0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
100 $
FEBRUARY 2023

Why Won’t Russia Offer Sweden & Finland A Deal To NOT Join NATO?

Support SouthFront

Why Won't Russia Offer Sweden & Finland A Deal To NOT Join NATO?

Illustrative Image

Written by Eric Zuesse

Sweden and Finland have jointly and together been seeking membership in NATO, but Turkiye is blocking Sweden’s bid unless and until Sweden will comply with Turkiye’s own national-security demands. Russia would be severely endangered if Finland joins NATO — much more than if Sweden does — but it’s a joint bid, and Finland has said they won’t join unless both do. Russia can offer both Sweden and Finland a deal that would improve the national security of all three countries, but has thus far failed to do so. It would break the current deadlock and quite possibly lead to the termination of NATO. I am mystified as to why Russia still hasn’t offered the deal.

On January 8th, Russia’s RT News headlined “Sweden complains NATO member is asking for the impossible” and reported that a deadlock on Turkiye’s allowing Sweden into NATO exists because Sweden won’t extradite to Turkiye a separatist Kurd whom Turkiye alleges had been involved in the 15 July 2016 attempted coup against Erdogan. It’s a deadlock which has postponed — and could block — the entrance into NATO of both Sweden and Finland.

When Finland and Sweden announced, shortly after Russia’s 24 February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, their intentions to abandon their neutrality throughout the Cold War and jointly to seek to become members of America’s anti-Russian military alliance, NATO, the immediate response of Putin was to say that Russia wouldn’t be disturbed by that (though it would potentially enable America to place its missiles on the Russian-Finnish border only a 7-minute missile-flight-time away from nuking Moscow).I was shocked by that statement. Then, on 12 May 2022, Russia’s RT bannered “Finland’s NATO membership will trigger response – Moscow”. The next day, I headlined “Russia’s Weak Response to Finland’s Joining NATO” and proposed instead that Russia should offer Finland and Sweden a national-security deal that would be in the best interests of all three countries, the Finnish, Swedish, and Russian peoples. I argued that, contrary to the statements by Russia’s Putin and Medvedev, who had said that what is at issue here is only a traditional “balance of power” issue, that’s not so (not at all), and that:

It wouldn’t “preserve ‘the balance of power'” [for Sweden and Finland to join NATO] because U.S./NATO will then be in position to place America’s nukes on Russia’s border near its brain-center Moscow, whereas Russia isn’t in position to place its nukes on America’s border near its brain-center Washington DC.

If Finland joins NATO, then America will station its missiles on Finland’s Russian border, 507 miles from Moscow, and that is 7 minutes away from blitz-nuking Moscow.

During the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, America threatened to initiate nuclear war against the Soviet Union if the Soviet Union would position nuclear missiles in Cuba, 1,134 miles from Washington DC, which would be about 10 minutes away from blitz-nuking Washington (but would have required much longer to reach Washington back in 1962).

Consequently, Russia now is in at least as dangerous a situation if Finland joins NATO as America was in during the Cuban Missile Crisis when America was threatening to launch a nuclear invasion against Russia if U.S.S.R. placed missiles in Cuba.

Furthermore: unlike America and the Soviet Union during the Cuba Missile Crisis, when BOTH nations were willing to negotiate a peaceful end to that Crisis, Russia is willing to negotiate a peaceful settlement this time around but America is not and has repeatedly refused to do so. Clearly, America is heading for conquest.

Consequently, Russia must now, if it is to adhere to the standards that both Kennedy and Khrushchev adhered to in 1962, make absolutely clear now to Finland’s Government that if and when Finland will join NATO, then Russia will have no alternative to blitz-nuking not only Finland but simultaneously nuking all other NATO-member nations.

Well, there actually IS an alternative: Russia’s Government can cede its sovereignty to America and begin negotiations on a surrender to the U.S. Government.

