Thế Giới

Sweden, Finland apply to join NATO: The benefits are not certain, the harms are not necessarily

Sweden and Finland apply to join NATO: The benefits are not certain, the harms are not necessarily - Photo 1.

NATO’s argument is that Russia launched a war in Ukraine to prevent NATO from continuing to expand, now Sweden and Finland help Nato expand, Russia wants to push NATO away from Russia’s borders, now it has 1300 km more. common border with NATO- is the common border between Russia and Finland, Russia seeks to divide NATO internally and weaken NATO, now NATO is stronger and internally united like never before. now. In short, in other words, NATO benefits greatly while Russia suffers much.

From the outside, it seems to be the case. Sweden and Finland are ideal candidates for Nato. Both are EU members, have modern military potential, and have established close and reliable cooperative relations with NATO in politics, military, defense and security. The geostrategic location of these two Nordic countries helps NATO to perfect its strategic layout in Europe to deal with Russia. The prestige of NATO is greatly enhanced when a country in Europe that has pursued a policy of neutrality now voluntarily renounces that policy of neutrality to apply for membership of NATO. Sweden and Finland also said that because of concerns about security threats from Russia and only relying on NATO to overcome the security challenge from Russia, NATO gloated about Russia’s not winning in Ukraine. was immediately counterproductive.

In essence in this development, it is not that NATO only wins and Russia only loses. NATO is crowded with more members, but it is not immediately stronger. NATO’s internals immediately revealed divisions when both the Turkish government and the Croatian president made NATO hostage to their own competing interests that had nothing to do with NATO or the current confrontation. between NATO and Russia.

Both Sweden and Finland quickly asserted that they were joining NATO, but there were no NATO military bases on the territory, no deployment of nuclear weapons on the territory. That is no different from before in terms of NATO’s strategic redeployment while Russia will certainly increase the deployment of troops and even nuclear weapons on the border with NATO.

Russia’s countermeasures and retaliation will make the rivalry between NATO and Russia in Europe more fierce and persistent, and détente and de-escalation more difficult. The long-standing collective security structures and mechanisms in Europe have been neutralized. Europe will not be able to have peace, security and stability in the long term, not short. The arms race will increase, mutual trust and cooperation will be difficult to restore.

NATO strengthens its reason to continue to exist, but it is always on the alert for impending war. Finland and Sweden decided to give up their neutrality to join a military alliance, and this military alliance still considers Russia as an enemy, it is no different from turning partners into opponents. How much security will be guaranteed is not known, but more concerns and worries, always in a state of having to be on guard and ready to respond about security is certain. These two countries now follow NATO to play a new political and security game with Russia that is very costly and has a persistent mental damage that doesn’t know when it will end.

Russia has more reasons and motivation to resolve the war in Ukraine in the most favorable way according to the initial and later strategic calculations. Russia is even more determined not to let NATO entice the former Soviet republics. Russia loudly opposes Sweden and Finland joining NATO, but inwardly does not have to worry more about NATO because these two countries have actually been in and out of NATO for many years now.

In the new political and security game in Europe, both NATO and Russia are hard to lose but not easy to win, if not impossible to win.

You are reading the article Sweden, Finland apply to join NATO: The benefits are not certain, the harms are not necessarily
at – Source: – Read the original article here

Back to top button