In Kaikonen’s opinion, the two countries joining the military alliance is important, especially from the point of view of national defense.
Both membership applications have already been ratified by 28 of NATO’s 30 members, and Slovakia joined the group at the end of September. The applications still require the ratification of Hungary and Turkey.
Turkey has continued to express its reservations regarding the possible membership of Finland and especially Sweden.
Mika AaltolaDirector of the Foreign Policy Institute, stated Ilta-Sanom on Tuesday that Finland should start thinking about its response to a situation where Turkey ratifies its application, but not Sweden. However, he estimates that both membership offers will probably be ratified at the turn of the year.
“I think it could happen before spring, i.e. at the turn of the year, but it’s definitely not set in stone,” Aaltola said.
Kaikkonen told YLE on Thursday that the defense administration is currently investigating various forms of NATO’s presence in Finland and weighing what would be justified from the point of view of both the Finnish military alliance and security. He reminded that joining the alliance does not oblige a country to host nuclear weapons, permanent military bases or troops.
“The most important thing is that it is something that also strengthens Finland’s security. The time for these decisions will come later. The most important thing at the moment is finalizing the membership,” he said.
He pointed out that the alliance has not established permanent bases or redeployed nuclear weapons to its member states in the 21st century. He added that Finland, as a member, must accept that nuclear weapons are part of the alliance’s defense and deterrence policy.
He considers the placement of nuclear weapons in Finland unlikely.
Aleksi Teivainen โ HT
Source: The Nordic Page