Sweden and Finland are not members of NATO, though both nations have some nominal ties to the alliance for the sake of coordination. Still, they’re not proper members, so NATO’s Article V collective defense requirement doesn’t apply.
NATO’s Commodore Hans Helseth, however, argues that NATO should feel a “moral obligation” to defend Sweden and Finland militarily if either one of them gets attacked, adding the nations are welcome to join the alliance.
Sweden and Finland have long valued their positions of neutrality, which affords them certain advantages during periods of NATO-Russia tensions. It also means they aren’t obliged by treaty to jump into any huge wars NATO gets sucked into .
While there are some in each nation arguing in favor of joining NATO, it appears there is little reason for them to consider doing so, particularly if it turns out NATO feels obligated to come to their defense militarily at any rate.
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- Turkish Airstrikes Kill 35 Kurdish PKK in Northern Iraq - June 17th, 2018
- Afghan President Offers Extension as Ramadan Ceasefire Expires - June 17th, 2018
- Saudi Warplanes Strike Airport in Yemen's Hodeidah - June 17th, 2018
- ISIS Suicide Bombers Kill 54 in Two Days in Eastern Afghanistan - June 17th, 2018
- US Denies Attacking Syrian Military Site Near Iraqi Border - June 17th, 2018
NATO is preposterous, ridiculous and dangerous.
A post best read aloud in one’s best Jackie Chiles voice.
And what country is most likely to attack Sweden or Finland?
Answer: the US, which violates the sovereignty of both routinely.
The US should get out of NATO and let the Europeans settle their own disputes and pay the consequences if they can’t.
Risky, the Europeans might discover they don’t need us.
Well given they face no threats this is a moot and minor point . It’s only newsworthy to ramp up the Russophobia.