Sweden and Finland set to join NATO in May

[Badger]

It is concerning, the potential for NATO expansion to create a world war.
I hope it never gets to that point.

Offs, tim, give it a rest. Putin has been threatening invasion of these countries which drove them into the arms of nato, with 110% justification.

Don't attempt to blame the NATO for this or even offer some half-assed both sides analysis because it is just plain wrong-headed.

[Badger]

It is concerning, the potential for NATO expansion to create a world war.
I hope it never gets to that point.

Offs, tim, give it a rest. Putin has been threatening invasion of these countries which drove them into the arms of nato, with 110% justification.

Don't attempt to blame the NATO for this or even offer some half-assed both sides analysis because it is just plain wrong-headed.

You need to look at things from a global perspective here. What happens in Ukraine is and will continue to have global impact, shaping how China might act towards us, among other things.
There have been multiple occasions in which we have had global-spanning international alliances spanning the globe. The late 1800s and early 1900s were one such occasion, and the 1930s were another.
In both cases, we saw world wars.
The world is composed of various power centers fighting for influence and territory using all the things in their disposal, and always has. And the more a NATO-type alliance expands and the more of them there are, the more flash points can create a global conflict between said power centers. Are we to myopically assume that tensions will just die off completely, forever, just because said countries are NATO members? Do we know how things will look like 20 or 25 years from now? How do we know that the tools we've used won't be turned onto us?
Of course the political will for war needs to exist, but that's something that tension can go a long way towards furnishing. When there is a sense of desperation or urgency, of course political leaders will find it relatively much more expedient to roll the dice.
The post-World War II world order could be destroyed by a major international war on multiple continents. We already see a proliferation of pacts and other things on the world stage. Biden himself understands this too, I think. He's flat-out committed to no Americans fighting in Ukraine. Good for him.
All this isn't "half-a**ed both sides analysis". It's recognition of geopolitical reality.
What you and I prefer is far from guaranteed to be the dominant paradigm globally anyway. To just assume that it will be in perpetuity, or act as such, is foolish. Geopolitical power knows neither morality nor political ideology. The real world ain't like a comic book where the baddies, as a rule, tend to lose in the end.

One can make such a generic "more International entanglements and alliances creates additional theoretical chances 4 some Flashpoint to occur leading to International conflict" about literally every treaty or military Alliance the US is involved in. By that logic perhaps we should attempt to dismantle NATO to reduce the number of flashpoints as you repeatedly refer to them.

But you are not being realistic. The issue here is rather whether or not Finland and Sweden likely joining NATO creates any tangible increased threat of War, balance versus the additional solidification of both Swedish and Finnish, plus general NATO and American interests, and likewise minimizes the chance that Russia would attempt to pull another Ukraine style invasion of Finland if and when they get the chance. The answers are quite clearly know, and absolutely yes in that order.

Overall, realistically, Finland becoming part of NATO markedly decreases the likelihood of War through reducing its primary threat being Russian expansionism. The cost benefit analysis of this is so lopsided that frankly this decision is pretty much a no-brainer, realistically speaking.

[Badger]

It is possible for both of these things to be true at the same time:

1) Russia has totally legitimate national interests and security concerns, and yes the West went badly wrong during and after the fall of the USSR in not sufficiently understanding and assisting these;

2) Russia's present conduct is totally outrageous and indefensible, and what happened previously is absolutely no excuse - the rest of the world is totally entitled to react appropriately, and that includes its neighbours pursuing whatever makes them feel most secure.

Did number one really occur though to a dramatic degree? I mean, ensuring that each European countries like Poland, Hungary a d the Baltics would have the protection of NATO to avoid what's happening in Ukraine is even in twenty-twenty hindsight a completely valid, Justified, and War risk reducing move. If anything the West was too timid in not extending such an agreement to Ukraine, which of course had it been accomplished would have avoided this entire bloody invasion.

I also don't recall that America's celebrations over the fall of Communism in Russia being of a particularly in your face Style.

[Badger]

Speaking of self-fulfilling prophecies, this is entirely of Putin's own doing:

For Putin, a Nordic Nightmare Is Springing to Life

-----------

It is concerning, the potential for NATO expansion to create a world war.
I hope it never gets to that point.

Russia apparently doesn't have the capacity to wage a war, let alone a world war.  I wouldn't worry.   

This article also says:

There was initial alarm as Turkey, a longtime NATO member, signaled this week that it might seek to block the Nordic countries’ joining the alliance. But on Saturday, a spokesman for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey walked back any potential challenge, saying that Turkey was merely trying to ensure that all alliance members’ security concerns were heeded.

So Turkey must have got what they wanted.

proved.

Probably promises, to what degree of enforceability is unknown, for Sweden to provide Intelligence on pkk activities there.

[Badger]

Upending 200+ years of military non-alignment for... what, exactly? Is Sweden's security really at greater risk today than at any point since the time of Napoleon?

Since the Nazi occupation of Norway at least, yes.

This isn't exactly rocket science levels of diplomacy.

Very large military aggressive country bordering Sweden and Finland invades neighboring country then threatens Sweden and Finland that they are next.

