NATO, neutrality and the Finnish shift

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine has led to internal debates and shifts within the neutral states of Europe like Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, Austria and Iceland. Finland, which has been on the NATO threshold for quite some time, is now clearly willing to shed its neutrality. Sweden has followed suit, too. These neutral states have remained committed to western values and economic systems. Their idea of neutrality was considered compatible with their interests and histories too.

Russian aggressiveness in Ukraine has led Finland to reconsider its future, especially since it shares an 800-mile border with Russia. Finland has always been conscious of its geographic proximity to Russia. No wonder Helsinki has over the years maintained a strong national posture, inclusive of a conscription system. Finland has also been importing military equipment. All this is to maintain a credible national defence.

Since NATO is a political and military alliance, countries aspire to join to ensure their freedom and security. It works on the principle of collective defence which is enshrined in Article 5 of the treaty. Meanwhile, Russia’s foreign minister has already warned of the potential consequences of this move.

The question is why Finland. A recent poll conducted suggests that almost 70% of the Finns are in favour of joining NATO, up from a mere 19% a few years ago. Almost all the parliamentary groups in Finland are now in favour of joining the organisation. The Finns have to thank Putin for this turnaround. Russia and Finland have had a chequered political history over the centuries.

After the Russian Revolution in 1917, Lenin granted Finland independence. The Finns are yet to overcome the trauma of the Soviet invasion in November 1939 and the four years of war that followed. In 1948, Finland had entered into a treaty with Russia indicating that it would not join the Warsaw Pact or NATO. This ensured its military neutrality. Though Finland joined the European Union in 1995, it maintained its independence and neutrality as a way of enhancing its interest vis-à-vis Russia.

Finland is now trying to make sense of what neutrality could mean under the new circumstances in which it finds itself. The rules of the game seem to have changed and the context in which it remained neutral has also been undergoing change. Having joined the EU, the Common Security and Defence Policy of the EU also provided Finland with a focus and rationale.

In addition to the recent developments, Finland’s warming up to NATO is also the logical outcome of its EU membership. This is of course a matter of opinion. Within the EU, there seems to be widespread support for Finland’s and even Sweden’s admittance to NATO. There could be some delay from Finland’s application for membership and its actual admittance. Finland’s request to join would lead to treaty (the Washington Treaty) ratification debates in each of the NATO countries. This process will have to be expedited to provide Russia less time and space for manipulation.

Putin’s military aggression in Ukraine will perhaps lead to an important phase in the geopolitical expansion of NATO. Finland joining could boost NATO, as Helsinki boasts of a well-funded and well-trained military. Helsinki has the ability to mobilise almost 280,000 troops if required. Finland spends almost 2% of its GDP on defence, which is technically expected of the NATO members. Let’s not forget Finland has also been contributing significantly to NATO missions like the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. Perhaps it could also deter the Russians from using their military might in the Baltic region. Finland’s priority is peace and stability in the Baltic Sea region.

The flip side is that Putin seems to regard neutrality as a weakness. However, if Finland joins NATO, it could also result in new tensions and vulnerabilities. Russia has been known to violate Finland’s airspace as well as initiate cyber attacks on its government websites. Moscow has even warned that if Helsinki joins NATO, it would even deploy nuclear weapons in
Kaliningrad.

If Finland joins the NATO alliance, it could lead to the bolstering of NATO’S forward forces, and more than double NATO’s borders with Russia. From Finland’s perspective, NATO membership would make it feel more secure under the provisions of Article 5. Perhaps if Ukraine were a NATO member, there would have been no war. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has laid bare the disadvantage of not being a NATO member. Finland would not like history to be repeated. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has made NATO an even stronger alliance.

(The writer is Professor,
Dept of International Studies, Political Science and History, Christ (deemed–to-be)
University, Bengaluru)