Russia’s current vaguely worded threat against Finland is just a vague way of doing that. However, another alternative exists for Russia, but one that Vladimir Putin seems not to be considering, at all, even though it really is the ONLY sensible one for Russia to do, and it would adhere to the model that JFK adhered to in 1962. But let’s first review what has led up to this Crisis, so as to place the Crisis into its proper historical context:

Russia’s first strategy against further enlargement of NATO was to demand, on 15 December 2021, to the U.S. Government; and, two days later, to America’s main anti-Russian military alliance, NATO; that NATO would never add any new member-nations — especially not Ukraine. This demand was firmly rejected, on 7 January 2022, by both America and its NATO arm. Worse yet for Russia: after Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24th, hoping thereby to prevent at least that country joining NATO, both Finland and Sweden were so scared that they might be invaded next, that both countries expressed in early April 2022 a desire to join the anti-Russian alliance, and were welcomed by America and its NATO arm to apply to join. So, even if Russia wins its war in Ukraine, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will have actually failed, because NATO seems now more likely even than before to increase — exactly the opposite of what Russia had been intending.

A more effective strategy by Russia might nonetheless still be possible. If so, I think that it would be something like this:

Russia will announce that its nuclear missiles will be targeted ONLY against the U.S. and its allies, including all NATO member-nations, no neutral or not-U.S.-allied nations. Consequently: Sweden, Finland, Ukraine, and any other nation that isn’t in NATO or otherwise treaty-bound militarily with the United States, will not be targeted by any Russian nuclear missiles.

In other words: any new NATO member-nation will thereby become a target added to Russia’s list for destruction in any WW III that might transpire between the United States and Russia.

Consequently, if  Finland or Sweden join NATO, then that nation’s likelihood of becoming annihilated if and when a Third World War starts, will enormously and suddenly increase, merely on account of that nation’s having become a NATO member.

Furthermore, Russia will simultaneously be announcing that if any nation wishes to have an assurance that Russia will never, under any circumstance, invade it, then Russia will welcome from that nation a request for such an assurance from Russia; and Russia will include in that announcement explicit invitations not only to Finland and Sweden, but to all other nations which have, at some time, expressed an intention or a possible future intention to join either NATO or one of America’s other anti-Russia military alliances, such as AUKUS.In this regard, Russia will also state that if ever Russia were to provide to a nation such an assurance and subsequently to violate it, then Russia would not only be violating its own tradition of rigidly adhering to international treaties that it has signed, but would also thereby be forfeiting any and all of its rights under international law, by doing so. In other words: Russia would, in advance, be surrendering to any country that it would subsequently be violating by its having invaded the country that it had promised never to invade. This in-advance promise to forfeit all of Russia’s rights under all international laws in any such circumstance, would be a surrender in-advance, under all existing international laws; and, consequently, under the arrangement that is being proposed here, there would be no nation in the entire world that has, or ever did have, so strict an international legal obligation as Russia would be having under this proposed arrangement.

Finally: this proposed arrangement will be offering, to all existing member-nations of NATO and of America’s other anti-Russian military alliances, a promise that if and when any such existing member-nation will quit that anti-Russian military alliance, Russia will be happy to — at the moment that this is done — automatically provide to that nation the same legal commitment never to invade that nation, as has just been described here.In other words: the proposed arrangement will be offering, to the entire world, a stark and clear choice between two options: on the one hand, being allied with the most aggressive nation in all of the world’s history — the nation that sanctions, coups, and outright invades, any nation that fails to cooperate with its goal to replace the United Nations as being the ultimate arbiter of international laws, by the United States as being, instead, the ultimate arbiter of what it calls “the rules-based international order” (in which all of those ‘rules’ come ultimately from whomever rules the U.S. Government).  Versus, on the other hand: building upon and remaking the U.N. into what had been the original intention for it by its creator and namer, U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, which was for the U.N. to replace the historically existing (until now) rule-of-force by-and-between contending international empires, by, instead, a peaceful and democratic international order, in which there will be a “United Nations” which will be a worldwide federation of all nations, in which international laws will be produced by the global legislature of duly authorized (under each individual nation’s own internal laws) representatives; and adjudicated by the global Supreme Court, and enforced by the sole global possessor and user of strategic weaponry, the U.N. itself, so that penalties that are ruled by this global Court of international relations can be enforced against the Government of any nation that has been ruled by this Court to have violated the rights of any other nation’s Government. In this understanding of the U.N.’s proper scope of power and of authority, the U.N. will have no authority and no power regarding the Constitution or laws of any nation that apply only internally to a given nation, but ONLY to international laws, which pertain only to international relations, never to a nation’s internal matters. FDR’s objective was to make another World War — another war between empires — impossible, by eliminating all empires, and replacing all of them by an international democracy of nations. Russia, in the proposed arrangement, would be striving to achieve, for the entire world, what FDR had planned for the post-WW-II world, but which tragically became promptly changed and abandoned by his immediate successor, Harry S. Truman — the founder (on 25 July 1945) of the present global U.S. empire (and of its hamstrung currently existing — Truman’s — U.N.).

