21 ms·

Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

192 points by toxik 4y ago

efleurine 4y ago
Thanks to the genius move of Putin. the best strategist of Russia ever.
m00dy 4y ago
But turks said no.
- gerikson 4y ago
  That's just a matter of haggling.
  - vr46 4y ago
    Everything has a price
    - bayesian_horse 4y ago
      The problem may very well be that Putin has bought off or compromised Erdogan in some form. Then there is no price high enough.
      - nicoburns 4y ago
        Realistically Erdogan doesn't have the power to stop this.
      - SkyMarshal 4y ago
        I doubt it, the Turks have been one of Ukraine’s strongest supporters, sending Bayraktar drones, closing their airspace to Russian flights, and closing the entrance to the Black Sea from the Mediterranean to Russian warships (all warships tbf). They’re no friend of Russia. This appears to just be about Sweden and Finland’s support for the Kurds, some of who are in Iraq and some in Turkey. Turkey doesn’t want them forming a new and potentially hostile nation on its border, and doesn’t want any support for that from within NATO. Unfortunately for the Kurds they’re probably about to get thrown under the bus, since Finland and Sweden are now more concerned about the much larger, aggressive, unstable, nuclear-armed rogue state on their own border.
        bayesian_horse 4y ago
        I think you are missing a lot of the military cooperation between Russia and Turkey. Turkey is buying weapons from Russia. Also, Erdogan stopped delivering the tank-busting missiles for the TB2 drone, which is a big deal. There really is no replacement. The Hellfire missile is too heavy and the Americans now have delivered unguided rockets retrofitted with a laser-seeking head but which can't bust tanks... So, Turkey and Russia might not exactly be friends. Erdogan and Putin is another topic. Also, be wary of what Erdogan and his people say. He's about as trustworthy as Putin, and when he calls those organizations "Terrorists" or that Sweden and Finland support them, then that's actually quite far from the truth and he wants something much less palatable.
      - stjohnswarts 4y ago
        This is very likely. Erdogan really isn't much more than a thug, they always have a price, and often have dirty secrets they don't want laundered.
      - neoberg 4y ago
        Sweden is lucky that Erdogan is in power and he'll bend and do a 180 in a month max. If anyone else was in that position, this would never happen. This topic is probably the only thing that has this much mainstream support since Erdogan came to power.
- martythemaniak 4y ago
  If they had to choose, NATO would probably rather have Sweden and Finland in and Turkey out. Here's an interesting thread on Finland's strategic importance: https://twitter.com/tomiahonen/status/1525959053490458624 https://twitter.com/tomiahonen/status/1525959053490458624
  - bayesian_horse 4y ago
    But NATO can't choose because getting rid of a prior member of an alliance undermines the very idea and value of the alliance.
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > getting rid of a prior member of an alliance undermines the very idea and value of the alliance Not really. It does if one does this after they’re invaded, to evade mutual defence commitments. But acknowledging that there are no longer shared values and providing an off ramp is perfectly fine. Strengthening, even, as it shows heightened resolve to take the commitment seriously.
      - bayesian_horse 4y ago
        If any member gets booted out because of ideological differences, no matter the circumstances, other members will necessarily fear the same. This is extremely hard to avoid...
        JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > member gets booted out because of ideological differences, no matter the circumstances, other members will necessarily fear the same Ejection is a serious thing. Even its deliberation will have the effect you describe. But anyone pretending NATO is immortal or immutable or above political alignment is naïve. If a member behaves radically differently from the others, will it be politically feasible to send one’s soldiers to their aid in a time of need? If the answer to that question isn’t predictably an unambiguous yes, the treaty should be modified. Leaving Russia to guess whether Estonia is a Britain member or a Hungary member undermines the alliance's deterrence. These treaties were forged by our parents and grandparents. They’re stronger as living documents than relics.
- jeltz 4y ago
  Sure, but the US will probably just throw them some bone and everything will be fine.
- kome 4y ago
  Turks are trying to establish some diplomatic bridge with Russia; that's very good. Russian aggression in Ukraine is terrible, but I feel the US are not trying to de-escalate anything. They are in full proxy-war mode. This can be very dangerous for Europe. France and Germany also would like to have more diplomacy, just like Turkey. Those countries have to live next to Russia - and maintaining a diplomatic relationship with Russia is vital. And this despite the fact that current Russian leadership is basically criminal. I don't think Sweden and Finland joining NATO is sending a good signal - or it's diplomatically wise. But let's see...
  - macintux 4y ago
    The problem with de-escalation is this: what compromise is possible here? Ukraine should just give up its independence and land and ability to seek justice for the horrific war crimes? Russia has the power to de-escalate by withdrawing. Ukraine has the power to de-escalate by ceasing to exist.
    - pydry 4y ago
      Abide by Minsk II, officially cede crimea (according to gallup this is what 80-90% of crimeans want), disband azov and promise never to join NATO. Theres a perfectly clear deescalation path and has been since before the war started. This war was many things but inevitable was never one of them. Deescalation is the last thing NATO or the US wants though.
      - macintux 4y ago
        A lot of words to say “give up their independence”. And Putin says the Minsk agreements no longer exist. (Updated to fix autocorrect typo)
      - drakonka 4y ago
