Finland and Sweden in NATO are strategic assets, not liabilities

In the two weeks since ambassadors from all NATO member states signed the accession protocols for Finland and Sweden to join the alliance, approximately half of the member countries have now ratified the decision. But as countries such as Hungary, Turkey, and the United States still have yet to ratify, it is worth taking stock of how the alliance would benefit from adding the two Nordic countries.

Finland and Sweden will bring two relatively small but advanced militaries into NATO, adding significant military capabilities and augmenting the alliance’s ability to deter additional Russian aggression. And contrary to suggestions by opponents of NATO enlargement, the addition of the two countries would strengthen transatlantic security and decrease the probability of Russian aggression against the alliance.

Consider some of the specific air, sea, and land capabilities Finland and Sweden will add to the alliance’s arsenal.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Military Balance 2021 report, the two countries will collectively contribute over 150 fighter aircraft, including 96 JAS-39 Gripens and 62 F/A-18 Hornets. By the end of the decade, Finland intends to acquire 64 fifth-generation F-35 fighter aircraft . This compares with Polish plans to acquire 32 F-35s and Italian plans to acquire 90 F-35s.

Sweden is also set to procure two advanced GlobalEye airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, more capable platforms than the aging E-3A AWACS planes NATO currently uses to monitor European airspace. AEW&C aircraft are critical components of an effective air defense system. Indeed, at their June 29 summit in Madrid, NATO members endorsed a strategy to “ensure the seamless delivery of the next generation Airborne Warning & Control System (AWACS) and related capabilities.”

Sweden also possesses a skilled navy with Visby-class corvettes and Gotland-class submarines. These would improve NATO’s ability to deter and defeat maritime aggression and protect sea lines of communication. Islands belonging to Sweden and Finland, especially Sweden’s Gotland Island in the middle of the Baltic Sea , will greatly complicate potential Russian naval operations.

Finland and Sweden would also bring significant land warfare capabilities to the alliance. Finland possesses one of the most capable artillery forces in Europe, with M270 Multiple Launch Rocket Systems and hundreds of towed howitzers. Finland has more artillery pieces than France, Germany or the United Kingdom. Together, Finland and Sweden boast 220 active Leopard main battle tanks, nearly matching Germany’s 245 Leopards, another meaningful contribution to deter an attack on NATO territory.

Sweden has also operated the Patriot air defense system since November 2021, while Finland operates NASAMS, the same system that protects Washington, DC. Additionally, both countries are considering buying Israeli-made air defense systems, which would further increase their contribution to the NATO alliance.

While NATO militaries have worked with their Finnish and Swedish counterparts for years, their membership in the alliance will allow these capabilities to be written into NATO war plans and deepen the level of integration. That will create additional dilemmas for Russian military planners, making aggression against the alliance less likely.

Some opposed to Finland’s and Sweden’s accession acknowledge their military contributions but suggest they would be outweighed by a new obligation to defend those countries against Russian aggression.

It is certainly true that NATO members would be expected to come to the aid of Finland and Sweden if they were attacked. After all, the heart of the NATO alliance is Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which states that “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.”

But that’s exactly the point.

It’s no coincidence that Russia has invaded and occupied Georgia and Ukraine (which are outside NATO) but has not dared invade a NATO member for more than seven decades. Putin appears to understand that an attack against a NATO member country would risk war with the United States. What’s more, by complicating Russian military planning, Finland and Sweden can strengthen NATO’s deterrence of Russian aggression against other members, too.

During times of relative peace and stability, non-Finnish NATO deployments in that country can and should be managed prudently to avoid unnecessary tension with Moscow. But if Moscow were to rattle its saber against NATO members in the Baltics or elsewhere, additional NATO forces could be moved into Finland.

Additional capabilities there would force Russian military planners to watch the 832-mile border and redirect finite combat forces to Moscow’s northwest. That would spread Russian forces more thinly across a wider front and make any scenario for potential aggression seem even less feasible to the Kremlin than it does now.

Strengthening NATO’s deterrent in this way might hasten the day when Russian leaders realize that the best path to peace and security is respecting the borders and sovereignty of its neighbors.

In the meantime, a careful review of Finland’s and Sweden’s military capabilities and the geo-strategic advantages associated with their addition to NATO makes clear that their accession would enhance the alliance’s deterrence of Russian aggression and serve transatlantic security interests.

That’s why the remaining NATO member countries should welcome Finland and Sweden into the alliance without delay.

Bradley Bowman serves as senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where Ryan Brobst is a research analyst, Jack Sullivan is a research associate, and John Hardie is a senior research analyst. Ashlyn Cox contributed to this article.

