Nordic governments, working on the basis that Finland and Sweden would have both secured membership approval ahead of NATO’s summit meeting in Vilnius, Lithuania, on July 11, now face the possibility that the political landscape in Turkey might continue to thwart Sweden’s accession ambitions.

Following the reelection of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in late May, U.S. leaders have increased the pressure on Ankara to lift its blockade against Stockholm’s accession.

“We’ll be better off when the process is finalized,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters in Sweden, The Washington Post reported on May 31. “And so we urge both [Turkey] and Hungary, who also has not yet ratified, to ratify their accession as quickly as possible.”

U.S. President Joe Biden has made the issue a priority ahead of the NATO summit next month, telling reporters additional discussions between him and Erdoğan were to follow in early June.

Leading Nordic politicians, including former Swedish Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist, have raised concerns that approval of Sweden’s entry to NATO could be postponed until April 2024 when the United States hosts the 75th anniversary of the alliance in Washington.

Finland, which had initially vowed to join NATO at the same time as Sweden, became a member in April.

Hultqvist’s Social Democratic Party has criticized Sweden’s center-right government for lacking a fallback position should Sweden fail in its mission to join in July.

“What is needed as a plan B is broader Nordic cooperation to ensure Sweden’s security going forward if entry to NATO is delayed. If this is to be a joint project for Sweden, the government must sit down and engage with parties. It must talk plainly about what they are doing to ensure accession to NATO,” Hultqvist said.

Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson’s administration has so far declined to present an alternative course of action.

Erdoğan has repeatedly threatened to block Sweden’s accession to NATO, accusing the Nordic state of refusing to extradite suspected Kurdish militants to Turkey. Erdoğan also labeled Sweden a “country soft on dealing with terrorism.”

The worst-case scenario for Sweden was a victory for Erdoğan that leads to Turkey digging in its heels.

Nordic governments had hoped to convene separate meetings between national defense ministers and military chiefs in the wake of the Vilnius summit. The proposed gatherings would carry the historic importance of being the first between four Nordic NATO states, serving as platforms to build a more unified defense bridge previously impossible given Finland’s and Sweden’s neutral status.

A Nordic region in NATO has serious implications for cross-border, collaborative military organizations like Nordic Defence Cooperation, or NORDEFCO.

Hultqvist views that forum as having the capability to quickly expand its role, especially if Sweden is left waiting.

“The basis for strong Nordic cooperation already exists within the framework of NORDEFCO where there are different agreements between the countries,” he said. “This level of cooperation can be developed and deepened considerably.”

By contrast, Finland’s placement within NATO is expected to take shape in the coming months. The government anticipates it will fall under the Allied Joint Force Command’s headquarters in Brunssum, Netherlands. The command is responsible for NATO’s defense in Europe north of the Alps, an operational region that also covers the NATO-policed Baltic states and Baltic Sea area.

“It may take some time before final answers are found on the issue of placement,” Finnish Defence Minister Antti Kaikkonen said. “Long-term solutions are still open. Finland has so far done business with Brunssum, as we have expected all along. Norfolk is not yet fully operational. Longer-term solutions will fall into place in due course.”

Norfolk, Virginia, houses a sizable NATO headquarters contingent, including the alliance’s Allied Command Transformation, a clearinghouse for next-generation technologies and warfare concepts to which all members contribute staff. An operational element, Joint Force Command Norfolk, also opened there in 2020.

Future talks to deepen defense collaboration in the High North may depend on the collective long-term desire by Nordic governments to fall under the latter structure, as opposed to the Europe-based command.

Norway and Denmark have indicated their preference to be part of Joint Force Command Norfolk, while Finland and Sweden concur, viewing a unified Nordic approach as fundamental to building a robust defense capability that maximizes the pooling of Nordic air, land and naval resources.

The potential for asset pooling is greatest in the area of air defense. Collectively, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland have 200-280 modern fighters — existing and on order — including Saab JAS 39 Gripens and F-35 aircraft types.

A solid Nordic defense capability offers a powerful deterrent to hostile forces in the High North, said Knut Storberget, chair of the Norwegian Defence Commission. That organization delivered a report critical of Norway’s defense spending and capabilities to the Defence Ministry on May 3.

