UK agrees mutual security deals with Finland and Sweden

[Sardaukar]

Here we go:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-61408700

 

The UK has agreed mutual security pacts with Sweden and Finland, agreeing to come to their aid should either nation come under attack.

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson visited both countries to sign the deals, amid debate about them joining Nato.

The pacts also state that Finland and Sweden would assist the UK in a crisis.

Mr Johnson and Swedish PM Magdalena Andersson said co-operation was "even more important" given Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The second deal was announced in a joint press conference with Finnish President Sauli Niinistö.

Mr Johnson said the "solemn declaration" between the UK and Finland was reflective of the "extreme difficulty of the times we are in".

He emphasised the deal was "not a short-term stop gap" while Finland considered whether to join the Nato defensive alliance, but rather a "enduring assurance between two nations".

 

Asked if there would be "British boots on the ground" in Finland should a conflict break out, Mr Johnson said military assistance would be offered, but that the "nature of that assistance" would depend upon the "request of the other party".

Mr Johnson added the agreement would become the "foundation of an intensification of our security and our defence relationship in other ways as well".

Mr Niinistö said his nation appreciated the UK's "strong support" of Nato's open-door policy to Finland's potential membership.

He said joining Nato would not be "against anybody" and the UK deal was intended to "maximise our security one way or another" while considering joining the defensive alliance.

However, when asked if the possible move could provoke President Vladimir Putin, Mr Niinistö said Russia would be responsible if Sweden or Finland joined Nato.

He said Russia was suggesting the two nations did not have their "own will" by threatening them against applying for membership

"They are ready to attack their neighbouring country, so... my response would be that 'you caused this - look at the mirror'".

[wendist]

I have no problem with the security pact as such but we certainly live in interesting times. Imagine the Swedish government try to do something like this at any time before February 24 this year. We (the public) got,AFAIK, a less than 24 hour heads up that the government intended to sign this, we still don't know exactly what the document says in detail and all this by a minority government who haven't even bothered to discuss it in parliament (one again AFAIK). In normal times this would have resulted in a vote of no confidence in parliament and then an extra election but now no one even bats an eye. Crazy times. 

[Sardaukar]

13 minutes ago, wendist said:

I have no problem with the security pact as such but we certainly live in interesting times. Imagine the Swedish government try to do something like this at any time before February 24 this year. We (the public) got,AFAIK, a less than 24 hour heads up that the government intended to sign this, we still don't know exactly what the document says in detail and all this by a minority government who haven't even bothered to discuss it in parliament (one again AFAIK). In normal times this would have resulted in a vote of no confidence in parliament and then an extra election but now no one even bats an eye. Crazy times. 

Thing is, we the public, are in need-to-know bases. Even I didn't have any idea about this until it happened (and I still have some contacts with military establishment, but ours if pretty good keeping their mouths shut about classified things unlike US ones, pun intended)

In Finland, these things are usually discussed in TP-UTVA. That is acronym for President and Foreign & Security Parliamentary Council (gov ministers basically and selected others). Latter also keep party leaders informed. I bet that's what happened in Sweden too, party leaders gave green light.

Edited May 11, 2022 by Sardaukar

[wendist]

I agree, there has probably been consultations behind closed doors. But we are four months away from a, scheduled, general election. Normally someone among the opposition would have protested this just to score points with the voters (and that might still happen). Will be interesting to see if the no to NATO crowd will use this pact as an argument for Sweden to not join NATO. After all the British have just signed up to save our bacon, right?😉  

[Sardaukar]

4 minutes ago, wendist said:

I agree, there has probably been consultations behind closed doors. But we are four months away from a, scheduled, general election. Normally someone among the opposition would have protested this just to score points with the voters (and that might still happen). Will be interesting to see if the no to NATO crowd will use this pact as an argument for Sweden to not join NATO. After all the British have just signed up to save our bacon, right?😉  

In Finland, even Greens have given green light to join NATO...and that starts to be amusing. 

I think there is some behind closed doors stuff going on. Of course, last poll in Finland gave 76% as yes to NATO. I don't think any party wants to go against that (except old commies). 

I think we are applying next week...so, that might be the thing that prodded Swedish gov also to sign this.

[Sardaukar]

Here we go to NATO:

https://yle.fi/news/3-12442140

Both President and PM strongly support applying for NATO membership ASAP.

