The actual security guarantees are reserved only for NATO member states, but Britain has promised to secure Finland even militarily.
Finland is living in uncertain times in terms of its security. Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO applications are almost in place, but the membership process will take months or even years.
Before joining NATO, Russia may put pressure on Finland in various ways, including militarily. Indeed, experts call uncertain months the so-called gray period.
The Finnish leadership has sought security from the western NATO countries during the membership process. In this story, we’ll briefly open out what’s known about these security promises.
What kind of security is Finland getting from the West?
Finland does not receive actual security guarantees, but Britain has publicly promised even military assistance to Finland. EU countries are also committed to helping.
Instead, the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson signed a political security declaration with both countries on Wednesday, committing Britain to provide assistance in the event of an attack.
The promise is significant because Britain is one of NATO’s strongest members and one of the three nuclear-weapon states alongside the United States and France.
Experts estimate that if the United States has promised Sweden security, it has probably promised it to Finland as well.
Prime minister Sanna Marinin (sd.) has reported (Ilta-Sanomat (you switch to another service)) that Finland has discussed security not only with the United States and the United Kingdom but also with France and Germany. There have been no public commitments from these.
Finland and Sweden are also protected by the EU’s Lisbon Treaty, Article 42.7 of which obliges all member states to support the attacked country “by all available means”.
What is the difference between NATO security guarantees and other security promises?
NATO security guarantees are legally binding on member countries. Guarantees from Britain and any other countries promising security are political declarations.
NATO members are therefore committed to defending other members with their own soldiers and, if necessary, even nuclear weapons.
The fifth article has never been applied to a state that has invaded a NATO country, and in principle it is up to the member states to decide on the content of their assistance.
In practice, the deterrent effect of an article is strong. NATO would lose its credibility if, in a real situation, member countries did not defend each other.
The EU aid article is a binding legal agreement. However, it does not specify what the assistance should look like. Unlike NATO, the EU has no concrete defense plans for the security of its member states.
Why does Finland need security from the West?
Russia has said it will take countermeasures if Finland applies for NATO membership.
Russia said on Thursday that it would launch both military and other countermeasures because Finland’s NATO membership threatens its security.
The words have a threatening echo because of the Russian president Vladimir Putin also threatened the West with military action in December before invading Ukraine.
Numerous experts consider Russia’s military action against Finland unlikely. The main force of the Russian armed forces is caught in the war in Ukraine. Without months of mobilization, it would not have enough troops against a well-equipped Finland.
Putin has also, at least in his speeches, considered Ukraine’s NATO membership aspirations to be a much more serious security threat than Finland’s or Sweden’s aspirations.
In any case, the purpose of Western security promises is to prevent Russia from putting pressure on Finland. They also guarantee that Finland will receive weapons and intelligence assistance quickly when there is a threat.
Why does Finland not receive actual security guarantees before joining NATO?
NATO security guarantees are for NATO members only. In many countries, providing security guarantees is as difficult a process as accepting a new NATO member.
NATO members have insisted on a commitment to guarantee each other’s security only. For example, the United States Joe Biden has repeatedly made it clear that Ukraine will receive arms assistance, but that NATO troops will not be sent to Ukraine.
Security guarantees are a huge commitment that is not made on light grounds.
In it, states commit to sending their own soldiers in danger of death on behalf of another country. Ultimately, NATO countries are safe from nuclear weapons, the use of which would lead to the destruction of all parties.
The granting of legal security guarantees in most NATO countries requires the same parliamentary scrutiny as would be required for the admission of a new member of the Alliance.
In the United States, for example, both security guarantees and Finland’s NATO membership should be approved by the Senate and its committees. In the United States, it is not considered necessary to go through a similar heavy process twice.
Why did Britain make defense declarations with Sweden and Finland?
Britain has sought to increase its role in Northern Europe and is already cooperating militarily with Finland and Sweden.
In recent years, Britain has invested more in security in Northern Europe and the Arctic.
It leads an additional NATO force in Estonia and has set up a rapid reaction force, JEF, together with the Netherlands, Finland, the other Nordic and Baltic countries.
Britain is dependent on energy produced by Norway and therefore considers the security of NATO’s northern edge to be of the utmost importance.
Britain has also been one of the most enthusiastic supporters of Ukraine. Relations with Russia are already very bad, so the new declaration is unlikely to weaken them any further.
When could Finland be covered by NATO security guarantees?
If Finland now applies for membership, it will be a member in a few months or a year at most. At the same time, security guarantees come into force.
Representatives of NATO member countries then invite the aspirant to become a member, and NATO begins membership negotiations. This phase is estimated to be quite short, as Finland and Sweden already meet the NATO membership criteria.
Next, a membership agreement will be signed, which must be ratified, confirmed in each of the 30 member states. This is the longest phase that can take months to about a year. In most countries, Parliament ratifies the agreement.
It is not known at this time that the government of any country or the majority of the parliament would oppose the membership of Finland and Sweden.
In the final stage, the candidate country itself must confirm the membership agreement. In Finland, it is done by Parliament. Thereafter, the applicant country is a full member of NATO and is subject to security guarantees.
Did the story evoke thoughts? You can discuss this topic until Monday, May 16 at 11 p.m.