Finnish soldiers during the “Cold Response” maneuvers by NATO troops in Norway in March. Norway is one of the founding members of the alliance – Sweden and Finland have been neutral for decades Photo Credit: Getty Images/AFP/JONATHAN NACKSTRAND
From BZ/dpa
Now it’s official: Sweden and Finland have applied for NATO membership. However, it is unclear whether accession can take place as quickly as desired by most. A member of the military alliance has expressed reservations.
Sweden and Finland have officially applied for NATO membership. Ambassadors from the two countries handed over the relevant documents to Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on Wednesday morning at the Alliance headquarters in Brussels.
The reason for Sweden and Finland’s desire to join the military alliance are security concerns that arose in the countries in the wake of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. Until then, both states had resolutely pursued a policy of military non-alignment.
The NATO Council will now deal with the applications for membership. It is made up of representatives of the 30 alliance states, who have to make a consensus decision on how to proceed.
The historical developments are overshadowed by the veto threats from NATO member Turkey. The latter had recently made it clear several times that it would only agree to the accession of Finland and Sweden in exchange for concessions.
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan explains his stance with the two countries’ alleged support for the banned Kurdish Workers’ Party PKK and the Kurdish militia YPG in Syria. At the same time, criticism has been leveled at the fact that NATO countries have restricted the delivery of armaments because of Turkey’s actions against these groups.
Until recently, it was unclear how Turkey could be prevented from vetoing Sweden and Finland’s NATO membership. According to diplomats, in addition to statements by the two northerners on the fight against terrorism, arms deals could also play a role. The government in Ankara, for example, wants to buy F-16 fighter jets in the USA – but a possible deal was recently politically controversial in Washington.