"As a member of NATO, Finland would strengthen the entire defence alliance. Finland must apply for NATO membership without delay. We hope that the national steps still needed to make this decision will be taken rapidly within the next few days."

Edited May 12, 2022 by Sardaukar

[Sardaukar]

Even though "Daily Heil" is not the most reputable rag, there is, Russian "leaders" show their true nature:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10815861/Russia-threatens-nuke-Britain-Satan-2-missile-just-200-seconds-Finland-10-seconds.html

Incredibly classy. 

[TrustMe]

The Russians seem to have forgotten MAD 😗

[Sardaukar]

What can you expect from totally criminal enterprise?

They know they have snowball's chance in hell conventionally.

i am amused they get so low, but...hey...should not be surprised.

Edited May 14, 2022 by Sardaukar

[BansheeOne]

Quote

Sweden will apply for NATO membership, Finnish parliament vote pending

54m ago

Sweden's government has decided to reverse decades of security policy and formally join NATO. Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson announced the step. Finland's parliament votes on the same plan later.

Sweden's government on Monday announced that it would formally apply for NATO membership. The EU member, which remained neutral throughout the Cold War, has rapidly reappraised its position in light of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

"The government has decided to inform NATO that Sweden wants to become a member of the alliance. Sweden's NATO ambassador will shortly inform NATO," said Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson.

The landmark decision comes after Sweden's ruling Social Democrats broke a 73-year policy of "non-alignment" and said on Sunday that they would back NATO membership.

On Monday, a parliamentary debate showed large support for joining the alliance. Out of Sweden's eight parties, only two smaller left-leaning parties opposed the move.

NATO hopes for quick application process

Andersson said she expects it "shouldn't take more than a year" for the alliance's 30 members to ratify Sweden's membership application. 

NATO Deputy Secretary-General Mircea Geoana told DW on Sunday that the alliance will do its best to make sure that Finland and Sweden will have an expedited application process.

"They would add value to their security, to our security, and in general to the transatlantic community," he said.

[...]

https://m.dw.com/en/sweden-will-apply-for-nato-membership-finnish-parliament-vote-pending/a-61814632

[Josh]

It will be interesting to see what pressure will have to be brought against The Sultan to accept membership.

[Yama]

Probably nothing, we will likely kowtow and declare all those Kurds and Gülenists as dangerous terrorists and ship them over.

[BansheeOne]

Actually, Finland and Sweden both being EU members, I suspect the latter will suddenly start dragging its feet on things Erdogan really wants until everyone quietly gives up the mutual blockade in a couple months. It has happened before.

[Yama]

Huh? All Erdogan needs to do is what he did before - start dumping refugees and migrants on the Schengen area, and EU will fold its hand.

[BansheeOne]

When did that ever happen? Not in 2020, when his attempt pancaked on the Greek border. Not in 2016 either, when he threatened that to get visa liberalizations while not revising Turkish anti-terror laws as required, and as a result the additional chapters promised to be opened in the EU accession negotiations as promised in the earlier mutual refugee deal never were. In fact that's the example I had in mind. Outside that deal, Erdogan has always needed European assent more than vice versa; and ever since it was concluded, he has failed to use it for further unilateral gain.

[Mistral]

1 hour ago, BansheeOne said:

When did that ever happen? Not in 2020, when his attempt pancaked on the Greek border. Not in 2016 either, when he threatened that to get visa liberalizations while not revising Turkish anti-terror laws as required, and as a result the additional chapters promised to be opened in the EU accession negotiations as promised in the earlier mutual refugee deal never were. In fact that's the example I had in mind. Outside that deal, Erdogan has always needed European assent more than vice versa; and ever since it was concluded, he has failed to use it for further unilateral gain.

Never mind that the economy now is really bad with official inflation over 70% and the mood in Europe is to stand up to bullies.  Now is not the time to be combative but the Sultan never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

 

[Yama]

On 5/16/2022 at 7:36 PM, BansheeOne said:

When did that ever happen? Not in 2020, when his attempt pancaked on the Greek border. Not in 2016 either, when he threatened that to get visa liberalizations while not revising Turkish anti-terror laws as required, and as a result the additional chapters promised to be opened in the EU accession negotiations as promised in the earlier mutual refugee deal never were. In fact that's the example I had in mind. Outside that deal, Erdogan has always needed European assent more than vice versa; and ever since it was concluded, he has failed to use it for further unilateral gain.

