Languish.org

Good for Finland. :)

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/05/24/finland-new-government-nato-membership-russia-sweden-tension-ukraine-baltic/27710113/

Quote

New Finnish Government Raises NATO Stakes
By Gerard O'Dwyer 3:04 p.m. EDT May 24, 2015

HELSINKI — In a move that is certain to further irritate Moscow, Finland's new center-right coalition has included the option of applying for NATO membership "at any time" in its government formation Joint Policy Position statement.

Moreover, in an unprecedented initiative, Prime Minister-elect Juha Sipilä's administration is set to draft a foreign and security policy that will include a special segment to calculate the potential monetary costs and implications of full Finnish membership in NATO.

The Kremlin has expressed growing consternation over the deepening relationship between Finland, Sweden and NATO.

That Finland will retain the option to apply for NATO membership during the government's four-year term has somewhat surprised the Kremlin, which believed that the inclusion of the nationalist and traditionally anti-NATO Finns Party in the new coalition would cool interest in joining the Western alliance.

However, the Finns constitute the junior partner in the government, which also includes the robustly pro-NATO National Coalition Party (NCP). The Center and the NCP will be the key players dictating defense and security policy going forward.

The "NATO option" and the new government's decision to conduct a root and branch cost and effect analysis of NATO membership represent milestones in the evolution of Finland's historically neutral foreign and security policies.

"The geopolitical landscape has changed in the Nordic and Baltic areas since Russia became involved in Ukraine. The important issue of whether Finland will remain non-aligned or join NATO is a question for the future and a possible referendum. It is important to maintain the option of NATO membership," said Alexander Stubb, the NCP's party chairman

In the interim, the NCP, which led the previous conservative-left government, favors moving the Finnish Armed Forces (FAF) closer to NATO by intensifying cooperation within the Partnership for Peace framework, while expanding near-neighborhood exercises with NATO forces.

In a decision welcomed by the FAF's command, the new government's Joint Policy Position backs a comprehensive review of future spending on defense. In addition, the government plans to produce a defense strategy report to define policy guidelines for the maintenance, development and use of Finland's conscript-based system, which is currently organized along total defense structures.

In a parallel initiative, the new government plans to amend legislation to permit military- and national security-run surveillance programs to collect signals intelligence outside Finnish borders and in communications passing through Finnish territory.

Unlike the earlier four-party conservative-left administration, all three partners in the new coalition support increasing the FAF's annual budgets in 2016-2025, with a particular focus on strengthening the military's procurement capability ahead of big ticket purchases, including the acquisition of a new fighter type and up to 64 aircraft to replace aging F/A-18 Hornets.

The government is embarking on a defense and security policy direction new to Finnish politics and strategic defense planning, said Teija Tiilikainen, the director of the Finnish Institute for International Affairs.

"The previous government made sure that it did not apply for NATO membership during its time in office. The new government's policy is different, it keeps the issue alive and the option open. It will be interesting to see how all this develops," Tiilikainen said.

Security tensions caused by Russia in Ukraine and the Baltic Sea region is the primary driver of the changes in Finnish policy.

The regional security environment has worsened considerably, and in a more unpredictable way, over recent years and especially since Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014, said Kari Sundström, a Stockholm-based political analyst.

"The Finnish center-right government's elevated interest in NATO is linked to a desire to build a stronger overall national defense capability through cost and task sharing. The appraisal and implications side of the planned investigation will help Finland determine, in a much more accurate way, the likely value of NATO membership," Sundström said

Entry costs for Finland, in terms of compatibility of training and equipment, may require a bigger defense budget at the beginning, said Sundström. "In reality, much of the Finnish defense forces' equipment and training is already of a NATO-standard," he said.

Finland's more security conscious mood is also fueling political movement on possible NATO membership, Sundström said.

