HS Analysis | What would the decision to finalize the NATO law already during this parliament mean?

Parliament a view seemed to have formed on Friday about the fact that the law on joining NATO can be completed already this election period.

This could therefore be done regardless of whether the last two NATO member countries, Turkey and Hungary, have ratified Finland’s membership when the decision was made.

The Parliament’s order of proceedings has caused debate regarding, among other things, the question of whether Finland and Sweden could eventually advance to NATO at different paces, as Turkey has hinted recently.

What would the decision to finalize the NATO law already during this parliament mean?

Officially The timetable for handling the NATO Act is outlined in the Foreign Affairs Committee, whose report is still in progress and which has therefore not taken a position on the matter.

It was organized in Parliament on Friday discoursewhere the groups told each other their positions.

Read more: A consensus is forming in the Parliament on finalizing the NATO Act before the elections – the Foreign Affairs Committee is also unanimous

Law taking it to the end in Finland in this election period would mean from one point of view that Finland would have done its part to strengthen NATO membership.

When Turkey and Hungary, possibly only after this, would proceed with their own ratifications, the progress would be as predictable as possible, and there would be no unfinished business in Finland.

The NATO question would also have been handled from beginning to end by the representatives of the same parliament.

Even with the new parliament, there will hardly be any more obstacles to the matter.

In the background discussions, you can still hear people thinking that it is not possible to rule out the possibility that questions or wishes for additional processing would arise among the new representatives, which could lead to a delay.

Otherwise one can think that the time difference would hardly be very significant, even if the processing is completed during the next parliament.

Speaker Matti Vanhanen (Centre) has assured that, if necessary, he would be ready to convene the parliament also during the election break.

So there is probably no very dramatic difference between the two options.

Processing before the elections also means that the issue has been taken out of the focus of more intensive election debates.

In Finland, foreign policy decisions have been made with broad consensus. The comments heard in the public and in the background on Friday indicated that the timetable discussion was not wanted to be unnecessarily politicized during the elections.

What Does the parliament’s decision then mean a common path for Finland and Sweden?

President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has hinted that Turkey could be willing to accept Finland as a member before Sweden.

In Finland, on the other hand, it has been considered important that the countries move forward on the same path to NATO.

This line has not changed in official speeches, though some kind of temporal difference cannot be ruled out.

Even if the parliament would now deal with the issue, Finland would still have the option to wait for Sweden in principle and if it wanted to, if Turkey decided to ratify only Finland’s membership.

The Government must present the NATO law to the President of the Republic for approval within three months, and the President then approves it.

In principle, there would be room for waiting here.

It’s a different matter, then, whether one would want to use this kind of leeway at that point, if the parliament has already said its word and if NATO’s door was open to Finland.

Finally Finland’s membership will only come into effect when both Turkey and Hungary have ratified their memberships, the Secretary General of NATO has invited Finland to join the NATO Treaty, and when Finland has subsequently deposited its own accession protocol with the United States.

At least in principle, the foreign policy leadership could also consider the timing of this deposit.

Attorney general Tuomas Pöysti review earlier Ilta-Sanomthat there is “some room for maneuver” in that point, and Finland could, for example, expect that Sweden’s process is moving forward, if it is to move forward.

However, it won’t last forever, because the parliament has made a decision to join NATO, he estimates.

“But if it’s a matter of, for example, preparing for the NATO summit, within those frameworks there is room for maneuver regarding the summer weeks,” Pöysti said.

Interpretation so it seems that at least a longer wait like this is quite unlikely after the parliament has made a decision.

On the other hand, one can ask whether the difference would necessarily be strange compared to leaving the parliament’s decision to wait for the ratifications of Turkey and Hungary until the time of the next parliament.

If Finland were to get the ratifications together before Sweden, the pressure to move forward and get the matter dealt with quickly would increase, regardless of whether the decision would come during this or the next parliament or when the parliament is in recess.

It is largely a matter of what the concrete situation would be and what would be politically desired and seen as possible.

Throughout the process, Finland has maintained close contact with Sweden as well as with other key NATO countries. This will certainly be done until the end of the process.

It should be clear that if Finland had the opportunity to advance to NATO before Sweden, it would be a place for discussion both at home and more widely, and Finland would not act alone in a vacuum.

In conversation the parliament’s proceedings have also asked whether the approval of Finland’s own NATO law, even before the ratifications of Turkey and Hungary, would give Turkey such tokens that should not be given or whether it would send wrong signals.

In terms of signals, Finland has hopefully communicated its exact wishes to Turkey, and I would think that they are known to Turkey regardless of the parliament’s decision schedule.

From the outside, it is now impossible to guess all the parts of the NATO ratification equation and Turkey’s mental movements.

Turkey’s schedule may also be affected by the recent devastating earthquakes. According to Friday’s data earthquakes have killed more than 21,000 people in Turkey and Syria. In Turkey, the attention is now practically completely on the devastation of the earthquake.