Ok so as you probably know by now, Finland had applied for last year and has been granted NATO membership this month as the 31st member. The question of the day is: why would this once neutral country, in which their neutral status has worked exceptionally well for them, decide to join a geopolitical gang such as NATO? We call it a gang because that’s essentially what it is. There's are prerequisites that must be met and there are duties and expectations that also must be met before one can obtain the benefits of NATO membership. The second question is, why would Finland join NATO when its literally next door to Russia with a 1,340km (832mi) border that separates them? To put it into perspective the land boarder that separates Finland from Russia is a little larger than the state of Texas (if traveling from north to south).
Is it safe to say that NATO is attempting to further agitate Russia by setting up the checkerboard for direct conflict? Some will say no - because Finland could just be trying to align itself with a bloc that gives them access to more allies should Russia attempt to take over Finland for whatever reason. But given that logic, we all know that Russia has been very conservative in how they engage Ukraine and they’ve been very strategic on how they execute decisions in the broader geopolitical arena. The other spectrum of the argument is that Russia has absolutely no plans on engaging Finland in any capacity whatsoever, and that by Finland joining NATO it will further legitimize Russia's position on stopping NATO from moving one inch forward via the Minsk Agreement. Therefore, it further justifies the Russian logic that the United States won’t the ability to sabotage any kinds of peace deals that do not directly benefit them.
What/did the United States and NATO promise Finland and if they didn't promise them anything what do they stand by gain joining NATO? This is considering the fact that they have been neutral for around 75 years or after World War 2. Technically before joining NATO, Finland did have an effective peace treaty with Russia (formally USSR) called “The Treaty of Friendship Cooperation and Mutual Assistance”. Going back to the question of “What/did the United States and NATO promise them?” At this point one can say protection; why? Because Finland is scared.
Supporting this position is Article 5 of the NATO Charter which says [paraphrasing] “if one member country is attacked then all member states must come to that country's aid”. Now Sweden the direct neighbor of Finland also applied - but they were denied NATO membership because Turkey a NATO member blocked them. Turkey alleged that the Swedes were allowing people to burn the Holy Quran, allowing Kurdish Terrorist to take root in their country as well as Turkey making the allegation that the Swede’s were granting Turkey’s enemies sanctuary in their country.
However, there is another reason why NATO allowed Finland to join and that's because Finland has a sizable military force, and by allowing them to join NATO it would boost the number of military servicemen NATO has standby show a hot war occur between NATO and Russia. This is done to counter the militaries of both Russia and China who have nearly 3-4 million servicemen in their ranks when combined. Sidenote: China has roughly 2 million active-duty servicemen right now where the U.S. has less than 500,000 with only 20% of them being actually fighters - a conversation for another time. So, adding Finland provides a military incentive to allow them into NATO while Finland takes advantage of Article 5 protection. Keep in mind that Finland was defeated in World War 2 by Russia which further adds to probable cause for our position here.
Comments