>> If that would be the case that we join, well my response would be that you
caused this, look at the mirror. >> So that is the president of Finland discussing
a potential joining or application to join NATO in the wake of Russia's war on Ukraine.
And his response to Vladimir Putin, very upset about that possibility.
Finland and Russia by the way share about an 820 mile long border and both Finland and now Sweden
are considering joining NATO because of this latest aggression from Russia. So on Thursday,
Finland's president, that was Sauli Niinisto, that's not how you say it.
And Prime Minister Sanna Marin who is very cool, went clubbing, I like her.
Anyway strongly backed Finland's NATO membership. NATO membership
would strengthen Finland security, they said in a joint statement. As a member of NATO,
Finland would strengthen the entire defense alliance. Finland must apply
for NATO membership without delay. Over in Sweden, again, Sweden doesn't share a border with
Russia, does share a border with Finland, there's a little more tepid over there.
Right now Sweden's ruling party, the Social Democrats, are having internal debates about
reversing their long-held stance opposing NATO membership, paving the way for Sweden
to make its NATO aspirations known within the coming days. Finland move first but
the two are closely coordinating and will likely apply for NATO membership in tandem.
So again, they're gonna do stuff together, they're gonna move as a unit. One is not as convinced,
the two countries have been although part of the EU, militaristically nonaligned. And again,
one of the consequences of this is that Russia cut off energy supplies to Finland. Finland gets
about 10% of its energy from Russia so that was one of the consequences but there could be more.
So this is from Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, on Thursday Russians
Foreign Ministry said that Helsinki must be aware of the consequences of its move
and threatened a corresponding symmetrical response. And they even, I think said some
kind of military technical something something something. But before I kick it to you Anna,
let's just look at how the people on the ground are feeling not just politicians.
So over in Finland, support for NATO typically hovered in the 20% or so range, in January 2022
less than 30% of the Finnish public was in favor of NATO membership. After Russia's invasion it
rose 53% to an incredible 76% in May, huge majority there. Then over in Sweden however,
it's a little bit less but still support for joining NATO has jumped by double digits
since January, it's about 57% according to April polls, it's not as dramatic as it is in Finland.
Again, perhaps because of that border. But we kind of could have seen this coming.
Anna thoughts on this now, what seems like NATO expansion potentially.
>> Yeah, I think Putin really nailed it. The one thing that he claimed to wanna prevent
is likely to happen now and while I still have my critiques in regard to NATO, I do now
understand and acknowledge that there is a purpose for it.
Before Russia's invasion my worldview, my thoughts on NATO was listen, it is considered provocative
by Russia, Russia isn't a threat. I don't think that Russia is gonna go against its own
economic self interest in invading the countries that we think it's gonna invade.
Turns out Putin is not a rational actor, is willing to essentially engage in a war
that is counterproductive for his own country for his own stated goals.
So if I were Finland or if I were a politician in Finland or Sweden, yeah,
I would look at what's happening to Ukraine right now and ask myself, would this happen if Ukraine
had already been part of NATO? And the likelihood is very unlikely. And so I would definitely wanna
be part of this alliance specifically to serve as a deterrent for Russian aggression.
That's not to say that NATO is perfect, that's not too at all whitewash the issues with NATO,
and and its actions in the past. But just thinking about it logically,
a rational actor would look at this situation and say, what can I do to protect my own country and
Finland and Sweden have decided to really do a 180 on this issue and try to join the alliance.
>> Right, and I would agree with you on, it makes absolute rational sense and I'm not gonna sit here
in the country that doesn't have a border with a belligerent nation.
Where that belligerent nation we've got enough of that going on inside our borders
and say that it doesn't seem like it makes sense for the people and the politics of this country.
I will say that, I mean painting Russia into a corner is pretty much what's happening. They've
painted themselves into a corner and I would love to see NATO serve more of a function than
just militaristic. And I know it does, I know there is some non military but intelligence
services, thwarting disinformation, that kinda stuff that I do think is good.
But ultimately I'm like, this has to be much more international and also demilitarized to a certain
degree and so I just wonder what is the purpose? It does kind of feel like a Russian content,
I mean it is a Russian containment apparatus at this point which clearly is necessary.
But I would obviously hope to avoid any kind of actual all and out war and I think
we're all agreed on that. I did wanna point out though,
Finland and Sweden have been everything but partners in NATO. Excuse me, everything but
members of NATO but they've been partners, so they become strong partners with NATO there basically,
as close as the country can get to the alliance without formally being in it.
They do military exercises together, share some intelligence. Both Sweden and Finland
supported NATO's mission in Afghanistan. Oops, and NATO's open door remained well open to Sweden and
Finland but it was not something either had to pursue unless the security situation in
Europe drastically shifted which is exactly what happened when Russia began threatening Ukraine.
The most recent countries to join NATO where Montenegro and Northern Macedonia,
it took them I believe 20 and 18 months each or 18 and 20 months. So it's not an immediate,
this application would take a while. It's not a yes, all of a sudden you're in NATO. But if
you're looking down the road a couple of years here as to when Russia gets finally booted out
of Ukraine or not or takes control of the eastern part of it, that two year waiting
period might be kicking in just the right time if you're trying to keep your country safe.
I wanted to also just point out because I didn't know the history of Finland and Russia and I'm
like, what's the history there. It is interesting that Russia has obviously bullied Finland around
before. So under Joseph Stalin's Red Army, Finland was attacked in 1939 which became
known as the Winter War, which Finland fought off the soviet invasion attempt on its own.
Finland's then pleas for Western allies for military assistance went unanswered, resulting in
Helsinki allying itself with Nazi Germany in the second World War against the Soviet Union between
1941 1944. Remember how Americans love to play sort of heroes in that war but it took a while
for the United States specifically to get involved in that war and Finland I guess needed an ally.
So then after the Cold War ended eventually Finland was able to step out of Russia shadow
and join the European Union in 95 as well as the Eurozone in 1999. But again,
we're talking about a country relatively small, known for liquorish, I'm like
Finland's not like really on the cutting edge here.
And what I really hope and this is what my hope for NATO, this is gonna sound so
pie in the sky, but it really is around the biggest cause of international conflict and war
which is energy and gas. And can we create a new way, can there be leadership
in these countries that are now feeling so pressed because they are no longer able
to rely on Russian gas to move to things like renewable energies, wind, solar etc.
Rather than, which of course I know we all talk about, fracking nuclear
and coal, any final thoughts on this? >> Yeah, I think you're absolutely right.
Aside from joining military alliances, I think for anyone who has a more internationalist frame of
mind, we need to focus on not being reliant on these questionable foreign governments
due to their access or their natural resources, their fossil fuels and stuff like that.
If we could be more energy dependent, not through doing more of our own drilling and fracking,
which is the story of the planet, but by forming new or alternative forms of energy, clean energy,
we'd be in a far better place. And by the way, I mean that innovation,
if the United States was smart enough we would really be leading the charge on that innovation.
Instead we have China leading the charge when it comes to things like solar panels for instance.
And we're leaving manufacturing jobs on the table
as a result of that and there's an economic component to it that would be
much more beneficial aside from the foreign policy implications as well.
>> But the oil barons and CEOs shan't allow that. They would rather us get
into way more hot wars if it means they can jack up prices and that there's
a run on oil. Renewables might lead to things like democracy and real security, so can't have that.