The President and Prime Minister of Finland said they were in favor of joining NATO
“without delay”
on Thursday, May 12, specifying that the decision of the Nordic country should be announced to the organization on Sunday.
France and Germany have already publicly expressed their support for this initiative, and the Secretary General of the Atlantic Alliance has indicated that if Finland confirms its intention, "
it will be warmly welcomed within the NATO and the accession process will go smoothly and quickly
”.
To discover
LIVE - War in Ukraine: follow the evolution of the conflict minute by minute
Follow information on the war in Ukraine with the Figaro application
Read also“
Joining NATO: a historic turning point for Sweden and Finland
”
Why was Finland not part of NATO?
Finland is historically a neutral country, so much so that we even speak of "
Finlandization
" to describe its strategy of compromise with its Russian neighbor, without entering into a military alliance.
After having been under Swedish domination for a long time then, from 1809, Russian, it became independent in 1917. During the Second World War, the country was attacked by the USSR, which failed to annex it but seized all of even Karelia, a strip of land north of St. Petersburg that separates the Gulf of Finland, in the Baltic Sea, from Lake Ladoga.
As Guillaume Lagane, specialist in defense issues and lecturer at Sciences Po, reminds us, Finland comes out bruised from this war and mourns the loss of 87,000 of its men.
At the same time, about a tenth of its population finds itself forced into forced displacement to flee Karelia.
But at this time, Finland is isolated on the international scene.
Indeed, while Nazi Germany, de facto allied with Finland within the Axis since both countries are fighting the USSR (for different reasons), began to lose the war, Finland turned against she signed peace with Stalin and pushed back the Wehrmacht.
The Finnish leaders therefore chose not to oppose the USSR frontally, for lack of being able to protect themselves from an attempt at Soviet aggression, and retained independence while accepting important concessions with regard to the policy Russian foreigner.
Neutrality has enabled Finland to acquire a diplomatic influence disproportionate to its real weight.
This neutrality is consecrated by the Finnish-Soviet Treaty of 1948, or YYA Treaty, an agreement of friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance, which guarantees in particular that neither of the two countries participates in an alliance directed against its neighbor.
Consequently, Finland does not participate in the Marshall Plan and does not sign the North Atlantic Treaty, which formalizes the creation of NATO the following year.
“This
status has no binding legal basis.
It is not a question of permanent neutrality as practiced in Switzerland, governed by international law and enshrined in its Constitution
", explains Guillaume Lagane, who underlines that this strategy has enabled Finland, like its Swedish neighbour, to acquire "
diplomatic influence disproportionate to their real weight
".
Why does the country want to join?
“
Being a member of NATO would strengthen Finland's security.
As a member of NATO, Finland would strengthen the alliance as a whole
,” Finnish President Sauli Niinistö and Prime Minister Sanna Marin said in a joint statement.
Read alsoA report paves the way for Sweden to join NATO
The war in Ukraine completely turned Finnish public opinion upside down in just a few months.
Of the 5.5 million inhabitants, 76% of the population is now in favor of membership, according to a poll published on Monday, triple its pre-war level.
A very large majority of the 200 deputies in Parliament has been won, with opponents falling to around ten, and most parties are now in favor.
On Tuesday, the Finnish Parliament's Defense Committee concluded that NATO was "
the best option
" for the country's security.
“
NATO is the largest military alliance in the history of humanity, it brings together a billion human beings, it is a considerable shield
”, comments General (2S) Bruno Clermont.
"
If before the conflict in Ukraine, Finnish opinion was in favor of the
status quo
, it is because until now the in-between situation seemed tenable to them, but the war in Ukraine has proven that the Russians do not hesitate to wage a classic war on European soil, and the threat they represent appears much more concrete
”, analyzes Guillaume Lagane.
"
Fortunately, Finland has no territorial disputes with Russia, but it is increasingly wary, and the Finns see how much being part of NATO creates a major difference in guaranteeing the integrity of the territory. of a country
".
In 2016, a project to join NATO failed in the face of rejection from the population, worried by intimidating statements from Vladimir Putin.
The government had backed down but wanted to intensify its collaboration with the Americans.
Does this upset the geopolitical balances in Europe?
Finland shares 1300 kilometers of border with Russia.
Its membership would therefore constitute a significant extension of the border of the entire Atlantic Alliance with its Russian rival.
Finland shares 1300 kilometers of border with Russia.
Wikimedia Commons-CC
This symbolic shift undeniably reinforces NATO's military power.
Despite its small population, Finland has a modern and efficient army.
His neutrality never meant the defense would be left out.
“
Finland is the nation in arms, we don't mess with them.
It is, with Switzerland, one of the only two countries which is ready to go to war in Europe, its population is incredibly resilient
, ”comments a connoisseur of the defense of European countries.
The Finns have an operational reserve of one million people, whom it can mobilize and arm at any time, and who have military training.
What are the international reactions to this accession?
On the side of the Atlantic Alliance, the Finnish decision was prepared and awaited.
The announcement made by the executive was greeted with enthusiasm, in particular by Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz.
Elected officials from the US Senate have also promised to support this membership.
The only dissonant voice among NATO member countries, Erdogan's Turkey, disapproved of this membership, as it had already done for Greece.
“Scandinavian countries, unfortunately, are almost like guesthouses for terrorist organizations
,” Erdogan said.
Unsurprisingly, finally, the Russians vigorously criticized this choice: "
The enlargement of NATO and the rapprochement of the Alliance to our borders do not make the world and our continent more stable and more secure
", declared Dmitri Peskov , spokesperson for the Kremlin, to the press, answering “
surely
” to the question of whether Russia would consider Finland's entry into NATO as a threat.
Russia's response will depend on “
the practical fallout from this process, the advance of military infrastructure towards our borders
”.
Read alsoFinland in NATO would “certainly” be a threat to Russia
“
If we stick to Western discourse, NATO is only a defensive alliance, there is nothing supposedly aggressive in Finland's accession,
” analyzes Guillaume Lagane.
But the Russians see NATO as an extension of American power, with an aggressive policy.
Should we then expect reprisals?
“
At most provocations, as we already see a lot of in the Baltic Sea, and indirect attacks, for example computer attacks;
but once Finland is under NATO's shield, the Russians can hardly go any further
”.