2016 agreement was a victory for Turkey: like many authorians, Erdogan makes outrageous demands so he can settle for a 'compromise' which is still advantegous for him. This is probably his goal in this newest dispute too, and if anything he would probably love if EU gets involved: it won't, though. It's a NATO business.

[BansheeOne]

Not the agreement of March 2016. Erdogan's threat in October/November to renege on it if Turkey didn't get the promised visa liberalization until year's end despite not changing its anti-terror laws as required. Which never happened.

[Sardaukar]

Now all the relevant nuclear-armed nations have given their support (USA, UK and France), that is good enough for me. 

It was total landslide in Finnish parliament, 188-8 for NATO in vote. 

 

[TrustMe]

1 hour ago, Sardaukar said:

Now all the relevant nuclear-armed nations have given their support (USA, UK and France), that is good enough for me. 

It was total landslide in Finnish parliament, 188-8 for NATO in vote. 

 

I'd be warry of the UK support to Finland if I was you. As a country we tend to talk a lot but do nothing to help our allies. Poland in 1939 and Ukraine in 1991 comes to mind.

Edited May 17, 2022 by TrustMe

[wendist]

47 minutes ago, TrustMe said:

I'd be warry of the UK support to Finland if I was you. As a country we tend to talk a lot but do nothing to help our allies. Poland in 1939 and Ukraine in 1991 comes to mind.

Problem here for us is, what choice do we have? If we are on our own Putin will know for sure there will be no nuclear retaliation, or even threat of one, because we don't have any such weapons. That leaves us wide open to nuclear blackmail should Russia feel the need to use it, an issue our politicians have never wanted to adress because they don't hava a solution for it. With the US/UK/France somehow involved then there is at least the possibility of a credible deterrence. Should they fail to deliver then we will be no worse off than if we were on our own but if they do, or more importantly if Putin believe they will, and deterrence work then we will be a hell of a lot better off. 

The one thing that changed everything here was that on February 24 a large chunk of the population in both Finland and Sweden finally understood, really got it, that going alone actually increased the risk of being attacked. The politicians here were taken completely by surprise and have spent the last month catching up rather than leading the way. It took a shot across the bow to wake people up but right now no one can say for sure where this will go or how it will work out.

[Stuart Galbraith]

11 hours ago, TrustMe said:

I'd be warry of the UK support to Finland if I was you. As a country we tend to talk a lot but do nothing to help our allies. Poland in 1939 and Ukraine in 1991 comes to mind.

We did all we could to help Poland in 1939, which was nothing. We couldnt put the RN into the Baltic, because it would be decimated. And even if we had, it had little capablity to affect events on land. Bomber command in 1939 was an unfunny joke.

The real problem is the Poles were led to believe the French would launch an offensive against Germany, in the event of Poland being attacked. And the French did, for about 10 miles or so. They had no interest in progressing further. If they had, they might well have completely toppled the German warplan.

On land, we were the junior partner. We only built the massive Army we subsequently did because of the French capitulation. Did you ever wonder why the Eighth Army got its name? Because 1 through 7 were French. So if the French were not going to march into the Ruhr, little chance we were going to do it by ourselves.

What happened in Ukraine in 1991, other than their voting to leave the Soviet Union?

Edited May 18, 2022 by Stuart Galbraith

[TrustMe]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

...What happened in Ukraine in 1991, other than their voting to leave the Soviet Union?

After the breakup of the USSR, Ukraine kept a number of tactical nukes. But after diplomatic pressure from the US and UK, they agreed to give the nukes to Russia as it was decided that only Russia would retain the use of both strategic and tactical nukes, nuclear powered ships etc... 

In return the UK made assurances that if Russia attacked Ukraine then British forces would intervene to stop them. When Russia invaded Crimera in 2014 the UK government did nothing even after they had agreed to stop them.

[Sardaukar]

16 hours ago, TrustMe said:

I'd be warry of the UK support to Finland if I was you. As a country we tend to talk a lot but do nothing to help our allies. Poland in 1939 and Ukraine in 1991 comes to mind.

Actually, you went to war for Poland. People tend to forget that. 

[Sardaukar]

Finland and Sweden sign some agreements:

Implementing Arrangement for Joint Procurement of Small Arms Family

Also agreement about NLAWs, Carl Gustav 84s and AT4 Anti-tank weapons, for having common instead of separate purchases. Also ammunition and training equipment purchases.