Finland and Sweden Submit Historic NATO Membership Applications

End of Nordic Neutrality Era

Finland and Sweden formally submitted applications for NATO membership on May 18, 2022, abandoning their long-standing policies of military neutrality in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and changing European security dynamics.

Key Facts

Countries: Finland and Sweden
Policy change: End of decades-long neutrality
Timeline: Applications submitted simultaneously
Catalyst: Russian invasion of Ukraine

Historical Context

Both countries had maintained military neutrality throughout the Cold War:

Finland: Neutral since WWII, balancing between East and West
Sweden: 200+ years of neutrality and non-alignment
Previous stance: Both participated in NATO partnerships but avoided membership

Public Opinion Shift

Russian invasion dramatically shifted public opinion:

Finland: Support for NATO membership rose from 25% to 80%
Sweden: Support increased from 35% to 60%
Security concerns: Fear of Russian aggression against neutral states

Government Decisions

Both governments moved quickly to formal applications:

Finland: Parliament voted 188-8 in favor
Sweden: Government decision with broad parliamentary support
Coordination: Both countries synchronized their applications

Russian Response

Moscow reacted with threats and warnings:

Promised “military-technical consequences”
Threatened deployment of nuclear weapons to Baltic region
Accused NATO of destabilizing regional security
Announced potential retaliatory measures

NATO Reception

Alliance members welcomed the applications:

Strong military capabilities of both countries
Enhanced Baltic Sea security
Strengthened northern European defense
Broad support among existing members

Turkish Objections

Turkey raised objections citing:

Swedish support for Kurdish groups Ankara considers terrorist organizations
Arms embargoes imposed on Turkey
Demands for policy changes before approval

Strategic Implications

The applications would significantly alter regional security:

NATO’s border with Russia would double (Finland-Russia border: 1,340 km)
Enhanced Baltic Sea control
Stronger Arctic presence
Improved regional defense coordination

Economic Considerations

Both countries addressed economic aspects:

Defense spending increases to meet NATO requirements
Industrial cooperation with alliance members
Integration of defense procurement systems

Timeline Challenges

The membership process faced various hurdles:

Turkish objections requiring resolution
Ratification by all 30 NATO members
Potential Russian interference attempts
Security guarantees during application period

The simultaneous applications represented one of the most significant expansions of NATO since the post-Cold War period and demonstrated the unintended consequences of Russian military aggression.