We all know Finland historically has had a difficult relationship with Russia and military actions for territory including when the USSR. They also kicked Russia's/USSR's butts several times in military conflicts. Now, along with Sweden, they both realize they need to be part of NATO to assure security from any future Russian threats on their countries. Having back up from membership is a good policy against a bully that is Putin/Russia.

MareBorealis wrote:

THS214 wrote:

davidjohnson6 wrote:

There is still a significant minority of the Finnish population who are against NATO membership - their opinions should be respected. This is a big deal for Finland - one should not underestimate its significance.

We can only decide what seems to be the right thing to do. History will decide what was the right thing to... and history won't reveal the answer for many years. The world is grey... not black and white

Disclaimer - I write this as a UK citizen who is pro NATO

In Finland 76% support Nato membership and 12% are against it. Sorry link only in Finnish https://www.iltalehti.fi/politiikka/a/f ... f101f0865a

Here's the original poll in English, YLE National Broadcasting Company:

https://yle.fi/news/3-12437506

MareBorealis well done with the link.

Thanks.

M564038 wrote:

Old Gerhardsen would have been proud of NATO General secretary Jens Stoltenberg … for his role in finally uniting with the swedes on this issue;-)

I don’t think it’s fair to give the credit to Jens. Full credit has to go to Vlad.

petertenthije wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Old Gerhardsen would have been proud of NATO General secretary Jens Stoltenberg … for his role in finally uniting with the swedes on this issue;-)

I don’t think it’s fair to give the credit to Jens. Full credit has to go to Vlad.

It is amazing to see how quickly the tide has turned in Europe. Russia is going to have a hard time explaining the fallout through propaganda.

Most certainly, but Jens is very close both to the political culture and the leaders in the nordic countries. The norwegian social democrats has been working for this since 1948, and he has been a personal friend of every swedish social democrat leader since Palme. He was especially close with Anna Lindh. I don’t think it hurt the cause for the swedish or finnish governing left parties to see «one of them» representing NATO. These guys are family.

petertenthije wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Old Gerhardsen would have been proud of NATO General secretary Jens Stoltenberg … for his role in finally uniting with the swedes on this issue;-)

I don’t think it’s fair to give the credit to Jens. Full credit has to go to Vlad.

Putin can't even keep his story straight anymore. He doesn't even mention Ukraine anymore

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 79693.html

“What that [response] will be – we will see what threats are created for us,” Mr Putin said. “Problems are being created for no reason at all. We shall react accordingly.”

Those are the words of a sick madman, and i do think the world needs to understand that anything is possibe from Putin. Hopefully there are still some high command Russians with some scruples left.

Irrespective of the goings on of Finland and Sweden, the larger issue is only growing in magnitude: that Russia finds itself as a lone actor on the global stage, increasingly more isolated in a global economy and more inter-connected world. That's not healthy for anyone and the consequences could have far reaching ramifications.

ObadiahPlainman wrote:

Irrespective of the goings on of Finland and Sweden, the larger issue is only growing in magnitude: that Russia finds itself as a lone actor on the global stage, increasingly more isolated in a global economy and more inter-connected world. That's not healthy for anyone and the consequences could have far reaching ramifications.

If Russia wants to be part of the First World Community, they should start acting like a First World Nation.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Taking a different viewpoint.... I hope we are not making the same mistakes that led to the war of 1914-1918 - namely 2 rival groupings of countries in Europe that were just waiting for the tiniest spark for the flames to erupt

You might be right, better let Russia takeover Ukraine and Finland too. Also Sweden to avert another world war. Please Mr Putin, can you be nice?

I don’t think that’s the right way. Nor is the talk of appeasement - we have to be united. Russia must step back, leave the other countries alone. Nobody will attack it, nobody would want to anyway.

Johns624 above is right.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/1 ... 2459777025

I wonder what concessions NATO will offer to get Turkey to play ball ? If it were up to me I'd restore their F-35 orders in exchange for donating their S-400 missles to Ukraine. That was what really ruptured relations with the U.S. But then again transferring those missles to Ukraine could be a red line for Russia.

ObadiahPlainman wrote:

Irrespective of the goings on of Finland and Sweden, the larger issue is only growing in magnitude: that Russia finds itself as a lone actor on the global stage, increasingly more isolated in a global economy and more inter-connected world. That's not healthy for anyone and the consequences could have far reaching ramifications.

