Page:The Effects of Finland's Possible NATO Membership - An Assessment.pdf/6

	ble degree of interoperability between Finland and NATO. The practical difficulties that would have to be resolved were Finland to join NATO are quite limited. This is due both to Finland’s democratic credentials, and to the perception that Finland is a militarily serious country underpinned by the reality of its territorial defence. Finland’s Bündnisfähigkeit, its practical readiness to be a full member of NATO, is correspondingly high. From the NATO perspective, Finnish accession would be technically straightforward and – in all likelihood – acceptable to member states.
4.	TOGETHERNESS. Finland and Sweden constitute a common strategic space and have compelling reasons to make the same fundamental choices as to their future security and defence, whether on the basis of the current policy of convergence with NATO, short of membership, or with a view to joining the Atlantic Alliance. As Western and European democracies, they share the same Nordic and Baltic space, and they face the same strategic challenges and uncertainties in that region. This strategic reality applies notably to the security of the Baltic States. Throughout Finland’s history as an independent state, strategic decisions taken by one of the two countries have had immediate and decisive consequences for the other. By working together, Finland and Sweden can have greater influence inside or outside of NATO, as was the case in their decision to join the EU more than twenty years ago. Conversely, divergent choices in Finland and Sweden would produce new difficulties. Finland would be more exposed and vulnerable than it currently is if Sweden alone were to join NATO. This would also create a serious challenge for Stockholm, the return of the 'Finland question', which had waned with Helsinki’s ability to stabilise its relationship with the USSR and move into Western structures during the Cold War. Finland joining NATO with Sweden staying out would create a strategically awkward situation, leaving Finland as a strategic outpost without territorial continuity with NATO.
5.	RUSSIA. Finland, as a member of the EU and as a Western democracy, shares with its partners a broad array of strategic concerns, calling for solidarity and common action. However, geography gives particular importance to Russia, with which Finland shares a 1340 kilometre-long border. As an unsatisfied power, Russia has made unpredictability a strategic and tactical virtue, underpinned by an impressive degree of political and military agility. Russia has adopted a revisionist stand towards

6 | THE EFFECTS OF FINLAND'S POSSIBLE NATO MEMBERSHIP ● AN ASSESSMENT