Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

REOreddit t1_j6kaoxs wrote

And using the same argument, Sweden could remain neutral, even if they join NATO and Russia invades Finland. Then why bother at all with any of this?


oldspiceland t1_j6kdquh wrote

Because it’s ultimately beneficial to have both of them in NATO from the perspectives of them and other NATO member states. They’re hoping that by creating a buffer of states large enough they will be able to ensure that Russia’s aggressive tendencies are outweighed by the knowledge that anyone they attack will have NATO riding to defend them instead of might.

Might allows for a lot of room for stupid decisions.


REOreddit t1_j6kfz8s wrote

Nobody is arguing that it isn't better to have both in NATO. But the truth is that Sweden and Finland have a lot more to gain from joining NATO than Turkey. So basically, Turkey can prolong this situation forever, the same way their candidacy to the EU is frozen. If Sweden doesn't want to make key concessions to Turkey, then they will not join NATO, not today and not in 20 years from now. If Finland wants to share the same future, so be it, but everybody would be safer, including Sweden, if at least Finland they joins NATO. And Finland saying they will not join without Sweden doesn't have any effect on Turkey's position.