When Finland joined NATO last year, the Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg talked about ironclad security guarantees.
The truth is that no one knows for sure whether the guarantees are iron or paper, because NATO’s common defense has never been tested in real action.
The core of NATO’s collective defense is Article Five of the Treaty. According to it, an armed attack against one or more NATO countries is considered an attack against all member countries.
Researcher and former officer of the British Royal United Services Institute Ed Arnold says that we don’t know how good security the Fifth Article brings.
– The fifth article has never been used for what it is intended for. It has been activated only once, after the September 11th terrorist attacks in 2001. It was a political demonstration of unity and solidarity towards the United States, Arnold says.
A NATO country has never been attacked by traditional military means. The success of the defense alliance is based on the fact that the country considering an attack really believes that NATO will work together to repel the attack.
If the aggressor, i.e. in the current situation presumably Russia, does not find the threat credible, the situation becomes dangerous.
Deterrence is weakened by talking
The deterrent effect of the fifth article can be weakened by talking. Stateside Donald Trump is likely to be the Republican presidential candidate in the fall elections. And Trump is talking.
Speaking at a campaign event last Saturday, Trump recalled how he had warned the president of a European country by saying that the United States will not defend those who do not pay. Trump would rather encourage Russia to attack.
There are still countries in NATO that have not reached the goal that at least two percent of GDP should be spent on defense.
On Wednesday, Trump repeated his threat not to protect NATO countries, “that don’t pay†.
– I have said that unless you pay them, we will not protect, Trump said while campaigning in South Carolina.
– Trump can weaken NATO’s deterrence when campaigning or, for example, at a press conference. This is difficult, and NATO is not used to this kind of behavior from the US. Trump can damage the fifth article even though he is not even in power, says Ed Arnold.
An empty promise of help from the US wish
Article five’s commitment to common defense is clearly written. The article says that the NATO countries will take the measures they deem necessary if one or more member countries come under attack. It may involve the use of armed force, but the record gives a lot of leeway.
According to Arnold, the wrong wording was the wish of the United States when NATO was founded in 1949.
The United States stayed away from both the first and the early stages of World War II, among other things because public opinion was against going to war.
– The United States wanted to make sure that it would not be drawn into the war in Europe against its will.
Activation requires consensus
Activating the fifth article is straightforward, at least on paper.
NATO’s most important political decision-making body, the North Atlantic Council, would meet at the ambassadorial level and state that the situation requires the activation of the fifth article.
The decision must be unanimous, and the leaders of the different countries would naturally be closely involved in the decision-making even in a situation where the ambassadors would decide on the matter.
– The assumption is that the shooting is underway when deciding on the fifth article. The troops of the attacked country will start resistance and other countries could help. Waiting for the North Atlantic Council’s decision would not inevitably prevent military action, says Ed Arnold.
According to Arnold, in the case of Finland, the assumption would be that the Nordic countries and possibly the Baltic countries would come to the rescue. Britain would also assist under the mutual defense agreement. It is likely that US troops would also participate in the battle, Arnold describes the possible scenarios.
The fifth article is not an automaton towards a great war
The fifth article can come up in different situations. In September 2022, a Russian fighter jet fired a missile at a British reconnaissance plane Above the Black Sea. The missile did not hit and the Russian pilot tried to shoot another missile, but it apparently fell into the sea.
– If a missile fired by a Russian fighter jet had hit the reconnaissance plane, Article Five could have been activated and Britain or the United States could have struck the base from which the Russian plane had departed. After that, the continuation would have depended on Russia’s reaction. If Russia would leave it at that, the situation would be over and we would move on to de-escalate tensions, Ed Arnold describes.
According to him, the biggest misconception related to the fifth article is the assumption that things will progress automatically.
– Let’s imagine that as soon as the shooting starts going towards the third world war or the use of nuclear weapons. Everything starts at a much lower level, and the countermeasures are inevitably not even military, says Arnold.
“Finland’s NATO membership changed the situation.”
According to researcher Ed Arnold, NATO has received additional time to strengthen its defense in Europe. The war in Ukraine and Finland’s NATO membership complicate the situation for Russia.
– Finland’s NATO membership changed the situation. It doubled the anti-NATO border line on which Russia has to keep troops. And wherever Ukraine’s front line is positioned, it will also tie up Russia’s resources in the future, says Arnold”.
Previously, Russia could have concentrated a significant amount of troops against the Baltics, but the situation has now changed.
According to Ed Arnold, NATO can be trusted in the future. The main thing is that European countries must take more responsibility.
– Even if Trump does not return to the White House, neither will the president Joe Biden is likely to start moving military resources in the direction of Asia. In other words, the Europeans have to do more for their defense in any case, and NATO is the perfect organization for this.