You are correct, at least in part. Russia is isolated and will become more isolated. That's a good thing though. Russia should not be allowed to participate in the greater world community anymore than a person who walks around the neighborhood killing children and burning down houses would be allowed to freely participate in their community. Russia has unilaterally created this situation and the world has an obligation to hold them responsible and make them stop. Go ask the people of Mariupol or Bucha about their health and their consequences.

ObadiahPlainman wrote:

Irrespective of the goings on of Finland and Sweden, the larger issue is only growing in magnitude: that Russia finds itself as a lone actor on the global stage, increasingly more isolated in a global economy and more inter-connected world. That's not healthy for anyone and the consequences could have far reaching ramifications.

https://www.ft.com/content/5e357d9e-671 ... 43bdbdab1d

The Financial Times had a good article on this a while back that explains why isolating Russia would be a major strategic blunder.. To summarize the main points:

1. "First, this notion will primarily benefit the Russian leader. It unwittingly gives him the legitimacy to speak on behalf of the Russian people" Anger would be directed towards the West, not Putin.

2. "Second, an isolation strategy is probably self-defeating because it closes off interest in what is happening in Russia." There are people in Russia opposed to the war, treating the entire nation with contempt will stifle those dissenting voices.

Also many nations in the non-Western world, like China and India, would not support any such policy, as well as many parts of Africa. So Russia would never be truly isolated. At worse they would end up as a weakened state totally dependent on China.

alberchico wrote:

ObadiahPlainman wrote:

Irrespective of the goings on of Finland and Sweden, the larger issue is only growing in magnitude: that Russia finds itself as a lone actor on the global stage, increasingly more isolated in a global economy and more inter-connected world. That's not healthy for anyone and the consequences could have far reaching ramifications.

https://www.ft.com/content/5e357d9e-671 ... 43bdbdab1d

The Financial Times had a good article on this a while back that explains why isolating Russia would be a major strategic blunder.. To summarize the main points:

1. "First, this notion will primarily benefit the Russian leader. It unwittingly gives him the legitimacy to speak on behalf of the Russian people" Anger would be directed towards the West, not Putin.

2. "Second, an isolation strategy is probably self-defeating because it closes off interest in what is happening in Russia." There are people in Russia opposed to the war, treating the entire nation with contempt will stifle those dissenting voices.

Also many nations in the non-Western world, like China and India, would not support any such policy, as well as many parts of Africa. So Russia would never be truly isolated. At worse they would end up as a weakened state totally dependent on China.

Good piece and I too read something similar to that, can't recall where. I should've clarified that the law of UNINTENDED consequences will have far reaching ramifications. Stifling dissent by demoralizing the Russian people (who are not the enemy) isn't the way. But the country needs to be held to account for their brazen actions.

Soviet Russia. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/1526251302459777025

I wonder what concessions NATO will offer to get Turkey to play ball ? If it were up to me I'd restore their F-35 orders in exchange for donating their S-400 missles to Ukraine. That was what really ruptured relations with the U.S. But then again transferring those missles to Ukraine could be a red line for Russia.

1 - Who cares what Russia’s red lines are?

2 - What can they do if Turkey did cross that red line?

It is worth remembering that Putin's state of mind may not be entirely rational - or may be moving back and forth between rational and irrational. While an individual in your local town who behaves irrationally can be locked up, this option is not readily available for a dictator of a sovereign state who not only has nukes but is willing to use them.

Let's suppose Turkey, as a member of NATO, supplies missiles to Ukraine. Maybe Russia retaliates by firing some missiles to a couple of miles off the coast from the Turkish military base(s) where those missiles were previously stored. Erdogan is not exactly a modest restrained character. What happens next ? Now think 10 moves ahead, and ask yourself what's happening.
There is a reason as to why during the 1980s, everything the USA did in Afghanistan against the USSR was with plausible deniability.
Those Stinger missiles ? We deny they came from the USA, and you can't prove it was us so quit moaning.


