Finland has traditionally walked a careful line of neutrality to avoid confrontation with its Russian neighbour. But the war in Ukraine is changing public attitudes, and joining NATO is becoming an increasingly realistic possibility.
Twenty years ago, joining NATO would have been unthinkable in Finland. But a historic shift in public opinion is now under way, with a survey released on February 28 finding that, for the first time, a majority of the population (53%) was in favour of joining the Atlantic alliance – an increase of 25% since the Russian invasion of Ukraine began.
By March 14, a second poll found support for joining NATO had jumped again – to 62%.
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, heightened security concerns have pushed Finnish politicians to consider dramatic policy shifts away from the country’s traditional neutrality. In an unprecedented move, Prime Minister Sanna Marin announced on February 28 that Finland would supply Ukraine with weapons to fight against Russian forces.
Meanwhile, Finnish President Sauli Niinistö has called for “cool heads” to prevail when it comes to making decisions over NATO membership.
“There is emotion at the heart of public opinion,” said Maurice Carrez, a professor at Sciences Po Strasbourg and a specialist in Finnish history. He added that two of the largest political parties in Finland are pro-NATO, the Social Democratic Party and the National Coalition.
“The Finnish president wanted to remind people that they have to avoid making a rash decision.”
Warnings from Russia
For Finland’s 5.5 million inhabitants, this means keeping calm in the face of escalating threats from Russia.
“Finland and Sweden are getting frequent warnings from Russia,” Chiara Ruffa, associate professor in war studies at the Swedish Defense University, told FRANCE 24. “In early March, for example, four Russian fighter jets violated Swedish airspace while the Swedish and Finnish armies were carrying out exercises on the island of Gotland [in the Baltic sea].”
“Nobody really believes that an attack is imminent, but it has become very clear that we are going to need to prepare for that eventuality,” she added.
>> 'War in Ukraine is coming dangerously close to NATO borders'
The current threat from Russia arguably became clear in 2014, when its forces entered Ukraine and annexed Crimea. Now, “the movement of Russian troops close to borders with Baltic countries has also played a role in stoking fears that were shown to be realistic”, Carrez said.
As a result, Finland has been modernising its own military and moving closer to NATO, even if it is not yet a member.
In 2014, Finland signed a treaty granting NATO troops support and transit through the country in times of crisis. And in 2022, NATO announced it would include Finland in alliance information-sharing during the war in Ukraine.
Memories of the Winter War
The fear of a Russian attack in Finland also has roots in World War II. The eastern Finnish border with Russia is more than 1,300 kilometres long, and the collective memory of Russian forces breaching it in 1939 remains potent.
During the Winter War that followed, Finland lost more than 80,000 soldiers in fierce battles with Russian forces.
The fight helped forge Finnish national identity, even though the country became independent in 1917 after more than a century as part of the Russian Empire.
“After independence, there was a terrible civil war,” said Carrez. “But when the Winter War started some of those national divisions disappeared. Today the Finnish remember the Winter War as the birth of the nation of Finland.”
The war ended with Finland ceding territory to Russia but retaining independence. Ever since, Finland has adopted a carefully balanced political stance to avoid antagonising its neighbour.
In 1948, Finland and Russia signed the Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, confirming Finnish neutrality in the decades to come.
“Finland didn’t become neutral because it lost the war against the Soviet Union in 1944,” Carrez said. “Finland has always tried to present itself as a neutral country, even between the two world wars. Obviously, it was a coerced neutrality, linked to the presence of a very powerful state at Finland’s border.”
The pros and cons
After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Finland shifted focus towards the West. It made its political allegiance official by joining the European Union in 1995 but kept its military neutral by declining to join NATO. Neighbouring Sweden made the same choice.
Now Finland’s parliament will reopen discussions in April on whether to join NATO after a report on the risks and benefits has been presented. The main advantage would be the military protection provided by NATO allies in case of attack under Article 5 of the NATO treaty.
But this could have drawbacks, too. “Does NATO offer real protection? It could be counterproductive,” said Carrez. Despite historical tensions there are also genuine ties linking Russia to Finland, and a large Russian-speaking community lives there.
Aligning with the West could also damage economic relations with Russia, which is an important trade partner and currently provides more than 97% of all the natural gas used in Finland, according to the EU statistical office Eurostat.
While no request has yet been made, NATO has indicated it would accept applications from either Finland or Sweden to join the alliance.
“Experts have said the process could move relatively fast,” said Ruffa. “It is well known that Sweden and Finland have the necessary military capacity, and there is a high level of interoperability as both countries have already participated in multiple shared missions with NATO.”
This article was translated from the original in French.
