according to the Stockholm newspaper Svenska Dagbladet) has been perceived.
You have sparked a debate about a further rapprochement with NATO that has not been so passionately waged for years. Even if joining NATO is not on the agenda at the moment, those who are calling for it feel encouraged. The Finnish newspaper Lapin Kansa sees in his own country the beginning of a “fearless debate on all the topics about which we have been silent up to now”.
It was a signal that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg telephoned both Finnish President Sauli Niinistö and Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson on Friday shortly before the conference of NATO foreign ministers. In the past few days, both had clearly condemned what they consider to be unacceptable Russian arrogance.
Sweden’s head of government wants to deepen partnership with NATO
First in Finland, both President Niinistö and Prime Minister Sanna Marin had chosen their New Year’s address as a platform to make it clear that Finland did reserve the option of NATO membership. “The possibility of joining a military alliance and applying for NATO membership,” declared President Niinistö, “is part of Finland’s freedom of action and freedom of choice, if we decide to do so.”
Sanna Marin said Finland had learned from the past: “We are not being deprived of our room for maneuver.” Finland shares a 1340-kilometer border with Russia and during the Cold War allowed Moscow interests to influence its foreign policy for a long time, but has been firmly anchored in the western camp since joining the European Union in 1995 at the latest.
Sweden’s Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson reacted a few days later. The European security architecture is “non-negotiable”, she said last week: “In Sweden we decide with whom we cooperate.” On Friday, Andersson went one step further and announced on Twitter a “deepening of the partnership between Sweden and NATO”.
Not only the rejection of any NATO expansion near its borders, which Russia demanded, but also the demand that NATO should no longer station troops or weapons in countries that were not yet part of the alliance in 1997, caused excitement in Sweden and Finland was. The Commander-in-Chief of the Swedish Armed Forces, Micael Bydén, commented on the outlined cooperation stop last week: This would “destroy the security-political foundation of Sweden”.
The opposition bourgeois moderates criticized the government for being too hesitant. Just keeping the NATO membership option open is no longer enough, said Moderaten spokesman Hans Wallmark: You have to apply for membership now. He spoke of “perhaps the most dangerous challenge in 50 years”. Russia is trying again to establish a Europe “of vassal states and buffer zones”.
Finnish accession to NATO: “When, if not now?”
Finland and Sweden have been participating in NATO exercises for years, buying fighter planes and other armaments from the USA and its NATO partners. In fact, the cooperation is so close that years ago the relationship between the two officially neutral countries and the alliance was said to be like “smoking without inhaling”.
Finland, with its long border with Russia, is more exposed than almost any other country, which is why the country has acted cautiously towards Moscow in the past. Helsinki has never lost contact, and President Sauli Niinistö has so far been said to have a comparatively good relationship with Vladimir Putin. Now, after the excitement of the last few days, Niinistö added that he had just repeated what he had always said. Before that, his New Year’s address was also seen by some in Finland as a “security policy turning point” (according to the newspaper Kaleva) has been understood.
It is clear that in some camps something seems to be slipping. There have always been supporters of NATO membership in Finland, for example in the conservative National Collection Party (according to surveys, the supporters and opponents each make up just under a third of the population, a further third is undecided).
The youngest converts can be found in the Green Party, which is also part of the government. The MP and former Greens chairman Ville Niinistö wrote in an essay that his party should follow the example of the pragmatic German Greens in relation to NATO. Finland could plan to become a member of NATO “within the next five years.”
His party colleague Atte Harjanne made it even more urgent: “When, if not now?”, The Green MP asked on his blog, “we should redeem the famous NATO option immediately.” In view of the “threatening and irritating neighbor” Russia, it is no longer enough to “just stand at the door”. The Finnish Greens now want to reposition themselves at a party congress in May.