Turkish stance on expansion raises thorny issues for NATO (Opinion)
Finland and Sweden formally applied to join NATO on 18 May. Pictured with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (centre) are Finnish Ambassador to NATO Klaus Korhonen (left) and Swedish Ambassador to NATO Axel Wernhoff (right). (Photo: NATO)
With Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan putting national interests first in stating his objections, is there still a path for NATO to welcome two new members in Finland and Sweden?
In a matter of weeks, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has resulted in the unintended achievement of accelerating progress on international security cooperation.
After decades of discussion, debate and gentle overtures which seemed unlikely to result in near-term change, Finland and Sweden have abandoned their previous policy positions and applied to join NATO.
This move has come as a delight to the alliance as it is keen to reduce the risks it faces in Scandinavia, but it also enraged Russia. It has the potential too to cause wider debate, and dissension that could yet be problematic for the long-term future
Already have an account? Log in
Want to keep reading this article?
More from Defence Notes
-
![What role could holographic and 3D capabilities play in the warfare of tomorrow]()
What role could holographic and 3D capabilities play in the warfare of tomorrow
Holographic and 3D technologies have been lauded by some for their ability to provide technical and operational advantages for military training and planning. But is the hype truly justified?
-
![Unfolding the Golden Dome for America: Seven things you should know about the programme]()
Unfolding the Golden Dome for America: Seven things you should know about the programme
Shephard talked to multiple experts about the most pressing concerns and considerations regarding the air defence system advocated by President Trump.
-
![Industry welcomes UK Strategic Defence Review, but pressure remains on future defence investment plans]()
Industry welcomes UK Strategic Defence Review, but pressure remains on future defence investment plans
While industry reception to the SDR has been positive, questions still remain from analyst and trade associations about what this could mean for future investment and the future UK Defence Industrial Strategy.
-
![UK Strategic Defence Review puts emphasis on autonomy, airpower and munitions]()
UK Strategic Defence Review puts emphasis on autonomy, airpower and munitions
The UK’s Strategic Defence Review (SDR) was launched as one of the first acts of the UK’s new Labour Government in June last year. The review has recommended a major big-picture reform of the country’s forces.
-
![Foreshadowing of UK defence review suggests it is light on programme details]()
Foreshadowing of UK defence review suggests it is light on programme details
The UK’s Strategic Defence Review (SDR) was designed to answer two questions: What is needed to fix UK defence and make it fit for the 2040s, and what do you get for a fixed financial profile? The SDR outlines that work still needs to be done on specifics.