Much of the rest of the world has sympathy for Ukraine... but doesn't particularly want to risk dying for Ukraine
There are reports saying that Russia is losing troops at a fast rate. Perhaps a better outcome is if Russia eventually runs out of soldiers and equipment it is able to send to fight in Ukraine... and let the fighting burn itself out
A war with conventional weapons that is localised to Ukraine is a terrible thing... but there are other military outcomes that are far worse

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/1526251302459777025

I wonder what concessions NATO will offer to get Turkey to play ball ? If it were up to me I'd restore their F-35 orders in exchange for donating their S-400 missles to Ukraine. That was what really ruptured relations with the U.S. But then again transferring those missles to Ukraine could be a red line for Russia.

Threaten to boot them out of NATO?

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/no- ... 5alvv.html

Why should they be trusted with F35? How do we know the technology won’t just land straight back in Russia?

Putin appears to be walking back the rhetoric of his minions.

scbriml wrote:

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/1526251302459777025

I wonder what concessions NATO will offer to get Turkey to play ball ? If it were up to me I'd restore their F-35 orders in exchange for donating their S-400 missles to Ukraine. That was what really ruptured relations with the U.S. But then again transferring those missles to Ukraine could be a red line for Russia.

1 - Who cares what Russia’s red lines are?

2 - What can they do if Turkey did cross that red line?

Exactly. Everyone is tired of Russian threats. They also aren't afraid of them. I found it funny that Finland's response to Russia's latest thread was the diplomatic equivalent of a yawn.

cpd wrote:

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/1526251302459777025
I wonder what concessions NATO will offer to get Turkey to play ball ? If it were up to me I'd restore their F-35 orders in exchange for donating their S-400 missles to Ukraine. That was what really ruptured relations with the U.S. But then again transferring those missles to Ukraine could be a red line for Russia.

Threaten to boot them out of NATO?
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/no- ... 5alvv.html
Why should they be trusted with F35? How do we know the technology won’t just land straight back in Russia?
Putin appears to be walking back the rhetoric of his minions.

Turkey's strategic location in the Middle East means the USA is not going to boot Turkey out of NATO and any suggestion of such a threat would be ignored by Turkey

Even the Swiss are looking to move towards being more closely aligned with NATO:

https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/ ... 022-05-15/

While formal NATO membership has been apparently discussed internally with the Swiss, it is unlikely. Likely, it would be closer cooperation, such as joint exercises.

Turkey expects its pound of flesh or it will block Finland & Sweden’s NATO applications.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61472021

Turkey's president has restated his opposition to Finland and Sweden joining Nato - just hours after they said they would seek membership.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the two Nordic nations should not bother sending delegations to convince Turkey, a key Nato member, of their bids.
He is angered by what he sees as their willingness to host Kurdish militants.
…
"Neither of these countries have a clear, open attitude towards terrorist organisation. How can we trust them?" the Turkish president said.

When it comes to trustworthiness, I know in which order I would list Finland, Sweden & Turkey!

Finland ahead of Sweden on trustworthiness, or the reverse ? Why ?

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Finland ahead of Sweden on trustworthiness, or the reverse ? Why ?

It all depends on what metric you use.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/10- ... world.html

No placing in there for your Russia.

There are of course other indexes where Sweden and Finland are mistly in the top ten if not top five.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Finland ahead of Sweden on trustworthiness, or the reverse ? Why ?

It's irrelevant. My point was, of those three countries, I'd put Turkey last in trustworthiness (as I suspect many others would). Erdogan calling Finland and Sweden untrustworthy, amused me.

Sweden and Finland will send in their applications tomorrow.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1526575448645414912

and as pure coincidence the Finnish president is on an official visit in Sweden today.
https://www.facebook.com/Kungahuset/pos ... 4660791992

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

Sweden and Finland will send in their applications tomorrow.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1526575448645414912

and as pure coincidence the Finnish president is on an official visit in Sweden today.
https://www.facebook.com/Kungahuset/pos ... 4660791992

A lot of symbolism there. Two close partners applying for NATO membership simultaneously. A huge change in both nations, probably more so in Sweden where non-alignment/neutrality has been an ideologial question, after 200 years of peace. Finland have had a more pragmatic approach. Putin, the great NATO ambassador, changed the public opinion in Finland faster than ever thought possible.

