Russia is not good at invading neighboring countries that stand up to it. Ukraine still resists the invader. But it is that kyiv has not been the only neighbor that the Kremlin has choked on. Already in 1939, in the so-called Winter War, Moscow tried to regain control of Finland, which had become independent in 1917. Just five months later, and after having lost more than 150,000 soldiers in its failed invasion, the Soviet Union made peace with Finland, seizing 9% of the territory. Moscow sold a resounding defeat to the indomitable Finns as a great victory. The “losers” had suffered only 25,000 casualties, and Although the loss of territory was significant, the humiliation suffered by the Red Army was formidable.
This war also resulted in a condition imposed on Helsinki, its neutrality on the international scene. After coming face to face with the iron Finnish resistance, the Soviet Union could not afford to have an enemy less than 170 kilometers from Leningrad, present-day Saint Petersburg. Thus, they forced the “defeated” country to adopt a non-aligned foreign policy, a condition that it has maintained until yesterday. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, in a joint statement, Finnish President Sauli Niinisto and Prime Minister Sanna Marin urged their country’s parliamentary authorities to take the necessary steps to apply for membership in the Treaty Organization of the North Atlantic. This announcement has been well received, both by the Atlantic alliance and by Finnish public opinion.
On the other hand, Sweden, the other great neutral actor in the North, could, in turn, announce this Monday its intention to apply for NATO membership. If this were the case, we would find ourselves facing the most profound change in the European geopolitical chessboard since the fall of the Soviet Union. And it is precisely these developments would put the Kremlin in check by adding two key pieces on the western side.
With Finland’s accession to the alliance, it gains 1,300 kilometers of border with Russia. Precisely, part of the Kremlin’s rhetoric has been based on the fact that the “special operation” was designed specifically to prevent Ukraine from becoming a member of NATO, thus bringing the enemy even closer to the gates. Even if the war was going well for him, which it isn’t, this would in itself be the worst geopolitical own goal that Putin could have scored.
Finland is a large country in size, about 338,000 square kilometers, almost as large as Germany but with a population somewhat larger than that of the Valencian Community. It is, despite its little more than five million inhabitants, a key piece on the geostrategic chessboard, not only because of its geographical location, but also because of its more than capable and well-equipped armed forces. Helsinki is an exception in the European military landscape. He is one of the few who, due precisely to his size and position, decided to maintain compulsory military service, something that has allowed him to maintain relatively low personnel costs, allocating his budget to the improvement and renewal of his equipment, including the purchase of F35 aircraft or the modernization of its navy.
Thus, we find ourselves before a people with a great capacity for mobilization, being able to count on a total of 280,000 well-trained and equipped soldiers, capable of facing the greatest number of conventional military threats. In addition, it is a people that is highly aware of the duty of defending their land, since 84% would be willing to take up arms in defense of the country.
In any case, we must bear in mind that these developments do not have an immediate consequence. Furthermore, the entry process can take months as it must be unanimously ratified by the 30 members of the alliance. Although both partners would be welcomed by the Western partners, there could be some other stumbling block along the way that would delay their official entry. Putin, meanwhile, will turn up the heat on the victimizing rhetoric that he and his minions have begun to use in relation to their confrontation with the West.
We are facing a world, today, that has become more dangerous. Helsinki has not failed to remind its EU partners of the existence of the common defense clause in article 42.7 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which is something like article 5 of NATO, which would be a small consolation, and insurance while your alliance application is being processed. In any case, Helsinki’s accession to the Atlantic alliance is a highly desirable development in the new international reorganization. Will Stockholm follow?
Discussion about this post