"Finnish membership in NATO was never discussed as a serious or immediate option as part of public debate until two years ago. It is now a hot topic. All recent polls show that Finns are becoming increasingly concerned about Russian aggression in the region and want a stronger defense. Finns also want a higher level of spending for the military. Although majority backing for NATO membership is still lacking, over 55 percent of Finns support the holding of a referendum to decide the issue," Sundström said.

The immediate need for increased capital spending on defense was identified by a special government-appointed parliamentary working group last September. Chaired by Ilkka Kanerva, the group proposed incrementally increasing the defense budget by US $170 million annually.

"The review we carried out advocated regular reviews of index increases to defense spending. It did not include spending on major material acquisitions for the Army, Navy and Air Force. This element of future budgeting will need to be addressed by the new government," Kanerva said.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has made no secret of his desire to see Sweden and Finland join fellow Nordic states Denmark and Norway in NATO.

In April, Stoltenberg, a former Norwegian prime minister, outlined ambitions and plans to expand joint exercises and increase information-sharing between Swedish and Finnish armed forces and NATO, particularly in the high-tension area of the Baltic Sea.

NATO's offer of deeper collaboration with Sweden and Finland happens against a backdrop of increasing unease over airspace violations by Russian aircraft and the detection of suspect "foreign" submarines and heightened underwater activity in Swedish and Finnish territorial waters.

The Finnish Navy dropped low-impact depth charges in the waters off Helsinki harbor at the end of April after its surveillance network detected unidentified "objects" off the near coast. The Swedish Navy has conducted similar "sub hunt" operations over recent months.

The incident off Helsinki harbor has reinforced the Finnish government's resolve to dispatch troops and naval assets to NATO's US-led BALTOPS naval and amphibious exercises in the Baltic Sea in June. Sweden is also participating.

If Finland wants to, then sure. Russia does not get to dictate foreign policy of sovereign nations based on arrangements it secured through bullying other countries nearly a century ago.

Yes, yes it should. :)

Yes.  :uffda:

There's a fairly vocal pro-Russian lobby here, though. In fact, the new PM's own Center Party has quite a few veteran politicians from the 70s who were the major figures of the "cooperation" period with the USSR. And some younger ones are following in their footsteps. Hopefully they will be sidelined, though.

Quote from: Solmyr on May 26, 2015, 04:11:50 AM
There's a fairly vocal pro-Russian lobby here, though. In fact, the new PM's own Center Party has quite a few veteran politicians from the 70s who were the major figures of the "cooperation" period with the USSR. And some younger ones are following in their footsteps. Hopefully they will be sidelined, though.

:ph34r:

The end of Finlandisation for Finland? Interesting. I'll believe it when I see though. Finns could be neutrals like Sweden at first, perhaps.

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 26, 2015, 04:23:09 AM
The end of Finlandisation for Finland? Interesting. I'll believe it when I see though. Finns could be neutrals like Sweden at first, perhaps.

And what have they been for the last 70 years if not neutral?  :huh:

Quote from: Martinus on May 26, 2015, 05:39:16 AM

Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 26, 2015, 04:23:09 AM
The end of Finlandisation for Finland? Interesting. I'll believe it when I see though. Finns could be neutrals like Sweden at first, perhaps.

And what have they been for the last 70 years if not neutral?  :huh:

Finlandised.  :contract:

We should force them to join.

If they do join I look forward to RT explaining how the Winter War was a justified self defense against the Fascist Finns.

Quote from: Valmy on May 26, 2015, 09:10:09 AM
If they do join I look forward to RT explaining how the Winter War was a justified self defense against the Fascist Finns.

They are already doing that.

Quote from: Solmyr on May 26, 2015, 09:37:21 AM

Quote from: Valmy on May 26, 2015, 09:10:09 AM
If they do join I look forward to RT explaining how the Winter War was a justified self defense against the Fascist Finns.

They are already doing that.

No shit? Well best to be pre-emptive.