MareBorealis wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

Sweden and Finland will send in their applications tomorrow.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1526575448645414912

and as pure coincidence the Finnish president is on an official visit in Sweden today.
https://www.facebook.com/Kungahuset/pos ... 4660791992

A lot of symbolism there. Two close partners applying for NATO membership simultaneously. A huge change in both nations, probably more so in Sweden where non-alignment/neutrality has been an ideologial question, after 200 years of peace. Finland have had a more pragmatic approach. Putin, the great NATO ambassador, changed the public opinion in Finland faster than ever thought possible.

I'd say more than partners in a way. The geographical area that today is Finland was the eastern half (more or less) for 400-500 years before we lost it to Russia about 200 years ago.
There is also allot of people in Sweden with Finnish heritage

I guess that these ties still remain in a way, especially when both countries are non NATO countries..
I also think that the decision to apply for NATO membership was actually taken several weeks ago.

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

MareBorealis wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

Sweden and Finland will send in their applications tomorrow.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1526575448645414912

and as pure coincidence the Finnish president is on an official visit in Sweden today.
https://www.facebook.com/Kungahuset/pos ... 4660791992

A lot of symbolism there. Two close partners applying for NATO membership simultaneously. A huge change in both nations, probably more so in Sweden where non-alignment/neutrality has been an ideologial question, after 200 years of peace. Finland have had a more pragmatic approach. Putin, the great NATO ambassador, changed the public opinion in Finland faster than ever thought possible.

I'd say more than partners in a way. The geographical area that today is Finland was the eastern half (more or less) for 400-500 years before we lost it to Russia about 200 years ago.
There is also allot of people in Sweden with Finnish heritage

I guess that these ties still remain in a way, especially when both countries are non NATO countries..
I also think that the decision to apply for NATO membership was actually taken several weeks ago.

Yes close historical and cultural ties, addiding to above: There is a significant Swedish-speaking minority in Finland, and Swedish is Finland's second official language.

Sweden and Finland joining in means all five Nordic countries are in NATO, that will take the Nordic co-operation a bit further again. The Baltic sea is becoming a Nato-Russia sea, probably more tense, but NATO is strengthening significantly in the region.

I find it hilarious that Putin, after years of veiled threats against Sweden and Finland for even considering joining NATO, is now saying "meh, them joining doesn't pose a threat to us"...but that was the whole reason to invade Ukraine...

einsteinboricua wrote:

I find it hilarious that Putin, after years of veiled threats against Sweden and Finland for even considering joining NATO, is now saying "meh, them joining doesn't pose a threat to us"...but that was the whole reason to invade Ukraine...

Yeah, he hopes everyone else has as bad a memory as he has. If he says it isn't a concern, then he doesn't have to do anything about it...not that he could anyways.

The president of the United States of America Joe Biden has announced that USA will "work together" witth Sweden and Finland in the event of a Russian aggression while Sweden's
and Finland's NATO membership applications are being processed/considered. Joe Biden also says that he strongly support Sweden's and Finland's NATO membership applications.

Biden: US will work with Finland and Sweden in event of 'aggression'

The United States will work with Finland and Sweden in the event of the ‘threat of aggression’ while the two countries’ Nato membership is being considered, Joe Biden said.

Biden said in a statement:

Finland and Sweden are longtime, stalwart partners of the United States. By joining Nato, they will further strengthen our defence cooperation and benefit the entire Transatlantic Alliance.

The US will maintain its “robust exercise activity and presence” in the Baltic Sea region, Biden continued:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/ ... 1568aa3329

US Navy amphibious assault ship has also entered the Baltic and will make a visit to Stockholm before joining the NATO exercise Baltops.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/stock ... -stockholm

#USSKearsarge, flagship of the Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group and @22nd_MEU
, transits the Danish Straits and enters the Baltic Sea , May 14.

The Kearsarge ARG-22 MEU is entering the Baltic Sea to work with Allies and partners in ensuring security & stability in the region.

https://twitter.com/USNavyEurope/status ... 7127520256

Although I assume this exercise has been planned for a longer period of time it's very good timing.

scbriml wrote:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61472021

Turkey's president has restated his opposition to Finland and Sweden joining Nato - just hours after they said they would seek membership.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the two Nordic nations should not bother sending delegations to convince Turkey, a key Nato member, of their bids.
He is angered by what he sees as their willingness to host Kurdish militants.
…
"Neither of these countries have a clear, open attitude towards terrorist organisation. How can we trust them?" the Turkish president said.

