Matti Pesu
Leading Researcher
The Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Finland
Finland joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) on 4 April 2023, concluding a historically swift ratification process that lasted less than eleven months. NATO membership has now inaugurated a new era in Finnish foreign, security, and defence policy. For the first time in its history, Finland is a member of a formalized, treaty-based military alliance.
Finland’s entry into NATO will turn the alliance into one of the most signifcant multilateral forums for Helsinki. Importantly, the scope of issues that Finland needs to deal with as an ally is much broader than the agenda Finland handled during its time as a NATO partner.
As a full-fledge ally, Finland must now begin to formulate its NATO policy in earnest. Importantly, Finland’s NATO policy will not only be determined by national preferences only, but also by NATO’s existing policies and the views held by Finland’s future allies. Helsinki has clearly expressed that upon entering NATO, it wants to find solutions that optimize Finland’s own defence as a part of NATO’s collective defence, and that make sense both from the national point of view and from the perspective of the whole alliance.
In practice, the process of national policy formulation will take place rather organically. As a NATO member, Finland must express its views on the broad array of issues that feature on the alliance’s agenda, thus building its NATO policy and profile bit by bit. In the longer term, governmental programmes, as well as foreign, security, and defence policy reports, will be the key documents for setting Finland’s NATO-related objectives.
One cannot understand Finland’s emergent NATO policy without paying attention to geography. Indeed, Finnish interest and objectives in the alliance will be anchored in geostrategic realities. There are four factors that will heavily influence Finnish NATO policy:
To be a credible ally, Finland must decide on its contribution to collective defence. There are several ways how allies are involved in this core purpose of the alliance. For instance, allies earmark troops and capabilities for NATO’s disposal. The alliance is currently building a new and ambitious force model, and military capable allies, such as Finland, are expected offer significant contributions.
Furthermore, Finland is likely expected to take part in NATO’s peacetime collective defence activities, namely the enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) battlegroups and its air policing missions in the Baltic States and Iceland. From a military perspective, the most natural eFP battlegroup for Finland would be the United Kingdom-led battalion in Estonia. That said, the decision about the Finnish involvement will first and foremost be political. The alliance may want to see Finnish soldiers serving beyond its immediate security environment, such as in the Black Sea region. NATO air policing demands less resources than contributing to the eFP. Finland’s participation in both the Baltic and Icelandic missions will most likely be seen desirable.
Finland has every opportunity to be an influential NATO ally. Firstly, Finland’s strategic location as well as the capabilities and strength of its armed forces should enhance the country’s political weight and afford it additional bargaining power in alliance decision-making. Secondly, in past decades, Finland’s focus has uninterruptedly been on deterrence and defence, duly providing the country with valuable expertise to offer NATO in the alliance’s current efforts to rebuild its deterrence and defence posture.
Thirdly, Finland has considerable experience in matters such as resilience, civil preparedness, and Arctic warfare, which are all potential policy areas, or niches, in which Finland can wield influence and in which Finland has already managed to build a good reputation within NATO. Fourthly and lastly, Finland’s multilateral diplomacy has traditionally been marked by pragmatism, bridge-building efforts, and the avoidance of bloc building. These characteristics could prove useful in NATO as well.
Finland’s entry into NATO will turn the alliance into one of the most signifcant multilateral forums for Helsinki. Importantly, the scope of issues that Finland needs to deal with as an ally is much broader than the agenda Finland handled during its time as a NATO partner.
As a full-fledge ally, Finland must now begin to formulate its NATO policy in earnest. Importantly, Finland’s NATO policy will not only be determined by national preferences only, but also by NATO’s existing policies and the views held by Finland’s future allies. Helsinki has clearly expressed that upon entering NATO, it wants to find solutions that optimize Finland’s own defence as a part of NATO’s collective defence, and that make sense both from the national point of view and from the perspective of the whole alliance.
In practice, the process of national policy formulation will take place rather organically. As a NATO member, Finland must express its views on the broad array of issues that feature on the alliance’s agenda, thus building its NATO policy and profile bit by bit. In the longer term, governmental programmes, as well as foreign, security, and defence policy reports, will be the key documents for setting Finland’s NATO-related objectives.
One cannot understand Finland’s emergent NATO policy without paying attention to geography. Indeed, Finnish interest and objectives in the alliance will be anchored in geostrategic realities. There are four factors that will heavily influence Finnish NATO policy:
- Finland is a Baltic Sea state, dependent on unhindered maritime traffic and with a vital interest in the territorial integrity of the Baltic states.
- Finland is an Arctic country, with an important role in defending the High North land domain and, indirectly, the Northern Atlantic sealines.
- Finland is a frontline state, meaning that building credible deterrence vis-à-vis Russia and ensuring the possibility to receive allied reinforcements will be among its key interests.
- Finland is peripherally located vis-à-vis the Western reserves of military and industrial power, directing its attention towards military mobility as well as security of supply.
To be a credible ally, Finland must decide on its contribution to collective defence. There are several ways how allies are involved in this core purpose of the alliance. For instance, allies earmark troops and capabilities for NATO’s disposal. The alliance is currently building a new and ambitious force model, and military capable allies, such as Finland, are expected offer significant contributions.
Furthermore, Finland is likely expected to take part in NATO’s peacetime collective defence activities, namely the enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) battlegroups and its air policing missions in the Baltic States and Iceland. From a military perspective, the most natural eFP battlegroup for Finland would be the United Kingdom-led battalion in Estonia. That said, the decision about the Finnish involvement will first and foremost be political. The alliance may want to see Finnish soldiers serving beyond its immediate security environment, such as in the Black Sea region. NATO air policing demands less resources than contributing to the eFP. Finland’s participation in both the Baltic and Icelandic missions will most likely be seen desirable.
Finland has every opportunity to be an influential NATO ally. Firstly, Finland’s strategic location as well as the capabilities and strength of its armed forces should enhance the country’s political weight and afford it additional bargaining power in alliance decision-making. Secondly, in past decades, Finland’s focus has uninterruptedly been on deterrence and defence, duly providing the country with valuable expertise to offer NATO in the alliance’s current efforts to rebuild its deterrence and defence posture.
Thirdly, Finland has considerable experience in matters such as resilience, civil preparedness, and Arctic warfare, which are all potential policy areas, or niches, in which Finland can wield influence and in which Finland has already managed to build a good reputation within NATO. Fourthly and lastly, Finland’s multilateral diplomacy has traditionally been marked by pragmatism, bridge-building efforts, and the avoidance of bloc building. These characteristics could prove useful in NATO as well.