        And giving up their land and independence is the last thing Ukrainians want, so it sounds like Ukraine and NATO are on the same page in terms of not appeasing a senile tyrant invading a sovereign nation.
- ericmay 4y ago
  Nah, and also Turkey (similar to when people argued that Hungary or Croatia would object) would be kicked out of NATO before Sweden and Finland would be prevented from joining. "But how would they do that? There's no process.. etc." They can just take a vote and then that's that. Likely Turkey will get some appeasement concessions, but there's no serious risk here.
  - arroz 4y ago
    Considering turkey controls the Black Sea, I doubt they would be kicked out At the same time, I don’t think they would say no anyway
    - ericmay 4y ago
      They'd definitely be kicked out at this point if push came to shove. No doubt about that. There's no value in a member who doesn't cooperate. Both Finland and Sweden are very much aligned with the rest of NATO and if member states object to them joining you basically set the precedent that one member state (that's not the US/UK) can hold the group hostage. There's no way that would be tolerated, regardless of the strategic importance of Turkey. To your point, they won't say no anyway. All the speculation is, I think, just circus.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - mcv 4y ago
        I really don't think so. Turkey is in a very strategic location. Turkey has leverage and a very good chance of getting the concessions they want. Which is sad, because I care about the Kurds, and they seemed to be one of the few good, humane groups in Syria.
        ericmay 4y ago
        Yea I mean you’re free to disagree or course and we won’t really know for sure until something like this gets tested, but I’ve stated my opinion on the matter and don’t have much else to add.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > But turks said no. No. If the Turks actually said "no," they wouldn't be making demands: https://www.dw.com/en/nato-turkey-outlines-demands-on-finland-and-sweden-membership/a-61806003 https://www.dw.com/en/nato-turkey-outlines-demands-on-finlan...: > Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu on Sunday outlined demands for Finland and Sweden which seek membership in NATO in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. > Speaking with Turkish reporters after a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Berlin, he said that Sweden and Finland must stop supporting terrorists in their countries, provide clear security guarantees and lift export bans on Turkey.
  - tut-urut-utut 4y ago
    From the Turkish perspective, why would they allow someone who supports their enemies to join the alliance? I guess both Swedish and Finnish government would both need to swallow a few frogs to comply with these requirements. At least, they won't be able to maintain a moral high horse over Turkey any more after complying.
    - theshrike79 4y ago
      > From the Turkish perspective, why would they allow someone who supports their enemies to join the alliance? ...because neither country is supporting Erdoğan's enemies? The dictator is just posturing for his own people, he'll never actually dare to vote against every other country in NATO.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - mabbo 4y ago
      > why would they allow someone who supports their enemies to join the alliance? Because Russia is still the scarier enemy. If the rest of NATO approves, what is Turkey going to do? Leave NATO and accept eventual invasion?
      - srhngpr 4y ago
        If I recall correctly, it requires unanimous vote of approval.
- SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
  > But turks said I very much doubt that these announcements are the _start_ of negotiations. More likely, the public phase makes the beginning of the end of negotiations for Sweden (and Finland) to join NATO. It would be a co-ordinated, done deal or close to it, before they break cover and announce it to the world, and to Russia specifically.
retskrad 4y ago
- ZanyProgrammer 4y ago
  Not quite sure of the relevance of this to the linked story, however true it might be.
  - dijit 4y ago
    > In Sweden, non-white people have zero power. Categorically and unquestionably false. What the parent is saying is that he wants more power than Swedes. (I’m not trolling, please check my Karma) That he believe's he's being discriminated against tells me everything I need to know about how he aligns himself, because only a few people have this rhetoric, and it's mostly attempting to garner sympathy. Why would I say that? I don't want to get into a race-debate, but there's a lot of people who don't seem to like Sweden because it's not anti-semetic enough. That might sound like an extremely rude statement but it's actually a huge problem at the moment, Muslims in the country seem to be doing anything they can to make themselves sound like victims deflect the fact that anti-semetic violence has been rising incredibly fast in the last 10 years where I live. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_Sweden#Situation_in_Malm%C3%B6_since_2009 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_Sweden#Situati... Why am I saying this? Because non-white people have as much power as white people in Sweden, there's non-white politicians at all levels of government (and not "Uncle Toms" that speak the party line). Here's the minister for Energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_Baylan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_Baylan (not that I'm saying it proves anything, but there's no barriers there) The only reason to lie about it is because you want sympathy, there's so many checks and balances built into the system to avoid racism. I'll be completely honest and say that you're more likely to get a job as a Syrian than a Dane. (nobody can understand the bloody Danes) The issue is that Sweden has a strong culture of "lagom", the idea that your actions shouldn't stick out so much. Don't buy the flash car, don't yell in public, wear modest clothes. Muslims who keep placing stickers telling Jews they're unwelcome leads Swedes to dislike the Muslims that live here. FWIW: I am not a Jew, and I'm a migrant to Sweden, but I've naturalised here and the rhetoric is the same as where I come from. The police are racist for investigating grooming gangs, so nobody investigates grooming gangs until it becomes a huge scandal. My childhood friend went missing (suspected murdered) after being targeted by one of these gangs, the fact that it hadn’t been investigated properly fuelled the far right in the region: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Charlene_Downes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Charlene_Down... It's not that you're brown my dude, it's because you're affiliating yourself with people who are trying their damndest to be loud. Nobody gives a fuck if you're brown. Seriously. I can't think of a more open place. and, conversely, I don't give a fuck if you're Muslim, but I draw the line at making other people feel unwelcome.