There still might be time enough for Putin to make that offer, not only to Finland, but to the world.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Support SouthFront

SouthFront

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
37 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
USA#1!

USA-NATO have russia surrounded… and will attack from all sides after Ukraine weakens it enough…heheheh

hash
failed
CentralAsianStudies

Meanwhile the USA rots from the inside as such a high degree it cannot even sustain its own self any longer. The US military is not designed to fight modern armies, just ones that lack and defenses. NATO and company can’t even handle the Afghanistan Sandal boys (no offense to those wearing sandals). And if you come back that neither could Russia, just remember that the sandal boys were well armed, supplied and trained by USA then. Yet the current sandal boys had minimal support and totally forced USA out with their tail between their legs and scared shitless.

Nonetheless

Right, and russia is not rotting from inside… all good in omsk…

Jens Holm

Bvadr bork

Kev not Kiev

Pass the anus borg sauce, with a side of sea salt spearm drippings…

Kev not Kiev

Yes, yes, yes…just like in the game of Risk…brilliant plan man, so smart, smarter than a smart city, smarter than a smart grid, smarter than a smart phone, as smart as a bag of orange pips for nibbling on at the ball game…

Des Hanrahan

Any offer from Russia is irrelevant . The governing elites of both Sweden and Finland are neoliberals who are entirely in America’s pocket . This “lets join NATO” idea did not come out of the blue ; it has been worked on for years . Over the past 10-20 years there has been a process of increased co-operation between the two countries militaries and those of the US/NATO . This has been to soften up the public .

hash
failed
Jens Holm

Its must be NEON liberales which fit Your level.

Nonetheless

Yes yes we can all trust russia not to invade… like Ukraine did…

hash
failed
Traveller

Eric is obviously unaware that both Sweden and Finland are ruled by USA satanists, and there is no negotiating with them. Very naive text indeed, like they are both sovereign countries of a sort. Pathetic, actually.

hash
hashed
Jens Holm

Very mjuch as some has lost a screwdriver in Your brain.

Kev not Kiev

It’s as exciting as a pair of pliers in your gear shifter box…

Jens Holm

Rustica is not in that. Who cares about them.

hash
hashed
Kev not Kiev

Rules based order – translated – Corruption based chaos…

hash
failed
Jon

Turkey has been a rather fickle NATO member, oriented as it is to the east and south, envisioning a new Ottoman Empire. Turkey never really made it into “Europe”.

Finland and Sweden are critical pieces to the NATO puzzle. If it costs NATO Turkey, it’s worth it.

However, Turkey will relent on its demand to Sweden. Turkey needs the NATO umbrella. History shows that Russia is the greatest risk to all its neighbors. That’s why Sweden and Finland, in particular, want in. If Ukraine had been NATO, Putin never would have pulled the trigger. The risk the Kurds pose to Turkey pales in comparison to the risks posed by Russia.

South

Several votings shows that 80% of the swedes do not want to join NATO.

hash
hashed
Kev not Kiev

Russia could offer Norway horses… for when they stop selling real cars in 2025, and promise not to accidentally nuke them and their pipeline to Poland if they take the horses and play nice…

hash
failed
Nigger the Cucky on Roids

Gas guzzler country that is living 100% on dirty oil sales, bans cars in 2025 🖕🖕🖕🏳️‍🌈🖕🏳️‍🌈🖕🏳️‍🌈 Fucking Nazis.

I guess the nighers of the North can afford electric cars since their oil and gas extraction business revenues increased 5 fold.

MarkU

Making deals with Western countries is futile, Finland have already reneged on a neutrality treaty with the RF and as Merkel said recently “We (the West) are warmongering whores with no honour and our word means nothing” OK not exactly those words but that is what it amounted to.

hash
hashed
schultz

Why Won’t Russia Offer Sweden & Finland A Deal To NOT Join NATO?