The report advocated the establishment of a “united Nordic region in NATO” to counter potential future aggression by Russia. The panel recommended a dramatic and immediate one-off payment of $6.4 billion to top up the Norwegian defense budget for 2023.

Norway will spend 1.43% of its gross domestic product on defense in 2023, short of NATO’s 2% target. The government is committed to meeting the 2% target by 2026.

Russia regards NATO expansion to Sweden and Finland as a regional threat, said Storberget, who described the relationship between Nordic states and Moscow as having “changed forever” in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

“The new tensions has consequences for Norway and all nations in the High North,” Storberget said. “We are in a new security policy situation where defense capabilities do not correspond to the security situation we find ourselves in, and far less to the challenge picture that is being developed. Greater long-termism, predictability and unifying political solutions are needed.”

Finland had indicated it would prefer a solution that would see the two Nordic unaligned states “jump together” into NATO.

However, Sweden has decided to examine a range of security-related options, including deepening Nordic defense cooperation and urging the European Union to develop enhanced defense policies to offer greater military protection to EU member states that border the highly sensitive Baltic Sea and High North regions.

Unlike Sweden, the Finnish government has set the wheels in motion to fast-track its application to join NATO against the backdrop of heightened security tensions in the region elevated by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Prime Minister Sanna Marin told opposition party leaders, the majority of whom back the government on this issue, that she expects a decision on NATO membership soon.

“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused Finland to review our security strategy,” Marin said at a joint press conference in Stockholm on April 13 hosted by Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson. “I won’t offer any kind of timetable as to when we will make our decision, but I think it will happen quite fast. Within weeks, not within months. The security landscape has completely changed.”

Noting enhanced defense cooperation with Finland, Andersson said Sweden and Finland can be expected to decide whether to apply for NATO membership independently and on different timetables.

The Swedish government is expected to deliver its National Security Report to the Riksdag, the country’s legislature, before May 31.

“What we need to do is to carefully think through what is in the best long-term interests of Sweden, and what we need to do to guarantee our national security, our sovereignty and secure peace in this new heightened tension and situation,” said Andersson.

Finland is expected to reach a decision on joining NATO before the Alliance’s two-day summit meeting slated to commence in Madrid on June 29.

The existing partner status of Sweden and Finland, within their cooperation framework with the alliance, means that neither country is covered under NATO’s Article 5, which considers a hostile attack against one member state to be an attack against all.

The Sarin government presented its updated Defense and Security Risk report to the Eduskuna, Finland’s legislature, on April 13. The report, which set out the pros and cons of joining NATO, serves as the opening salvo in a new national debate to join NATO.

The report outlined the “fundamental changes” Finland would be required to make to its foreign and security policies in order to join the military alliance. It identified the main benefits of joining NATO to include security guarantees embedded in the mutual-defense pledge as well as increased security cooperation through the alliance.

The risks and disadvantages listed by the report included the potential for a hugely negative reaction by Russia if Finland decides to join NATO.

“If Finland and Sweden become Nato members, the threshold for using military force in the Baltic Sea region would rise, which would enhance the stability of the region in the long term,” the report stated.

Finland’s trepidation over a hostile response from the Kremlin was confirmed on April 14 when Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chair of Russia’s security council, signaled that Russia would abandon its nuclear-free-zone policy for the Baltic Sea.

“Russia would need to bolster its defenses in the Baltic Sea region. This would include the deployment of nuclear weapons, if Finland and Sweden were to join NATO. In this situation, there could be no more talk of any nuclear–free status for the Baltics – the balance must be restored,” said Medvedev.

In a poll run by the Finnish Business Policy and Forum (FBPF), released on April 12, some 84% of Finns considered Russia to pose a “significant military threat” to Finland and a constant threat to Europe and Baltic Sea and the High North regions.

A March poll conducted by the FBPF found that a record 60% of Finns favored joining NATO, compared to 26% in October 2021.

Finland and Sweden joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) program in 1994 and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council in 1997. The militarily unaligned Nordic states are designated “most active partners” by NATO.

Sweden has contributed to the NATO-led Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan, the Kosovo Force (KFOR) in Kosovo, and NATO Mission Iraq. For its part, Finland has contributed to NATO-led operations and missions in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Sweden and Finland are among six countries, known as Enhanced Opportunity Partners under the Partnership Interoperability Initiative, that contribute to NATO operations and other alliance projects.