自北约所有成员国大使签署芬兰和瑞典加入北约的入盟议定书以来，两周内，约有一半成员国已批准该决定。但由于匈牙利、土耳其和美国等国尚未批准，因此有必要评估一下，如果这两个北欧国家加入北约，北约将获得哪些益处。

芬兰和瑞典将为北约带来两支规模相对较小但技术先进的军队，显著增强北约的军事实力，并提升其遏制俄罗斯进一步侵略的能力。与北约扩张反对者的观点相反，这两个国家的加入将加强跨大西洋安全，并降低俄罗斯对北约发动侵略的可能性。

考虑一下芬兰和瑞典将为联盟的武器库增加的一些具体的空中、海上和陆地能力。

根据国际战略研究所发布的《2021年军事平衡》报告，芬兰和波兰将共同出兵超过150架战斗机，其中包括96架JAS-39“鹰狮”战斗机和62架F/A-18“大黄蜂”战斗机。到本十年末，芬兰计划采购64架第五代F-35战斗机。相比之下，波兰计划采购32架F-35，意大利计划采购90架F-35。

瑞典也计划采购两架先进的“全球之眼”（GlobalEye）空中预警与控制（AEW&C）飞机，其性能优于北约目前用于监控欧洲空域的老旧E-3A预警机。空中预警与控制飞机是有效防空系统的重要组成部分。事实上，在6月29日于马德里举行的北约峰会上，成员国批准了一项战略，旨在“确保下一代空中预警与控制系统（AWACS）及相关能力的顺利交付”。

瑞典也拥有一支装备精良的海军，包括维斯比级轻型护卫舰和哥特兰级潜艇。这些舰艇将提升北约威慑和打击海上侵略以及保护海上交通线的能力。瑞典和芬兰的岛屿，特别是位于波罗的海中部的瑞典哥特兰岛，将极大地阻碍俄罗斯潜在的海上行动。

芬兰和瑞典也将为北约带来重要的陆战能力。芬兰拥有欧洲最强大的炮兵部队之一，装备有M270多管火箭炮系统和数百门牵引式榴弹炮。芬兰的火炮数量超过法国、德国和英国。芬兰和瑞典共拥有220辆现役豹式主战坦克，几乎与德国的245辆豹式坦克数量相当，这对于威慑对北约领土的攻击又是一项意义重大的贡献。

瑞典自2021年11月起也开始使用“爱国者”防空系统，而芬兰则使用NASAMS系统，该系统也用于保护华盛顿特区。此外，两国都在考虑购买以色列制造的防空系统，这将进一步增强它们对北约的贡献。

尽管北约各国军队多年来一直与芬兰和瑞典的同行开展合作，但它们加入北约后，这些合作能力将被纳入北约作战计划，并加深一体化程度。这将给俄罗斯军事策划者带来更多难题，从而降低其对北约发动侵略的可能性。

一些反对芬兰和瑞典加入欧盟的人承认它们的军事贡献，但认为这些贡献将不及保卫这些国家免受俄罗斯侵略的新义务。

北约成员国若芬兰和瑞典遭到攻击，理应伸出援手。毕竟，北约联盟的核心是《北大西洋公约》第五条，该条规定“对欧洲或北美洲一个或多个成员国的武装攻击，应视为对所有成员国的攻击”。

但这正是关键所在。

俄罗斯入侵并占领了格鲁吉亚和乌克兰（这两个国家都不是北约成员国），却在过去七十多年里不敢入侵北约成员国，这绝非偶然。普京似乎明白，攻击北约成员国将面临与美国开战的风险。此外，芬兰和瑞典通过干扰俄罗斯的军事计划，也能增强北约对俄罗斯侵略其他成员国的威慑力。

在相对和平稳定的时期，应谨慎管理芬兰境内非芬兰籍北约部队的部署，以避免与莫斯科产生不必要的紧张关系。但如果莫斯科对波罗的海国家或其他地区的北约成员国发出威胁，北约可能会向芬兰增派部队。

在这些地区增设作战能力将迫使俄罗斯军事策划者密切关注长达832英里的边境线，并将有限的作战力量调往莫斯科西北部。这将使俄罗斯军队在更广阔的战线上分散，使克里姆林宫认为任何潜在的侵略行动都比现在更不可行。

以这种方式加强北约的威慑力，可能会加速俄罗斯领导人意识到，实现和平与安全的最佳途径是尊重邻国的边界和主权。

与此同时，仔细审视芬兰和瑞典的军事能力以及它们加入北约所带来的地缘战略优势，可以清楚地看出，它们的加入将增强北约对俄罗斯侵略的威慑力，并服务于跨大西洋安全利益。

因此，北约其他成员国应该立即欢迎芬兰和瑞典加入北约。

布拉德利·鲍曼担任保卫民主基金会军事与政治力量中心的高级主任，瑞安·布罗布斯特是该中心的研究分析师，杰克·沙利文是研究助理，约翰·哈迪是高级研究分析师。阿什琳·考克斯对本文亦有贡献。