qiskit 4y ago
Sweden was an unofficial NATO member anyways. Everybody knew this. They just didn't officially join in order to pretend to be a 'neutral' actor on the world stage, but anyone with a brain should know whose side they are on. In the modern world, there are only 4 independent states - US, china, russia and north korea. Everyone else is a vassal to some degree or another.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > In the modern world, there are only 4 independent states - US, china, russia and north korea. Everyone else is a vassal to some degree or another. Wut? North Korea is the vassalist vassal that ever vassaled. Russia might be getting there.
  - qiskit 4y ago
    No. They are the most indepedentest of the independent. They only serve one lunatic dictator and his family. And developed nuclear weapons against the wishes of US, china and russia. Can't get more independent than that. It's a country that literally starved itself to stay independent.
    - actionfromafar 4y ago
      NK exists at the behest of China. China wants a buffer between it and South Korea. If that wish were to change, I'd expect NK to be either gobbled up by China or allowed to rejoin with SK.
      - qiskit 4y ago
        > NK exists at the behest of China. No. China and NK was created with the backing of the soviet union. They were vassals of the soviet union until they decided not to be. Both china and north korea have been independent actors for a while now. Even before the soviet union collapsed. > China wants a buffer between it and South Korea. Why would china want a buffer between it and south korea? You mean between china and the US? > If that wish were to change, I'd expect NK to be either gobbled up by China or allowed to rejoin with SK. SK is a vassal of the US. You don't "rejoin" a vassal state. It'll be more likely north korea will one day liberate south korea than anything. South korea has a foreign occupation force. North korea doesn't. Think about it.
ThinkBeat 4y ago
fabian2k 4y ago
If you have a neighbour that invades sovereign countries, it makes sense to seek strong allies. This is a direct result of Russia invading Ukraine, it doesn't matter how much Russia complains now.
- frozencell 4y ago
- lazyjones 4y ago
  Russia demanded a neutral (not NATO-affiliated) Ukraine as one of their peace conditions.
  - temp8964 4y ago
    By invading Ukraine. LOL.
    - Consultant32452 4y ago
      - golergka 4y ago
        I'm not sure how is that relevant here? Because if you're trying to say that US is to blame for this war, here's the newsflash: causal relationships and moral responsibility are not the same thing. Even if you knowingly provoke a criminal to do a crime (for example, by leaving your home unlocked, or by going around a bad neighbourhood in very sexy clothing), it does not in any way absolve him of decision to do the crime.
        Consultant32452 4y ago
        The world is not simple good guys vs bad guys. Often it's bad guys vs bad guys.
throw-nocoiner 4y ago
The way Sweden and Finland admission process unfolded makes a complete mockery of democracy Rushed, decided behind closed doors, by a small clique of elites, without any semblance of democratic mandate, unconstitutional, no real public debate, no referendum, all in an atmosphere of McCarthy-like media frenzy. Any nuance is instantly brushed aside as Putin's propaganda The polls put the support at ~52% in Sweden and ~61% in Finland. That means 48% and 39% of the people are neutral or against. This mass of people have no representation in mass media, and no major political party to back them. This void will be filled, probably by some outlier parties, possibly extremists. It's a recipe for a disaster
- fabian2k 4y ago
  It's disingenious to only state the support percentage for polls that also have a significant amount of "don't know / don't care / undecided" answers. And the polls I've seen all had a pretty large amount of responses that were not directly opposed to joining NATO. The most recent poll I've seen for Finland also has an even higher percentage of support for joining NATO now than your poll.
  - curiousllama 4y ago
    Not to mention, NATO can't accept any countries with an active border dispute, because it would immediately trigger Article 4. As a result, Russia has an established strategy of taking a slice of any country that considers joining NATO. It worked in both Georgia & Ukraine. If you don't move quick, you won't move. This is the purpose of representative democracy - to allow trusted leaders to make decisions like this on your behalf.
    - Hamuko 4y ago
      And if you try to hold a referendum on joining NATO, Russia will be all over it like nobody's business. I'm glad that we decided to not have a referendum and considering how pro-NATO the opinion polling is, I'm not really worried for the death of democracy.
stjohnswarts 4y ago
This is great news. I don't think Turkey will be able to stop this considering how pissed off other members are at Russian genocide and belligerence. Seems Turkey doesn't mind that...
- seanw444 4y ago
  Genocide? Really?
  - macintux 4y ago
    Yes. ... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
    - edanm 4y ago
      I had never read that definition, and it seems way too broad to be what most people mean - according to this definition, killing 20 Christians on purpose is considered a genocide? Indeed, from later in the article: > While mass killing is not necessary for genocide to have been committed, it has been present in almost all recognized genocides.
      - macintux 4y ago
        Given the large civilian graves, the bombing of shelters, the forced deportation of Ukrainians to Russia, the theft of children…there doesn’t seem to be a reasonable argument that this isn’t genocide.
        edanm 4y ago
notorandit 4y ago
- xhevahir 4y ago
  > And you don't even border to Russia! The Russian threat to Sweden isn't merely academic. There was even speculation a few years ago that Russia might invade the Swedish island of Gotland in order to better position their missiles towards Western Europe.
karaterobot 4y ago
So does everyone here speak Swedish except me, or are we all chatting about an article we can't read? Here's an English article saying the same, just to maintain the illusion. https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/14/europe/sweden-finland-nato-next-steps-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/14/europe/sweden-finland-nato-ne...
- KptMarchewa 4y ago
  There are a lot of great quality automatic translators - at least for some languages. https://www.deepl.com/translator https://www.deepl.com/translator works best for me.
  - ossusermivami 4y ago
    it's great but isn't that limited to 5k words? not that i know if it reach the limit of the article since i havent tried,
- proxysna 4y ago
  Google translate is your friend. https://translate.google.com/?sl=sv&tl=en&text=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.svt.se%2Fnyheter%2Futrikes%2Ffinland-ger-natobesked&op=translate https://translate.google.com/?sl=sv&tl=en&text=https%3A%2F%2...
- robin_reala 4y ago
  There’s quite a big contingent of us (both native and immigrant) on HN. But yes, probably better to stick to English primary sources.
- jimbob45 4y ago
  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/16/russia-finland-sweden-nato-ukraine-war https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/16/russia-finland... Another article on the matter. I was in the same boat as you, friend.
- teddyh 4y ago
  https://www.thelocal.se/20220516/swedish-pm-and-opposition-leader-announce-decision-to-join-nato/ https://www.thelocal.se/20220516/swedish-pm-and-opposition-l...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jmyeet 4y ago
So let's recount what Putin has achieved in the last 3 months: 1. Failed to conquer all of Ukraine; 2. Failed to capture Kyiv; 3. Failed to make meaningful gains in the Donbass; 4. Failed to decapitate Ukraine's leadership; 5. Suffered huge casulaties; 6. Done massive damage to the perception of Russia's military (and thus the power it can project); 7. Done more for NATO solidarity than probably anything else in the last 20 years when previous to this, there wasn't a lot as much fervour for NATO; 8. Prompted Finland and Sweden to join NATO when previously they were happy being neutral; 9. Russia is now subject to broad sanctions where previously Europe was looking to increase gas dependence on Russia (eg Nord Stream 2). So Putin has quite literally achieved nothing. A lot of this was foreseeable too, which is why many (including myself) thought Putin wouldn't invade. The question now is what is Putin's state of mind? Is he aware of the true position (as in, is he getting accurate assessments and intelligence or just "yes men")? Does he still think he can "win"? What does "winning" even look like now? A rational person would be looking for a face-saving exit (think "mission accomplished"). I thought that might be occupying the Donbass and negotiating for some autonomy for the region but even that is starting to look out of reach. My concern is that someone cornered like this after making such a huge gamble at terrible cost is capable of doing something even more awful.
- eschulz 4y ago
  I agree. The Putin regime has paid such an enormous price over the last three months that I'm now concerned they might take egregious and insane steps at any time. These steps would be to save face, and I think they can in part be avoided if the regime could somehow package together something that they can sell as a victory to the Russian people and their sympathizers abroad.
- theshrike79 4y ago
  The worst part is that I can't see a valid "out" for Russia as a country from this. Even if Russians, by some miracle, manage to pry Putin out of power, what then? Will anyone trust any of their leadership? The level of sanctions on Russia is AFAIK unprecedented on a global scale, it's only been months and regular people are already feeling the effects. And if the sanctions go on for a few years, they'll be at Soviet Russia levels of living.
rainworld 4y ago
dang 4y ago
We have profound respect for other languages, but HN is an English-language site and articles here need to be in English. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20english-language%20site&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
- aaomidi 4y ago
  With various translation tools getting more and more powerful, is it potentially time to reconsider this policy? Something along the lines of please do English articles unless you absolutely can't?
  - dang 4y ago
    Maybe, but I don't think so. The non-English articles that get submitted are usually current-affairs pieces. If we were seeing a lot of obscure, intellectually interesting content that really hit the HN sweet spot, that would be a stronger case—certainly such content exists in many languages. But it's not what people pick to post here.
    - aaomidi 4y ago
      Good point!
  - AnnikaL 4y ago
    This article opens with a video clip of a reporter speaking in Swedish about Erdogan/Turkey's opinions on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Although there are captions, manually typing in each caption to a translation service seems very tedious.
- TiredOfLife 4y ago
  But paywalls somehow are allowed?
  - dang 4y ago
    That's answered in https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html. If you read that and still have a question, there's more explanation here: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=paywalls%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989

192 points by toxik 4y ago

efleurine 4y ago

Thanks to the genius move of Putin. the best strategist of Russia ever.

m00dy 4y ago

But turks said no.

gerikson 4y ago
That's just a matter of haggling.
- vr46 4y ago
  Everything has a price
  - bayesian_horse 4y ago
    The problem may very well be that Putin has bought off or compromised Erdogan in some form. Then there is no price high enough.
    - nicoburns 4y ago
      Realistically Erdogan doesn't have the power to stop this.
    - SkyMarshal 4y ago
      I doubt it, the Turks have been one of Ukraine’s strongest supporters, sending Bayraktar drones, closing their airspace to Russian flights, and closing the entrance to the Black Sea from the Mediterranean to Russian warships (all warships tbf). They’re no friend of Russia. This appears to just be about Sweden and Finland’s support for the Kurds, some of who are in Iraq and some in Turkey. Turkey doesn’t want them forming a new and potentially hostile nation on its border, and doesn’t want any support for that from within NATO. Unfortunately for the Kurds they’re probably about to get thrown under the bus, since Finland and Sweden are now more concerned about the much larger, aggressive, unstable, nuclear-armed rogue state on their own border.
      - bayesian_horse 4y ago
        I think you are missing a lot of the military cooperation between Russia and Turkey. Turkey is buying weapons from Russia. Also, Erdogan stopped delivering the tank-busting missiles for the TB2 drone, which is a big deal. There really is no replacement. The Hellfire missile is too heavy and the Americans now have delivered unguided rockets retrofitted with a laser-seeking head but which can't bust tanks... So, Turkey and Russia might not exactly be friends. Erdogan and Putin is another topic. Also, be wary of what Erdogan and his people say. He's about as trustworthy as Putin, and when he calls those organizations "Terrorists" or that Sweden and Finland support them, then that's actually quite far from the truth and he wants something much less palatable.
    - stjohnswarts 4y ago
      This is very likely. Erdogan really isn't much more than a thug, they always have a price, and often have dirty secrets they don't want laundered.
    - neoberg 4y ago
      Sweden is lucky that Erdogan is in power and he'll bend and do a 180 in a month max. If anyone else was in that position, this would never happen. This topic is probably the only thing that has this much mainstream support since Erdogan came to power.
martythemaniak 4y ago
If they had to choose, NATO would probably rather have Sweden and Finland in and Turkey out. Here's an interesting thread on Finland's strategic importance: https://twitter.com/tomiahonen/status/1525959053490458624 https://twitter.com/tomiahonen/status/1525959053490458624
- bayesian_horse 4y ago
  But NATO can't choose because getting rid of a prior member of an alliance undermines the very idea and value of the alliance.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > getting rid of a prior member of an alliance undermines the very idea and value of the alliance Not really. It does if one does this after they’re invaded, to evade mutual defence commitments. But acknowledging that there are no longer shared values and providing an off ramp is perfectly fine. Strengthening, even, as it shows heightened resolve to take the commitment seriously.
    - bayesian_horse 4y ago
      If any member gets booted out because of ideological differences, no matter the circumstances, other members will necessarily fear the same. This is extremely hard to avoid...
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > member gets booted out because of ideological differences, no matter the circumstances, other members will necessarily fear the same Ejection is a serious thing. Even its deliberation will have the effect you describe. But anyone pretending NATO is immortal or immutable or above political alignment is naïve. If a member behaves radically differently from the others, will it be politically feasible to send one’s soldiers to their aid in a time of need? If the answer to that question isn’t predictably an unambiguous yes, the treaty should be modified. Leaving Russia to guess whether Estonia is a Britain member or a Hungary member undermines the alliance's deterrence. These treaties were forged by our parents and grandparents. They’re stronger as living documents than relics.
jeltz 4y ago
Sure, but the US will probably just throw them some bone and everything will be fine.
kome 4y ago
Turks are trying to establish some diplomatic bridge with Russia; that's very good. Russian aggression in Ukraine is terrible, but I feel the US are not trying to de-escalate anything. They are in full proxy-war mode. This can be very dangerous for Europe. France and Germany also would like to have more diplomacy, just like Turkey. Those countries have to live next to Russia - and maintaining a diplomatic relationship with Russia is vital. And this despite the fact that current Russian leadership is basically criminal. I don't think Sweden and Finland joining NATO is sending a good signal - or it's diplomatically wise. But let's see...
- macintux 4y ago
  The problem with de-escalation is this: what compromise is possible here? Ukraine should just give up its independence and land and ability to seek justice for the horrific war crimes? Russia has the power to de-escalate by withdrawing. Ukraine has the power to de-escalate by ceasing to exist.
  - pydry 4y ago
    Abide by Minsk II, officially cede crimea (according to gallup this is what 80-90% of crimeans want), disband azov and promise never to join NATO. Theres a perfectly clear deescalation path and has been since before the war started. This war was many things but inevitable was never one of them. Deescalation is the last thing NATO or the US wants though.
    - macintux 4y ago
      A lot of words to say “give up their independence”. And Putin says the Minsk agreements no longer exist. (Updated to fix autocorrect typo)
    - drakonka 4y ago
      And giving up their land and independence is the last thing Ukrainians want, so it sounds like Ukraine and NATO are on the same page in terms of not appeasing a senile tyrant invading a sovereign nation.
ericmay 4y ago
Nah, and also Turkey (similar to when people argued that Hungary or Croatia would object) would be kicked out of NATO before Sweden and Finland would be prevented from joining. "But how would they do that? There's no process.. etc." They can just take a vote and then that's that. Likely Turkey will get some appeasement concessions, but there's no serious risk here.
- arroz 4y ago
  Considering turkey controls the Black Sea, I doubt they would be kicked out At the same time, I don’t think they would say no anyway
  - ericmay 4y ago
    They'd definitely be kicked out at this point if push came to shove. No doubt about that. There's no value in a member who doesn't cooperate. Both Finland and Sweden are very much aligned with the rest of NATO and if member states object to them joining you basically set the precedent that one member state (that's not the US/UK) can hold the group hostage. There's no way that would be tolerated, regardless of the strategic importance of Turkey. To your point, they won't say no anyway. All the speculation is, I think, just circus.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - mcv 4y ago
      I really don't think so. Turkey is in a very strategic location. Turkey has leverage and a very good chance of getting the concessions they want. Which is sad, because I care about the Kurds, and they seemed to be one of the few good, humane groups in Syria.
      - ericmay 4y ago
        Yea I mean you’re free to disagree or course and we won’t really know for sure until something like this gets tested, but I’ve stated my opinion on the matter and don’t have much else to add.
tablespoon 4y ago
> But turks said no. No. If the Turks actually said "no," they wouldn't be making demands: https://www.dw.com/en/nato-turkey-outlines-demands-on-finland-and-sweden-membership/a-61806003 https://www.dw.com/en/nato-turkey-outlines-demands-on-finlan...: > Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu on Sunday outlined demands for Finland and Sweden which seek membership in NATO in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. > Speaking with Turkish reporters after a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Berlin, he said that Sweden and Finland must stop supporting terrorists in their countries, provide clear security guarantees and lift export bans on Turkey.
- tut-urut-utut 4y ago
  From the Turkish perspective, why would they allow someone who supports their enemies to join the alliance? I guess both Swedish and Finnish government would both need to swallow a few frogs to comply with these requirements. At least, they won't be able to maintain a moral high horse over Turkey any more after complying.
  - theshrike79 4y ago
    > From the Turkish perspective, why would they allow someone who supports their enemies to join the alliance? ...because neither country is supporting Erdoğan's enemies? The dictator is just posturing for his own people, he'll never actually dare to vote against every other country in NATO.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - mabbo 4y ago
    > why would they allow someone who supports their enemies to join the alliance? Because Russia is still the scarier enemy. If the rest of NATO approves, what is Turkey going to do? Leave NATO and accept eventual invasion?
    - srhngpr 4y ago
      If I recall correctly, it requires unanimous vote of approval.
SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
> But turks said I very much doubt that these announcements are the _start_ of negotiations. More likely, the public phase makes the beginning of the end of negotiations for Sweden (and Finland) to join NATO. It would be a co-ordinated, done deal or close to it, before they break cover and announce it to the world, and to Russia specifically.

retskrad 4y ago

ZanyProgrammer 4y ago
Not quite sure of the relevance of this to the linked story, however true it might be.
- dijit 4y ago
  > In Sweden, non-white people have zero power. Categorically and unquestionably false. What the parent is saying is that he wants more power than Swedes. (I’m not trolling, please check my Karma) That he believe's he's being discriminated against tells me everything I need to know about how he aligns himself, because only a few people have this rhetoric, and it's mostly attempting to garner sympathy. Why would I say that? I don't want to get into a race-debate, but there's a lot of people who don't seem to like Sweden because it's not anti-semetic enough. That might sound like an extremely rude statement but it's actually a huge problem at the moment, Muslims in the country seem to be doing anything they can to make themselves sound like victims deflect the fact that anti-semetic violence has been rising incredibly fast in the last 10 years where I live. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_Sweden#Situation_in_Malm%C3%B6_since_2009 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_Sweden#Situati... Why am I saying this? Because non-white people have as much power as white people in Sweden, there's non-white politicians at all levels of government (and not "Uncle Toms" that speak the party line). Here's the minister for Energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_Baylan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_Baylan (not that I'm saying it proves anything, but there's no barriers there) The only reason to lie about it is because you want sympathy, there's so many checks and balances built into the system to avoid racism. I'll be completely honest and say that you're more likely to get a job as a Syrian than a Dane. (nobody can understand the bloody Danes) The issue is that Sweden has a strong culture of "lagom", the idea that your actions shouldn't stick out so much. Don't buy the flash car, don't yell in public, wear modest clothes. Muslims who keep placing stickers telling Jews they're unwelcome leads Swedes to dislike the Muslims that live here. FWIW: I am not a Jew, and I'm a migrant to Sweden, but I've naturalised here and the rhetoric is the same as where I come from. The police are racist for investigating grooming gangs, so nobody investigates grooming gangs until it becomes a huge scandal. My childhood friend went missing (suspected murdered) after being targeted by one of these gangs, the fact that it hadn’t been investigated properly fuelled the far right in the region: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Charlene_Downes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Charlene_Down... It's not that you're brown my dude, it's because you're affiliating yourself with people who are trying their damndest to be loud. Nobody gives a fuck if you're brown. Seriously. I can't think of a more open place. and, conversely, I don't give a fuck if you're Muslim, but I draw the line at making other people feel unwelcome.

qiskit 4y ago

Sweden was an unofficial NATO member anyways. Everybody knew this. They just didn't officially join in order to pretend to be a 'neutral' actor on the world stage, but anyone with a brain should know whose side they are on. In the modern world, there are only 4 independent states - US, china, russia and north korea. Everyone else is a vassal to some degree or another.

