a political decision taken by them and, in principle, would take place outside NATO structures on a bilateral basis. It is obvious that experiences gained from NATO partnership activities would be relevant in organising their contribution. It is, however, NATO’s contingency planning and command structure that would play the leading role: by definition, non-members of NATO will not have been part of the corresponding planning preparations.
One further observation concerning the relationship between the EU and NATO concerns the way in which they are perceived by external actors such as Russia. Even as its attitude towards NATO became harsher over the years, Russia’s perception of the EU’s role as an actor in security and defence policy remained nonchalant. The situation, however, changed fundamentally during the run-up to the confrontation in Ukraine. Since then, the roles of NATO and the EU are hardly distinguishable as a part of the Russian enemy picture. In Russia’s December 2015 National Security Strategy, NATO and the EU are presented as companion parts of the West, with NATO and the United States at the forefront. Russia sees EU membership (or even associate status with the EU) as leading inexorably to NATO membership: it is this view which informed Russia’s policy in Ukraine from 2013 onwards.
Considerations of the EU as a security and defence framework remain in a state of flux. Uncertainty about the United Kingdom’s membership of the EU, the stresses placed on the Schengen regime, the difficulties in securing a resolution to the Cyprus problem, and the redefinition of EU-Turkey relations are all at play at the time of writing, and each one can have a significant effect on the future of the EU as a security and defence actor. The fact remains that EU membership and its implications in the field of security and defence have led, after due political deliberation, to the end of non-alignment as Finland’s policy of choice in 2007.
Finland’s policy within the CSDP. Security policy considerations played a key role in Finland’s decision to join the EU, and to do so with no legal or de facto opt-outs. Therefore, a functional and credible CSDP has always been of the utmost importance to the country. Finland has been in favour of deepening the CSDP, while putting the emphasis on concrete issues such as the development of common capabilities and better use of the Union’s comprehensive toolbox and civil-military cooperation. Finland has contributed to most EU-led
