Both countries want to join NATO at a very tense time for the organization. Sweden and Finland, feeling threatened, can supply highly trained armed forces
The Russian invasion of Ukraine that began in February is causing shocks to the European security environment, the full magnitude of which will not be seen until the fog of war has lifted. What is already known is that the war has created a sense of shared insecurity among Europeans.
The request to join NATO submitted by Sweden and Finland is an expression of the concern of two Nordic nations geographically close to Russia that they are thinking about the war. The concerns of these two countries about Russian behavior are not new, but are now being reborn with vigor to bring about a historic change in strategic cultures based on neutrality, knocking them on the door of an organization whose periphery they have remained for decades. Always close, but always refusing to cross the threshold of full participation.
The state of exhaustion in which Russia was left after the fall of communism clouded the need for extreme neutrality. Both countries began rapprochement with the West, joining the European Union in 1995 and adopting the Lisbon Treaty’s mutual defense clause, drafted with enough ambiguity to preserve their neutrality.
There was also rapprochement with NATO, which took shape with the entry of the two countries into the Partnership for Peace (PfP) program and the beginning of a long journey of loyal participation in the Alliance’s multinational operations.
These countries’ cooperation with NATO has grown since then and today more than some allies come together with it. They had never taken the step to legally commit to the Washington Treaty. For while bonding would have placed them under the protective umbrella of the Alliance, it would also have forced them to get involved outside their borders in the defense of others, something that was not well received by their citizens. A defense survey commissioned by the Finnish Ministry of Defense published in 2007 showed that almost 70% of Finns refused to join NATO at the time.
The security environment has changed. Putin’s pressure has led to a miracle by rolling back decades of neutrality. Accession will not take place immediately, as it requires the consent of all allies, without exception. Despite the fact that the two countries easily meet NATO’s political demands of any candidate, rapid access appears to be out of the question given Turkey’s stance.
Russia’s response has shown its disappointment. Deputy Minister Ryabkov has described the decision as a “serious mistake”, predicting “far-reaching consequences”. Putin has nuanced this assessment by saying that Russia has no problem with access but adding that it will not tolerate the expansion of the Alliance’s infrastructure into Swedish or Finnish territory.
With the new allies, NATO will be significantly strengthened, as its armed forces, while relatively small, are equipped with advanced equipment and highly trained. His entry into the Alliance is to be commended for all. It also contributes to strengthening the European Pillar as both are members of the European Union and has the salutary effect of forcing its citizens to give greater support to the security concerns of others.
However, the fact comes at a tense moment. At least in the short term, Sweden and Finland’s accession to NATO will increase friction with Russia. The Alliance assumes a problem that could have been avoided if the decision had been taken during a time of relaxation. Opportunities have been.
The idea could also introduce the seeds of discord in NATO. Without rejecting it outright, Turkey has expressed reservations about accession, arguing against these countries’ attitudes towards the PKK’s Kurdish refugees.
Turkey’s period of detention with Russia since the war in Syria, exacerbated by Erdogan’s foreign policy, may have also played a role in Turkey’s position. Although he eventually accepts the entry of the two countries, it has become perfectly clear what he thinks of his two new allies.
The accession of Finland and Sweden significantly shifts the Alliance’s center of gravity northwards. It is logical that NATO’s emphasis on Eastern Europe should not be at the expense of attention for other security concerns, nor should it support the feeling that the East and the South do not receive the same attention in NATO.
Welcoming two democracies concerned about a real threat is a matter of solidarity as well as a moral duty, even if they have refused to share the burden of mutual security in an Alliance for decades. Sweden and Finland should be accepted with open arms, but also with full awareness of the implications for continental security if received at a time when Russia is waging war against Ukraine and against a West embodied by NATO and the United States. Enlargement should not make the Allies less sensitive to security problems other than Russia’s, nor to problems such as the fact that Ceuta and Melilla are not included in the geographic space defined in Article 6 of the Washington Treaty. The result of Sweden’s and Finland’s accession to NATO should be greater security for all; not less.
This article was published in ‘The conversation
Source: La Verdad
I am an experienced and passionate journalist with a strong track record in news website reporting. I specialize in technology coverage, breaking stories on the latest developments and trends from around the world. Working for Today Times Live has given me the opportunity to write thought-provoking pieces that have caught the attention of many readers.
