[INTERVIEW] Finland to join NATO with a new outlook

Diplomacy

Published: 19 Mar. 2023, 16:36 Updated: 19 Mar. 2023, 17:15

[INTERVIEW] Finland to join NATO with a new outlook

Kai Sauer, the Finnish under-secretary of state for foreign and security policy, in an interview at the Finnish Embassy in Seoul on Thursday. [PARK SANG-MOON]

As Finland gets the greenlight from Turkey and Hungary to join NATO, there is no turning back for the Nordic country whose public opinion on Russia has changed drastically since its invasion of Ukraine.

“The Russian aggression on Ukraine was the ultimate reason for Finland to join NATO,” said Kai Sauer, the Finnish under-secretary of state for foreign and security policy, speaking in Seoul on Thursday.

The public support within Finland for joining NATO jumped from around 20 percent before the Russian invasion of Ukraine to nearly 80 percent afterward, according to multiple public polls in the country.

The Nordic nation shares some 1,340 kilometers (832 miles) of border with Russia, where a new fence was being set up as of last month to boost border security.

For the Finns, who have for decades operated a mandatory military conscription system and relied on their national capacities that boast the largest artillery capability in western Europe, joining the alliance was “the right decision” to cope with a different Europe, said Sauer.

“There was a general assessment that what we had was not enough, that we needed guarantees from the alliance, and ultimately, the nuclear guarantee from the United States to be safe,” Sauer said.

The U.S. extended deterrence has also been part of public debates in Seoul in recent months as more South Koreans call for development of the country's nuclear weapons to address security threats from North Korea.

To hear more about where security interests are increasingly converging between Europe and Asia, the Korea JoongAng Daily sat down with Sauer at the Finnish Embassy in Seoul on Thursday. The following are edited excerpts of the interview.

Q. What brings you to Korea this time around?

A. We have regular [in-person] policy consultations with Korea which were put on hold since the pandemic. With Korea we have ongoing inter-governmental, business and people-to-people contacts, but is important to talk to each other directly every now and then. The world has changed dramatically for Europe since our last consultations, and we see the ripple effects also in [this] region.

In the context of such changed world for Europe, where do you see Asian powers like Korea playing a part?

Korea is one of the Asia Pacific Four nations invited to the NATO summit in Vilnius and this shows how certain values are not constrained to Europe or to the transatlantic areas. The way Russia is acting in Europe might set an example for others to follow, which must be condemned. Here in this region you have governments committed to rules-based international order and then others like North Korea, whose recent missile launches deserve to be condemned. There may also be a connection between Ukraine and Taiwan. On Taiwan, we very much hope for the status quo to prevail and the stability to prevail as well.

It seems more likely that Finland will join NATO before Sweden does. Any concerns on how the roadblock at NATO may have damaged the image of the alliance having a united front?

It is our hope that both Finland and Sweden will be NATO members by the time of the summit in Vilnius [in July]. It is not our choice to go through the ratification process separately, but that seems to be the choice given us.

Finland has pursued pragmatic relations with Russia for decades. What has that meant for the country’s economy after the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Russia has been an important trading partner for us. If you look at the map, you can see how close St. Petersburg is to the Finnish border, and the city was an attractive market for the Finnish products, its forest industry and energy companies. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, all these opportunities were not there anymore, but I think for the Finnish companies it was clear from the beginning that there is quite a high risk included in their Russia operations. As we look to alternative markets, we have been discussing with Korea the potential of our commercial cooperation especially in the fields of emerging technologies.

What are your thoughts on the increasing polarization between NATO and Russia and between the United States and China? Has the world entered a so-called new cold war and is there any hope for multilateral institutions to pull through?

We are asking ourselves the same question in Europe. I would argue that there is still legitimacy and power behind the multilateral institutions. They don’t fail just because one member is breaking the rules. This would be the same as arguing that one’s judicial system is irrelevant because one has criminals in society. The UN has delivered when it comes to its response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. For instance, if you look at the Security Council, it is still a platform where you can voice your views and these views have been predominantly against Russia, as they have been at the General Assembly.

As someone with years of career at the UN, how do you respond to calls to de-member Russia from multilateral organizations like the G20 and the UN Security Council?

I used to think that this is not a realistic path, and I am not sure if there is even a technical or legal path to do this, but it deserves to be discussed.

Where do you see the conflict in Ukraine headed? Will the sanctions on Russia play a bigger role over time?

We need to be aware of a key difference in the decision-making systems in Ukraine and Russia. In Russia, the decision to make peace or stop the conflict is made by one person. In Ukraine, you have a democracy with the president, prime minister, parliament, parties and constituents, which means that it can be quite time-consuming and difficult to arrive at a decision on what to do and how to react to the conflict.
The effects of the sanctions on Russia are not immediate because Russian society and economy is quite resilient — it’s a big country with a lot of resources. Again, because it is not a democracy, even when people are under a lot of pressure with certain consumer goods disappearing, this doesn’t have an effect. The sanctions will take time.

BY ESTHER CHUNG [chung.juhee@joongang.co.kr]