So Turkey does not want to be in alliance with countries harbouring Kurdish nationalists. Given that most other NATO countries are also harbouring Kuridish nationalists, there is only one logical move for Turkey. Leave NATO. Get the hell out.

Erdogan's argument about Finland/Sweden is likely just a cover. Turkey has no intention of leaving NATO, and NATO has no intention of asking Turkey to leave.

We are instead into a haggling phase. Turkey wants some favour in return for not vetoing new members. The question is whether Finland and Sweden are willing, post haggling, to pay the price demanded

I love the symbolism of this cover of the Helsingin Sanomat. No doubt the Soviet-style artwork is deliberate:


Credit: Helsingin Sanomat

einsteinboricua wrote:

I find it hilarious that Putin, after years of veiled threats against Sweden and Finland for even considering joining NATO, is now saying "meh, them joining doesn't pose a threat to us"...but that was the whole reason to invade Ukraine...

It was always about Ukraine. All this talk about Russia fearing NATO getting closer to their borders is BS. They always wanted to try to occupy Ukraine, they do not care about Finland and Sweden. Now of course, they have to react, since they made such a big deal out of it, but they don't really care.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Erdogan's argument about Finland/Sweden is likely just a cover. Turkey has no intention of leaving NATO, and NATO has no intention of asking Turkey to leave.

We are instead into a haggling phase. Turkey wants some favour in return for not vetoing new members. The question is whether Finland and Sweden are willing, post haggling, to pay the price demanded

Considering Turkey's economy is in the middle of an economic meltdown, some form of economic aid might change the tune of the Turks.

alberchico wrote:

The Financial Times had a good article on this a while back that explains why isolating Russia would be a major strategic blunder..

I don't have access but would imagine that piece was written before Putin invaded Ukraine. In a vacuum I'd tend to agree with the main points but at no time has Europe or NATO ever coerced any country to join the EU or NATO itself. That's a myth that Russia and China like to trot out to their brainwashed drones. Eastern Europe was a hell hole under Soviet rule for 50 years and what did they do the instant they had the chance? They applied to join the EU and NATO. And history repeats itself today with Finland and Sweden. Maybe once they decapitate Putin and usher in a new government someone will be bale to get through the drunken haze of uselessness that's been saddling the Russians with utter incompetence for hundreds of years now. It's hard to find a country that's wasted so much STEM-based talent for so long. It takes so much hard work and they just refuse to do it. Corruption, stifling oppression and the press, interfering in foreign elections, conducting botched invasions..it's the typical easy way out for the common drunk. Who knows, maybe this shit show in Ukraine and our collective resolve against will finally cause Russians to wake from their stupor and embrace the harder path.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AlexLuck9/st ... 3803975680

Unconfirmed but here is a list of demands that Turkey is presenting.

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/AlexLuck9/status/1527072363803975680

Unconfirmed but here is a list of demands that Turkey is presenting.

A pretty big list.
But I'd assume it is the start of negotiations.

How can one get kicked out of NATO?

Applying is one thing getting in is another Turkey has put the brakes on a the fast track membership process.

https://www.ft.com/content/3d1ab5d0-19a ... 7b9e2be141

Kiwirob wrote:

Applying is one thing getting in is another. Turkey may use it’s veto and that’s the end of it, unless Turkey is expelled.

https://www.ft.com/content/3d1ab5d0-19a ... 7b9e2be141

Turkey has the EU by the proverbials, in part due to the 2016 Turkey/EU refugee agreement - highly unlikely that Turkey will be expelled...

Kiwirob wrote:

Applying is one thing getting in is another Turkey has put the brakes on a the fast track membership process.

This drama has a lot to do with Turkey's relation to the US and to NATO generally. Asli Aydintasbas, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations says:

"The president Erdogan almost certainly sees this as an opportune moment to air his grievances about existing NATO members, especially with the Biden administration, which has kept the Turkish leader at arm's length.

"It is unlikely that Erdogan had one specific policy goal in mind, but he will no doubt expect to be cajoled, persuaded, and eventually rewarded for his cooperation, as in the past"

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/18/euro ... index.html

The excellent series by this channel on Ukraine, considers, in great detail and with balance, the implications behind these two nations applying to join NATO.
(With something that shocked me about Sweden when discussing the history of their nation and neutrality).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7qNd2U1i4g&t=10s