mmm__donuts t1_j6l597f wrote on January 31, 2023 at 2:27 AM

Reply to comment by REOreddit in Haavisto: Finland has patience to wait for Nato membership — with Sweden. by parandroidfinn

Your question is getting a lot of hate for some reason, but it's a good one.

My answer: because being in NATO makes it possible that Finland will be pulled into a war with Russia. This most likely cause would be if the Ukraine conflict escalates. And in that case, being in NATO without Sweden means being at war with a country with which Finland shares a massive land border and not having the support of the powerful and nearby Swedish navy and air force.

Look at the choice from Finland's point of view: Being in NATO protects Finland to the extent that they expect Russia to attack Finland and puts Finland in danger to the extent that they expect a NATO-Russia war to happen over something else. Given the damage it has suffered in Ukraine, Russia isn't going to have the strength to attack Finland for years. It's far more likely that NATO will end up at war with Russia as a result of something happening in Ukraine than it is that Russia will invade Finland soon. So, it makes sense for them to wait for Sweden so that Sweden's NATO membership can ameliorate the risk of being drawn into a war with Russia.

REOreddit t1_j6m1cr6 wrote on January 31, 2023 at 7:33 AM

But I think your premise is wrong, Finland will always have the support of Sweden, no matter what. For starters, both are in the EU, which has a mutual defense pact. Also, I don't know if those two (or the Nordic countries) have a bilateral defense treaty, but they could and they should. NATO is not exclusive to other military alliances. If the US were attacked, you can be sure Australia would help them however they could, and the US shares as much intelligence (five eyes) with them as they want.

mmm__donuts t1_j6nftxv wrote on January 31, 2023 at 4:02 PM

If NATO decided to intervene in Ukraine, would Sweden be willing to take the risk of participating in the fighting even after NATO wouldn't have them? What if the war was over Russia's invasion of Turkey? If Finland is in NATO, there are a whole bunch of reasons they might end up at war with Russia besides an attack on Finland, and mutual defense pacts don't cover those.

REOreddit t1_j6njvtc wrote on January 31, 2023 at 4:27 PM

If NATO attacks Russia without Russia attacking them first, I wouldn't expect any help from any country outside of NATO, but of course any country could join the war if they wanted.

If Finland ends up in a war with Russia for other reasons than self defense, any help from Sweden would depend on the circumstances, and the potential threat to Sweden. Yes, I agree that mutual defense pacts don't cover every eventuality, but I don't see a problem with that. Otherwise you are bound to blindly follow any stupid decisions from your allies.

Having said that, if Russia were to attack Turkey, that would be such a crazy move that no country in Europe would be safe, and it would probably be in Sweden's interest to intervene, at least to defend Finland, if not in a more active role.

mmm__donuts t1_j6nseuo wrote on January 31, 2023 at 5:19 PM

>If NATO attacks Russia without Russia attacking them first, I wouldn't expect any help from any country outside of NATO, but of course any country could join the war if they wanted.

And Finland would be one of the most exposed countries in NATO should that happen without Sweden being a member. It's a good reason for them to wait.

>If Finland ends up in a war with Russia for other reasons than self defense, any help from Sweden would depend on the circumstances, and the potential threat to Sweden. Yes, I agree that mutual defense pacts don't cover every eventuality, but I don't see a problem with that. Otherwise you are bound to blindly follow any stupid decisions from your allies.

Being in NATO vastly increases the chances of a war for reasons other than self defense. As you point out, that's the risk of joining any alliance. Being in NATO without Sweden makes that war much more difficult for Finland to fight.

>Having said that, if Russia were to attack Turkey, that would be such a crazy move that no country in Europe would be safe, and it would probably be in Sweden's interest to intervene, at least to defend Finland, if not in a more active role.

Sweden's military isn't going to be the deciding factor in that war. It makes far more sense for them to hold back and let other people do the fighting.

[deleted] t1_j6nzk01 wrote on January 31, 2023 at 6:02 PM

How are Sweden supposed to do that with a target on us, exactly? Russia might just say we will nuke you and be done with it. Sweden would be forced to close transportation for nato and just accept the target is there and we have no way of participating since we are outside Nato with guns pointed at us. Would that country not have to look out for themself in that situation? What if there comes a new government who says differently? If you weren't so blind you would see the next best thing for Russia is that finland joins and Sweden doesn't. This is their goal now and it seems like it's working. You really think solidarity matters when you are on your own with a target on you? Ofcourse we wont and cant do much in that situation with a target on us.

That's what would happen and it's amazing people can't use logic anymore.

REOreddit t1_j6o0xyx wrote on January 31, 2023 at 6:11 PM

Ok, then do whatever Turkey asks you to do, problem solved.