Quote from: Martinus on May 26, 2015, 03:37:04 AM
If Finland wants to, then sure. Russia does not get to dictate foreign policy of sovereign nations based on arrangements it secured through bullying other countries nearly a century ago.

Agreed. Finland is a sovereign nation and NATO should admit them if they want to join. Same for Sweden.

Quote from: Zanza on May 26, 2015, 11:11:30 AM

Quote from: Martinus on May 26, 2015, 03:37:04 AM
If Finland wants to, then sure. Russia does not get to dictate foreign policy of sovereign nations based on arrangements it secured through bullying other countries nearly a century ago.

Agreed. Finland is a sovereign nation and NATO should admit them if they want to join. Same for Sweden.

Do not agree at all - at least not with the thinking.

Finland being sovereign doesn't mean NATO is obligated to take them if they want to join.

NATO should take them if

A) Having them in NATO increases the overall security of the NATO nations, and
B) The rest of NATO really intends to go to war to defend them, and
C) They are both willing to go to war to defend NATO.

That is at a minimum.

Honestly, I am not really sure what the point of NATO really is anymore, anyway. I don't know that expanding it is useful at this point.

I suspect the best option for Finland, and for Russia, is for Finland to increase military spending and deepen its interoperability with NATO, but to forego actual membership.  There's still some security value for the Fins to remain marginally Finlandized, and unfortunately there's some ambiguity in the value of NATOs s. 5 guarantees.

Quote from: Valmy on May 26, 2015, 09:43:46 AM

Quote from: Solmyr on May 26, 2015, 09:37:21 AM

Quote from: Valmy on May 26, 2015, 09:10:09 AM
If they do join I look forward to RT explaining how the Winter War was a justified self defense against the Fascist Finns.

They are already doing that.

No shit? Well best to be pre-emptive.

:D I'm sure that's RT's position as well.

Quote from: Barrister on May 26, 2015, 11:23:56 AM
I suspect the best option for Finland, and for Russia, is for Finland to increase military spending and deepen its interoperability with NATO, but to forego actual membership.  There's still some security value for the Fins to remain marginally Finlandized, and unfortunately there's some ambiguity in the value of NATOs s. 5 guarantees.

I dunno, I mean we already got the Baltic states. That's sure to rankle the Russkis a lot more than Finland.

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on May 26, 2015, 11:29:39 AM
I dunno, I mean we already got the Baltic states. That's sure to rankle the Russkis a lot more than Finland.

I think he's talking about the deal from Finland's POV.  I.e. is it in their interest to incur the obligation to come to Latvia's defense.

What's encouraging to me is that they are talking about increasing defense spending as a component of their move towards NATO.  Kind of a nice change of pace from some of the current members letting their armed forces wither away.

From a Finnish perspective- no, why should they?
NATO has their back anyway and they don't have to do anything in return.

From a lets annoy Russians perspective- hell yes.

Quote from: Tyr on May 26, 2015, 02:16:13 PM
From a Finnish perspective- no, why should they?
NATO has their back anyway and they don't have to do anything in return.

From a lets annoy Russians perspective- hell yes.

If Russia found an excuse to violate Finnish sovereignty what would NATO do?  probably nothing.  Whether Finland was in our out of NATO.

Quote from: Tyr on May 26, 2015, 02:16:13 PM
From a Finnish perspective- no, why should they?
NATO has their back anyway and they don't have to do anything in return.

From a lets annoy Russians perspective- hell yes.

I don't think NATO will do a nuclear exchange with Russia over Finland if Finland isn't a member.

I always thought "nuclear exchange" sounded too polite.  Like a cookie exchange but a little different.

Eh, sure, why not?

You know what would really make them shit?  Get China to join.

That would be worse for us than Russia.  Russia and China are pretty cozy these days anyway.

Quote from: derspiess on May 26, 2015, 04:04:18 PM
That would be worse for us than Russia.  Russia and China are pretty cozy these days anyway.

Not so Cozy if they are NATO.