Just two years after joining NATO, Finland finds itself navigating a complex landscape of security considerations. Following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the nation saw a staggering shift in public opinion, with nearly 80% of citizens initially supporting NATO membership. This approval culminated in Finland’s accession to the alliance on April 4, 2023. However, fast forward to today, and the narrative has shifted once more. Currently, only about 50% of the Finnish populace expresses trust in the United States, the country to which they have tied their security future.
Prime Minister Petteri Orpo has acknowledged these changing sentiments, indicating a clear awareness of emergent uncertainties. The prior sense of assurance derived from American backing has begun to dim, particularly following the re-election of President Donald Trump. His approach to foreign policy, marked by a transactional ethos, raises questions about the reliability of U.S. commitments to NATO members—a concern emphasized by Finns as they strategize for their national security.
At the heart of Finland's current security planning is a newly considered Plan B, known colloquially as 'Nordic Plus.' This strategic rethinking comes in response to worries surrounding NATO’s Article 5, which asserts that an attack on one ally is an attack on all. The Finnish government is contemplating a military cooperation model involving its Nordic neighbors—Sweden, Norway, the United Kingdom, and potentially France—should traditional avenues for defense falter.
"NATO membership has unlocked significant new potential for military cooperation between Finland and its allies," RUSI reports. With Finland situated strategically and benefiting from its geographical proximity to these nations, the potential for logistical support during conflicts stands to significantly enhance its defense posture.
Finland has already taken steps to bolster this vision, advocating for improvements in Nordic connectivity and infrastructure. The collaboration could yield an air force comprising around 200 modern fighter jets, enhancing regional capabilities. Notably, countries like Norway and Sweden possess the potential to increase their conscription efforts substantially, thereby augmenting military readiness.
Additionally, the United Kingdom is perceived as a serious security partner, one that could provide multi-faceted military support encompassing land, air, and naval operations. France may also play a pivotal role as a military heavyweight, contributing nuclear capabilities and reinforcing collective deterrence. However, how willing these nations are to commit additional resources to such collaborations remains an open question.
On the broader European scene, Finland has actively promoted defense initiatives through the European Commission. The Finnish government has urged EU leaders to convene a defense-focused summit, which indeed took place on March 6, 2025. The importance of collective European security efforts does not escape Finnish policymakers, especially as they contend with the complexities of a changing global landscape.
Yet significant challenges persist. The balance of commitment among Western European countries comes into question, particularly regarding their willingness to shoulder the defense burden should a crisis arise. Historically, nations distanced from Russia, including Finland's immediate neighbors, have been less inclined to perceive threats seriously. This can create tension within the alliance as some countries might exhibit a tendency to free ride off those considered frontline states.
Reflecting on historical precedents, there is a cautionary tale about the efficacy of European powers mistrusting their own capabilities without American leadership. Finland realizes that successful deterrence against Russian aggression hinges not just on its own military readiness but on the broader collective commitment of allied nations. As Ukraine's recent trials have demonstrated, alignment with stronger partners is vital for maintaining security.
But what if these collaborative efforts falter? Finnish decision-makers are acutely aware of this potential reality. Currently, there is little discourse on a Plan C, though the somewhat unspoken possibility exists that, should the European response to Russia's actions weaken, Finland may have to consider rapprochement with its long-time adversary. However, sensitive to national defense concerns, this would only serve as a last resort.
In the present day, moments of reassurance are crucial as Finland attends to the potential ramifications of NATO's uncertain political landscape. The Finnish government remains committed to fostering European security cooperation while simultaneously preparing for an independent defense posture—an intricate balancing act given the global and regional tensions.
In conclusion, Finland's two-year journey within NATO reflects the unpredictable nature of international relations. The evolution of security strategies continues, with an increasing emphasis not only on establishing a robust European security network through the 'Nordic Plus' collaboration but also on keeping channels open to American support—however tenuous it may currently seem. Finland's strategic reserves must remain adaptable and responsive, ensuring that history doesn't repeat itself at the cost of its national integrity.
