Sunday

22nd May 2022

Opinion

The pros, and cons, of Finland joining Nato

  • (Photo: Nato)
Listen to article

The Finnish Nato debate returned with a vengeance last week as a result of Russian aggression on Ukraine, with opinion poll figures flipping almost overnight : for the first time 'yes' to Finnish Nato membership got over half of popular support, at 53 percent.

What is more, two citizens' initiatives were presented to parliament in Helsinki, one demanding Nato membership and one demanding a referendum on Nato membership.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

Both gathered the needed 50,000 signatures in a matter of days. Political parties and individual politicians are notably reconsidering their views.

The debate, in fact, got so heated that the Finnish president Sauli Niinisto decided to give a statement on Thursday (3 March) recalling that "In times of extreme change, we must keep a cool head".

Niinisto then flew to the US to meet president Joe Biden on Friday. .

If there is a headlong rush to Nato, it is almost so much so, that there is no time to discuss and debate: public opinion would seem to lean towards getting inside the North Atlantic alliance as quickly as possible , to minimise the impact of Russian reactions that a membership application is expected to lead to.

This has changed the vision as to what the steps towards membership would be.

Thus far, one of the main questions has been how to ensure and demonstrate necessary domestic public support for Nato membership.

Ideas for, and against, a referendum have been aired, plus the idea of making this a central question at the parliamentary elections of April 2023.

And yet, how central would the question actually be? There is no longer much of a debate between the parties, which increasingly agree on the issue.

More haste, less speed?

In such a rush, there would not be time for lengthy reports on implications of membership, either.

Five years ago, a thorough evaluation of possible consequences was conducted and commissioned by the ministry for foreign affairs; following a similar one in 2007. If there was to be a third one, but this time about the experiences of the first years of membership.

But is this all so clear cut?

In the rush, the central points about what an eventual membership negotiation phase could bring have yet been discussed. It is as if the procedure was simply one of sending in a letter of application and then being accepted.

For the Nato side , it would be important to retain the regular process of negotiations with the aim of ascertaining that the candidate fulfils the criteria.

In the case of Finland, there are hardly problems on this front, the country is already so close to full membership through its enhanced partnership, information exchange etc.

Given that Finland would actually enhance Nato with its important defence capacity, and even more so when potentially joining alongside Sweden, the country might want to stop to actually discuss issues that might be clarified in potential membership negotiations.

Nuclear weapons is one such issue, and it's not much spoken about in Finland.

Nato membership would make the issue relevant, and the country's view on nuclear sharing would need to be clarified.

Even more importantly, it is important to think about maintaining the possibilities of deep defence cooperation among the Nordics and in particular with Sweden, irrespective of Nato membership.

Defence cooperation with Sweden covers times of peace, crisis, conflict and war and includes operational planning for all situations, and there are "no pre-set limits to deepening this defence cooperation", as the government's Defence Report (2021) puts it.

It would be in Finland's and Sweden's interests to be able to maintain and deepen their bilateral defence cooperation even if both were in Nato.

Should Nato membership need some time to materialise, it might now frustrate many people.

However, the delay might be productive for better defining a full picture of Finland's defence policy commitments and interests.

Author bio

Dr Hanna Ojanen is research director at the politics department at Tampere University in Finland, and adjunct professor at the Finnish National Defence University's department of warfare, and an expert on European security and defence, including EU-NATO -relations, and Nordic security.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

China backs shutting Ukraine out of Nato

In Munich, Volodymyr Zelensky voiced his concerns that the chances of Nato membership for his country may already have been diminished, because of the pressure from Russia.

Analysis

Sweden's Nato debate resurfaces

You might have seen headlines about a majority in the Swedish parliament backing the 'Nato option'. But before you conclude that Sweden anytime soon will apply for membership - hold your horses! There is still a vast majority against.

Russia warns against Finland and Sweden Nato bid

Finland is expected to kick off a debate on the country's potential Nato membership. But Russia has clearly voiced opposition towards any potential enlargement of the western military alliance.

Sweden and Finland Nato decision is right for Baltic

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is a threat to all Europe, particularly the Baltic. Sweden and Finland must join Nato to secure peace in the Baltic Sea, write the leaders of the EPP Nordic and Baltic delegations in European Parliament.

Will 'Putin's Nato' follow Warsaw Pact into obscurity?

Valdimir Putin's equivalent to Nato — the Collective Security Treaty Organization of Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Armenia, Tajikistan, and Belarus — is convening in Moscow next week to give cover that Russia is not alone in its war against Ukraine.

The EU Parliament Covid inquiry: the questions MEPs must ask

A basic lack of transparency around the EU's vaccines procurement negotiations has prevented effective public and parliamentary scrutiny. It has also made it impossible to answer some of the key questions we put forward here.

News in Brief

  1. UK to send 'hundreds' of migrants to Rwanda each year
  2. Norwegian knife attacks were domestic dispute
  3. Sweden hits back at Turkey's 'disinformation' in Nato bid
  4. Germany's Schröder gives up one of two Russia jobs
  5. G7 countries pledge €18bn in financial aid for Ukraine
  6. Italian unions strike in protest over military aid for Ukraine
  7. Russia cuts gas supply to Finland
  8. Half of Gazprom's clients have opened rouble accounts

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic delegation visits Nordic Bridges in Canada
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersClear to proceed - green shipping corridors in the Nordic Region
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers agree on international climate commitments
  4. UNESDA - SOFT DRINKS EUROPEEfficient waste collection schemes, closed-loop recycling and access to recycled content are crucial to transition to a circular economy in Europe
  5. UiPathNo digital future for the EU without Intelligent Automation? Online briefing Link

Latest News

  1. What Europe still needs to do to save its bees
  2. Remembering Falcone: How Italy almost became a narco-state
  3. Economic worries and Hungary on the spot Next WEEK
  4. MEPs urge sanctioning the likes of ex-chancellor Schröder
  5. MEPs call for a more forceful EU response to Kremlin gas cut
  6. Catalan leader slams Pegasus use: 'Perhaps I'm still spied on'
  7. More EU teams needed to prosecute Ukraine war crimes
  8. French EU presidency struggling on asylum reforms

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us