Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

presidentti.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#721

Post by ebruchez »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #687
nathanm412 wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not how it benefits Hungary, but what benefits Orban. He's playing the playbook we're all to familiar with lately of antagonizing allies while warming up with Putin. It allows him to solidify his base while attacking the principles of democracy that might threaten his position.

> what benefits Orban Orban’s party won reëlection. Orban is popular [1]. We can crib about disinformation and this or that, but holding Hungary accountable for his decisions is perfectly acceptable. [1] https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-viktor-orban-europ...

> reëlection

I love the use of the diaeresis.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#722

Post by dragonwriter »

aiilns wrote: post #717
kibwen wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is possible to create an alliance against an external threat without defining the threat in advance, as you seem to assume. If Russia wanted to join NATO, they could, and this was an imaginable possibility in the 90s, and could be an imaginable possibility again in the future, in a post-Putin era. A defensive pact is just a pact against anyone who attacks; if the US attacked a NATO country, it would be a pact agai…

Obviously you are unaware of basic history of how NATO was created to halt the communist/Soviet "threat". Please, look up "History of NATO" on Wikipedia. So, for NATO there _was_ a _defined threat_ it sought to protect against. In general, all alliances are made against perceived present or future threats, if you are _actually_ aware of an alliance being made with no external threat in mind, please let me know.

If you delve deeper into the history of NATO, you will realize that the threat that was most critical in the mind of some members and a key reason it exists is the threat of...Germany (who was not, initially, a member, even West Germany) becoming resurgent again once the allied occupation inevitably ended. (Which, ironically, ended up taking much longer than anyone would have expected because of the Cold War.)

NATO was flexible for these purposes because it was not defined or structured around any particular threat, but as a general-purpose regional security organization with a mutual defense commitment adaptable to changing threat circumstances.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#723

Post by simonh »

walrusfromspace wrote: post #597
simonh wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you mean the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia? Unless you're implying that was a sham political cover for naked Serbian self interest. Perish the thought. NATO was defending Kosovo from a war of aggression and ongoing genocide.

>NATO was defending Kosovo from a war of aggression and ongoing genocide. Except that Kosovo was not a part of NATO so you can't say that NATO is a defensive alliance unless you are going the Roman way of pre-emptive defence[1]. [1] All Roman wars were officially defensive because they believed gods would not support an offensive war

I have addressed this point in more detail across thread. Defending other people is still defence.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#724

Post by [deleted] »

DocTomoe wrote: post #389
sph wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can Russia pressure and disrupt the process when NATO members are the ones most afraid of Putin? Finland's doing this only because of Russia's actions. I can't imagine anybody vetoing Finland's membership. In fact, the more the merrier^Hstronger.

NATO won't accept members that are entangled in regional conflicts which may turn into wars soon (that's why Ukraine couldn't apply anymore after 2014). So Russia's solution would be to start such a conflict, sooner rather than later.

[deleted]

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#725

Post by tpmx »

tpmx wrote: post #82

Timeline (from Swedish press yesterday - Omni): Today, May 12: Finnish president Niinistö presents his view on the NATO issue. Friday, May 13: A new Swedish security policy analysis is presented in parliament. All 8 parties represented there have collaborated on this. Saturday, May 14: Heads of the Finnish Social Democratic Party meet and decide on the NATO issue. Swedish and Finnish FMs join a NATO meeting in Berlin…

Added:

Monday May 16: The Swedish government meets, formally decides and then submits the application the same day.

(Source: Expressen, today)

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#726

Post by CRConrad »

dotnet00 wrote: post #671
CRConrad wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny thing is, the USA isn't "paying for everything". The people who whine about NATO members "not paying enough" seem to think all the other NATO countries have got rid of their armies and are defended only by US troops permanently stationed there. That's not how it works: They all have their own defense forces. Trump was whining that those are not big enough (and he was probably even [at least mainly] right there)…

Wasn't Trump specifically complaining about many NATO members not seriously working towards the 2% of their GDPs they were expected to spend on defense? Which was also in the news around February since Germany seriously committed to meeting that requirement in response to Ukraine, thus effectively saying that he was not all too unreasonable to demand that?

Yup. As I said:

>> Trump was whining that those are not big enough (and he was probably even [at least mainly] right there)

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#727

Post by CRConrad »

whb07 wrote: post #630

Hurray for US citizens footing the security bill for more of the EU. If the US goes bankrupt (it already is), makes one wonder if the other countries will come to our aid and supply us with money, weapons, personnel when the time comes.

> Hurray for US citizens footing the security bill for more of the EU.

Sigh... Here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31355478

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31355371

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31352661

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31352202

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#728

Post by antupis »

andruby wrote: post #85
M2Ys4U wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, adding new members requires unanimous consent from all existing members, so it's not guaranteed to be smooth sailing. I highly doubt that any of NATO's members will veto an application from Finland (or Sweden).

How about Hungary and it's seemingly pro-Russian leader, Orban? They could vote against.

Hungary already gave greenlight. I think Turkey is now that might use Veto.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#729

Post by Regic »

rich_sasha wrote: post #496
andruby wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about Hungary and it's seemingly pro-Russian leader, Orban? They could vote against.

Vetos are somewhat overrated. Agents may have the right to veto, but might not have the power to deal with the consequences. Russia has a UN veto and uses it, because they can weather the consequences. Could Hungary piss off all of its allies, trade partners, basically everyone but Russia? Doubtful. Hungary is playing a skillful, if somewhat devious, game of balancing between Russia and the West. But an outright FU t…

The hungarian leading party (fidesz) has already declared they will not veto Ukrain's adoption to the EU so I personally really doubt they would veto Finland's entry to the NATO. They are playing a double-game (sorry, this probably doesn't make sense in english, it's a hungarian expression): Orban had a famous quote he said to EU leaders "don't listen to what I say, only to what I do", which in practice means alienating the EU in rhetoric but not so much in practice. Of course this is not so simple as other EU members also care about the rhetoric too but it still summarizes Orban's geopolitics fairly well. This is not unique either, Merkel had similar "two-faced" approach to Russia and even toward Hungary, Orban is just significantly less popular in the west due to his populist anti-democratic tendencies.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#730

Post by pastacacioepepe »

rich_sasha wrote: post #587
pastacacioepepe wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet Ungary alone is stopping the 6th round of Russia sanctions from the EU. They are not afraid to veto to protect their interests, like any nation should do. It's not a coincidence that von der leyen wants to change the voting system from hunanimity to majority. They don't like to lose, and the rules are fine only as long as they can do what they want. So vetoes have more power than you would let us think.

I think it's been convenient to blame Hungary, but the truth is, plenty of countries are unhappy about banning Russian hydrocarbons, with Germany leading the list. They can weather the consequences of their veto, because there isn't much will to make it happen anyway - i.e. there are no consequences. I can imagine Finland/Sweden being very different. Who benefits/loses from Finland/Sweden joining? These countries are…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN