> Finland is a more complicated case, since they already have a specific agreement with Russia What, do you mean the Finno-Soviet Treaty of 1948[1]? That ended

> Finland is a more complicated case, since they already have a specific agreement with Russia What, do you mean the Finno-Soviet Treaty of 1948[1]? That ended in 1992, and "[w]hen in January 1992 the new Treaty of Friendship was complemented by the exchange of notes terminating the 1948 treaty, the last remnant of restrictions on an independent Finnish foreign policy were formally removed."[2] > and are so vulnerable. They may prefer the status quo. I doubt it.[3] The Finns have been vulnerable to Russia before, and know how to hold a grudge. A majority[4] is for membership now. On Friday the fifth of March (I think it was), the Eduskunta -- the Finnish Parliament -- debated NATO membership. And not one, but two Citizens' Initiatives that have each gathered enough signatures to make (further?) parliamentary discussion mandatory. ___ [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Soviet_Treaty_of_1948 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Soviet_Treaty_of_1948 [2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20181125193537/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/1992-09-01/finland-vindicated https://web.archive.org/web/20181125193537/https://www.forei... [3]: Source: Personal experience; lived here for 27 years now. [4]: https://yle.fi/news/3-12337202 https://yle.fi/news/3-12337202