Sweden and Finland. Gee, we really don't want to be invaded. Hey nato, can we join you guys so it becomes highly unlikely will be invaded?

Nato. Sure, come on in!

Russia and various shills for putin. This is all NATO's fault!1!!

[Badger]

Upending 200+ years of military non-alignment for... what, exactly? Is Sweden's security really at greater risk today than at any point since the time of Napoleon?

Since the Nazi occupation of Norway at least, yes.

This isn't exactly rocket science levels of diplomacy.

Very large military aggressive country bordering Sweden and Finland invades neighboring country then threatens Sweden and Finland that they are next.

Sweden and Finland. Gee, we really don't want to be invaded. Hey nato, can we join you guys so it becomes highly unlikely will be invaded?

Nato. Sure, come on in!

Russia and various shills for putin. This is all NATO's fault!1!!

If Sweden's longstanding military non-alignment culture can withstand both world wars, then I think it can withstand a guy barely even able to conquer any of Ukraine.

Maybe yes, maybe no. To my knowledge in World War 1 the Central Powers never made any particular / threats towards Swedish neutrality. In WWII obviously they had to be on their best behavior of neutrality for 90% of the war or risk being invaded by either Hitler or Stalin. It's not like they had the choice of joining a military Alliance to protect as opposed to expose them until literally mid 1945 given the German troops in Norway didn't surrender until nearly a month after VE Day. I think it is manifestly clear that, if Sweden hypothetically could have joined a military alliance with the Allies that would have somehow lessened its chance of invasion by either Germany or the soviets, it would have grabbed it with both hands and justifiably so.

But those are Completely apples to oranges comparisons. Today they have a significant existential threat, and the option of a solid military Alliance to dramatically reduce said threat. Again, a diplomatic no-brainer for which no one but Putin himself is responsible. (Shrug).

[Badger]

The ugly fact is Edgrogan has NATO by the balls here. As admitting Sweden and Finland are so important at the moment, I fear we have to largely appease for now hopefully not at the expense of extraditing those 30 individuals at least, and then once the ink is dry put him on a tripwire notice that if he f**** around again he'll find out regarding sanctions. But if he's a good boy he'll get what he wants, again, at least for now.

[Badger]

NATO is an alliance expressly aimed at strengthening member states' national security. Turkey has been a member for decades while Finland and Sweden now want to be in. If Finland and Sweden are actually supporting Kurdish independence fighters using violent means, I don't think it is strange at all for Turkey to demand concessions before they can enter NATO. And I also think it is ridiculous for Swedish foreign policy to be hijacked by one Kurdish MP who apparently holds a massive amount of power.

Yeah I actually agree with this. No love for Erdogran, but the PKK are terrorists and if Sweden is turning a blind eye to them that deserves a response.

They are terrorists in the sense that the US (and UK) desperately want Turkey on-side, and officially designating them terrorists is the price. Turning a blind eye to Turkish genocide is a price the US is very willing to pay. Same reason why the West didn't come rushing to the aid of the Armenians in the way it has with Ukraine...

In retrospect, perhaps our recognizing The Armenian Genocide last year was a bit premature. We could have potentially used a promise not to do so at least for the foreseeable future as alternative leverage against turkey. I'm not saying I opposed that recognition-quite the opposite- but it's fairly symbolic and has more impact on turkeys view of the world than our own. Priorities and all that.

[Badger]

NATO is an alliance expressly aimed at strengthening member states' national security. Turkey has been a member for decades while Finland and Sweden now want to be in. If Finland and Sweden are actually supporting Kurdish independence fighters using violent means, I don't think it is strange at all for Turkey to demand concessions before they can enter NATO. And I also think it is ridiculous for Swedish foreign policy to be hijacked by one Kurdish MP who apparently holds a massive amount of power.

Yeah I actually agree with this. No love for Erdogran, but the PKK are terrorists and if Sweden is turning a blind eye to them that deserves a response.

They are terrorists in the sense that the US (and UK) desperately want Turkey on-side, and officially designating them terrorists is the price. Turning a blind eye to Turkish genocide is a price the US is very willing to pay. Same reason why the West didn't come rushing to the aid of the Armenians in the way it has with Ukraine...

In retrospect, perhaps our recognizing The Armenian Genocide last year was a bit premature. We could have potentially used a promise not to do so at least for the foreseeable future as alternative leverage against turkey. I'm not saying I opposed that recognition-quite the opposite- but it's fairly symbolic and has more impact on turkeys view of the world than our own. Priorities and all that.

Not recognizing one of the worst genocides ever committed should never be used as a political tool, it was a disgrace it took so long.

Never Say Never. Recognizing it in a vacuum was the right thing to do and indeed long overdue. However, if given a choice in 2022 where we had not yet made such recognition that if we held off doing so at least a few more years it would permit Sweden and Finland a relatively seamless entry into NATO without having to conduct some very sketchy extraditions of Kurdish activists, I frankly would be okay with that.

As morally correct is it the recognition of the Armenian Genocide is, it's still fundamentally a symbolic gesture. Admission of Sweden and Finland into NATO helps ever-so-slightly squeeze the Vice on Putin's War Machine in the Ukraine which is actively killing thousands.