Page:The Effects of Finland's Possible NATO Membership - An Assessment.pdf/52

 ference between the two cases. Nuclear submarines based in Kola and the growing economic importance of the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean are issues which appeared on the scene well after the founding of the Alliance.. [sic] Finnish membership could be interpreted as a move closer to the Kola Peninsula by the Alliance.

While Finnish territory would be important in any conflict around the Baltic Sea, Russia’s strategic problems would be compounded if Sweden were to apply for membership as well. If NATO could use both Finnish and Swedish territory without restriction in such a conflict, the prospects for the Alliance to manage hostilities between Russia and one or two Baltic States would improve considerably. The extent to which Finnish and Swedish membership would change the strategic importance of the adjacent military regions in Russian eyes, as compared with other regions, is difficult to measure as it in all likelihood is connected with the general state of affairs between Russia and its adversaries, and possible conflicts elsewhere. But it is a reasonable assumption that more resources would be devoted to the Northwest.

ON RUSSIA’S POTENTIAL RESPONSE. Russia is not at ease with itself and the world. During the last fifteen years, Russia has turned into a unsatisfied power, questioning post-Cold War arrangements in Europe and even the norms and principles of the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and the Paris Charter of 1990. Russia considers itself disadvantaged by the state of affairs in Europe. The view that Russia is not just another European state is largely shared by the Russian elite. This sets Russia apart and leads to a revisionist stand demanding a renegotiation of European security structures and even demanding the recognition of spheres of special interest, in other words a veto over developments that impinge on Russia’s interests. Due to historical experience, this would be unpalatable for Finland. In particular, the enlargement of NATO is seen as a threat, driven by the United States, and aimed at bringing American military bases and forces closer to Russian borders to contain Russia.

Russia shares a land border with fourteen states from North Korea to Norway. Its borders have historically been porous as there are few barriers. This partly explains the innate difficulty Russia has in dealing with its neighbours. Not a single conflict in the post-Soviet sphere has been settled. All remain simmering and are known as frozen conflicts, guaranteeing in most cases a degree of droit-de-regard for Moscow but concurrently hampering economic and human contacts with manifold consequences. 52