Finland in NATO
Tornike Parulava
August 1, 2023

When talking about the full-scale military aggression launched by Russia against Ukraine on 24 February 2022, it is often stressed that this war has changed many things and Europe will never be the same again. While the consequences of the war will continue to affect our environment in many ways, most of these changes will become visible only after the end of the war. Nevertheless, the process of transformation has already begun in some directions, and the results have not been long in coming.
On 4 April 2023, a Finnish flag-raising ceremony was held at NATO headquarters in Brussels, and Finland became the thirty-first member of the organization founded by 12 countries. Speaking at the ceremony, the President of the Republic of Finland, Sauli Niinistö, emphasized: ‘the era of military non-alignment in our history has come to an end. A new era begins.'”
Finland radically changed its foreign and security policy by joining NATO, a policy that had been in place for 70 years and had enjoyed support among the Finnish people and political circles. The country chose a policy of military non-alignment after the end of the Second World War, during which it was involved in military confrontation with the Soviet Union and later – with the Nazi regime. Finland lost around 12 percent of its territory to the Soviet Union and had to relocate significant percent of its population. This said, it can be argued for sure that a country with similar experience would not make decisions regarding its security architecture easily and would only change its well-established approaches due to necessary circumstances.
Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine goes far beyond the confrontation between the two countries, and is rather an action designed to undermine the rules-based international order. It was the disruption of the rules-based international order that forced Finland to revise its foreign policy. “Recent developments in the Euro-Atlantic space have highlighted the collective security organization as the most effective guarantor of security in the present-day world. An instrument for joint planning of deterrence and defence operations is the only real way to avoid military conflict. The most unmistakable proof of this is the 70-year history of NATO. None of its members have been attacked during this period, except for the terrorist attack of 11 September 2001, and none of its members have faced the threat of their sovereignty and territorial integrity being violated. The success of this Alliance is further demonstrated by its continuous enlargement of NATO and the aspiration of young democracies in Europe to join the Alliance. Several rounds of NATO enlargement after the end of the Cold War has clearly demonstrated that the most effective way of stable economic and democratic development in Central and Eastern Europe is by joining NATO and then the European Union.
Finland’s accession was notable from the standpoint of NATO enlargement and the Open Door Policy. Finland joined NATO in less than a year after first applying for membership. It was the fastest integration process in NATO’s modern history, which had its objective reasons behind – among the partner (non-member) countries of NATO, Finland (and Sweden) had the closest relationship with the Alliance in various areas. Apart from constant high-level political dialogue, Finland’s defence and security systems were fully in line with NATO standards. The level of Finland’s interoperability with the Alliance was extremely high, due to the continuous modernization of the Finnish armed forces and Finland’s active involvement in NATO operations since the 90s. Finland was actively involved in NATO military exercises and in many cases hosted large-scale NATO exercises in its territory. But the high level of interoperability and mutual trust between Finland and NATO is best demonstrated by the country’s participation in NATO-led military exercises under Article 5 scenario. NATO applies a very sensitive approach to military exercises under Article 5 scenario, i.e. collective defence, and the participation of non-member states in such exercises is allowed only as a rare exception. Finland was, indeed, such an exception. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise to anyone that the political decision on Finland’s accession was implemented speedily after its adoption.
Another significant aspect of Finland’s accession to NATO is the extension of NATO’s border with Russia. According to widespread propaganda narratives, NATO’s getting closer to the borders of Russia posed a “national security challenge” to the latter. Finland’s accession doubled NATO’s border with Russia by adding 1,300 kilometers to it. Accordingly, the aforesaid narrative became practically irrelevant in the given situation. This fact may have a positive impact on the future enlargement of the Alliance.
It can be safely argued that Finland’s accession to NATO destroyed the buffer zone concept developed in the last century. This approach has already exhausted itself and proved to be ineffective in modern reality. On the other hand, Finland’s accession reaffirms that there is no alternative to collective defense and a trans-Atlantic union in the European security architecture at the moment.
Blog by Tornike Parulava
The views expressed in the article represent the opinions of the author