Russia knows Sweden and Finland are suck ups to the West and are too far under the Western fiat money spell.

hash
hashed
Shit country makes shit military

How does it feel to be alone and vassal of China and militarily ridiculed in Ukraine? 🤣

Julll

Russia could setup the equivalent of Minsk. So it get binded on own side while western scum instal their military equipment anyway

hash
hashed
Ojhnny Zepp

Nato bid was a nato organized coup in finland. It was based on a 1000 selected person poll in a msm news site. Nato membership should be a case of referendum, but traitorous finnish politicians decided to screw the finns. I’m a finn and horrified by pur country’s msm hate speech against russia. the situation is just undescribable.

hash
hashed
Scarpantibus

Sanna Marin deserves a shining deal of steel

hash
hashed
kotromanic

Most of the western leaders have gone through the same schools. They share the same opinions. Many have been funded by pro us ngo’s and joined “young leaders” panel long bevor they came into their positions. They would be nothing without the us. There is no need for further bribe they think alike.

No russian offer would ever be considered. That’s the result of sleeping while the us groomed the future leaders from young on. You wake up and every leader in the world loves the us. No matter what the individual populations may think.

hash
hashed
leviathan

They even all dress the same in this dark blue and white. On a fun day in blue and yellow. A WEF school uniform. Diversity? Like hell, they are neocon clones.

Johannes Ekhman

Pro Russia militaristic zealots and Russian Siloviks can’t understand that world is moving to renewables and Russia is biggest loser in this change. Sweden, Norway and Finland are the first European nations completely abandoning fossile energy during 2030’s. Russia – the rusty old stinking gas station – has not many years left to use fossile fuels as weaponry. It has blundered things now even in Ukraine.

hash
hashed
Last edited 28 days ago by Johannes Ekhman
leviathan

Do not extrapolate the West, 12% of the world population, to mean the whole world. Only the West, 12% of humanity only, is moving towards renewables. The other 88% of humanity will use all energy, including renewables were it make sense.

leviathan

“….world is moving to renewables…..” Then 1. why does Scholz and Van der Leyen beg for LNG gas from Qatar and Canada? 2. Why does Poland open a new pipeline for gas from Norway? 3. Why is Europe paying up to 5 time the old Russia piped gas price for LNG from USA? 4. Why does Macron complain USA gas is too expensive?

leviathan

“….rusty old stinking gas station…..” – wrong again. Gas is the cleanest energy producing only water and carbon dioxide as the end products both non toxic. Unlike the toxic plastics and metals in renewable energy products like solar panels, windmills and batteries.

leviathan

you have no idea how integrated economies, industries and energies work.

Shit country makes shit military

Rooskies bragged that “winter is coming”. Well, harsh winter has come – to Russia. At least you can use your gas and oil Europe won’t buy. Russia is hanging on the ropes and deserves it. 🤣

Kev not Kiev

Why wont they offer Sweden and Findland a better deal? BECAUSE THEY DON’T FUCKING DESERVE ONE!

hash
failed
Elgar

Since 2007 Russia’s economic growth have been weak and pandemic and war in Ukraine has weakened Russia a lot while Fenno-Scandinavian nations have passed finance crisis and pandemic very well. Their “energy wende” has been much more successfull than that in Germany.

hash
hashed
Sadde

The leading parties in both countries would definitely reject any such offer from Russia. Stupidity reigns supreme in both countries, otherwise they would not have tried to make a target of both countries. Any nuclear attack on the two biggest cities in both countries would render 20% of the populations dead and totally dysfunction. On the other hand the same stands for the majority of countries in NATO. Call it Stupidstan.

hash
hashed
Redguard

This is a very naïve article. It’s obvious that Russia will not just randomly decide to attack Finland or Sweden. Russia is quite satisfied with the borders with these countries. There is absolutely zero intent or desire from Russians to attack Finland and even less for Sweden, BUT the problem is that USA has a massive intent and wish to use Finland for attacking Russia, so they are bribing Finish and Swedish corrupt politicians to become their servants.

hash
hashed
Curmudgeon

Reply to Des Hanrahan`s comment. Other than “Any offer from Russia is irrelevant” I agree with your assessment. Because Sweden and Finland are ruled by “neoliberals” aka globalist scum, they are already “woke” and in rapid decline. There is no point in Russia even considering to make an offer to them, they are beyond saving.

hash
hashed
37
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x