tablespoon 4y ago
> In the modern world, there are only 4 independent states - US, china, russia and north korea. Everyone else is a vassal to some degree or another. Wut? North Korea is the vassalist vassal that ever vassaled. Russia might be getting there.
- qiskit 4y ago
  No. They are the most indepedentest of the independent. They only serve one lunatic dictator and his family. And developed nuclear weapons against the wishes of US, china and russia. Can't get more independent than that. It's a country that literally starved itself to stay independent.
  - actionfromafar 4y ago
    NK exists at the behest of China. China wants a buffer between it and South Korea. If that wish were to change, I'd expect NK to be either gobbled up by China or allowed to rejoin with SK.
    - qiskit 4y ago
      > NK exists at the behest of China. No. China and NK was created with the backing of the soviet union. They were vassals of the soviet union until they decided not to be. Both china and north korea have been independent actors for a while now. Even before the soviet union collapsed. > China wants a buffer between it and South Korea. Why would china want a buffer between it and south korea? You mean between china and the US? > If that wish were to change, I'd expect NK to be either gobbled up by China or allowed to rejoin with SK. SK is a vassal of the US. You don't "rejoin" a vassal state. It'll be more likely north korea will one day liberate south korea than anything. South korea has a foreign occupation force. North korea doesn't. Think about it.

ThinkBeat 4y ago

fabian2k 4y ago

If you have a neighbour that invades sovereign countries, it makes sense to seek strong allies. This is a direct result of Russia invading Ukraine, it doesn't matter how much Russia complains now.

frozencell 4y ago
lazyjones 4y ago
Russia demanded a neutral (not NATO-affiliated) Ukraine as one of their peace conditions.
- temp8964 4y ago
  By invading Ukraine. LOL.
  - Consultant32452 4y ago
    - golergka 4y ago
      I'm not sure how is that relevant here? Because if you're trying to say that US is to blame for this war, here's the newsflash: causal relationships and moral responsibility are not the same thing. Even if you knowingly provoke a criminal to do a crime (for example, by leaving your home unlocked, or by going around a bad neighbourhood in very sexy clothing), it does not in any way absolve him of decision to do the crime.
      - Consultant32452 4y ago
        The world is not simple good guys vs bad guys. Often it's bad guys vs bad guys.

throw-nocoiner 4y ago

The way Sweden and Finland admission process unfolded makes a complete mockery of democracy Rushed, decided behind closed doors, by a small clique of elites, without any semblance of democratic mandate, unconstitutional, no real public debate, no referendum, all in an atmosphere of McCarthy-like media frenzy. Any nuance is instantly brushed aside as Putin's propaganda The polls put the support at ~52% in Sweden and ~61% in Finland. That means 48% and 39% of the people are neutral or against. This mass of people have no representation in mass media, and no major political party to back them. This void will be filled, probably by some outlier parties, possibly extremists. It's a recipe for a disaster

fabian2k 4y ago
It's disingenious to only state the support percentage for polls that also have a significant amount of "don't know / don't care / undecided" answers. And the polls I've seen all had a pretty large amount of responses that were not directly opposed to joining NATO. The most recent poll I've seen for Finland also has an even higher percentage of support for joining NATO now than your poll.
- curiousllama 4y ago
  Not to mention, NATO can't accept any countries with an active border dispute, because it would immediately trigger Article 4. As a result, Russia has an established strategy of taking a slice of any country that considers joining NATO. It worked in both Georgia & Ukraine. If you don't move quick, you won't move. This is the purpose of representative democracy - to allow trusted leaders to make decisions like this on your behalf.
  - Hamuko 4y ago
    And if you try to hold a referendum on joining NATO, Russia will be all over it like nobody's business. I'm glad that we decided to not have a referendum and considering how pro-NATO the opinion polling is, I'm not really worried for the death of democracy.

stjohnswarts 4y ago

This is great news. I don't think Turkey will be able to stop this considering how pissed off other members are at Russian genocide and belligerence. Seems Turkey doesn't mind that...

seanw444 4y ago
Genocide? Really?
- macintux 4y ago
  Yes. ... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
  - edanm 4y ago
    I had never read that definition, and it seems way too broad to be what most people mean - according to this definition, killing 20 Christians on purpose is considered a genocide? Indeed, from later in the article: > While mass killing is not necessary for genocide to have been committed, it has been present in almost all recognized genocides.
    - macintux 4y ago
      Given the large civilian graves, the bombing of shelters, the forced deportation of Ukrainians to Russia, the theft of children…there doesn’t seem to be a reasonable argument that this isn’t genocide.
      - edanm 4y ago

notorandit 4y ago

xhevahir 4y ago
> And you don't even border to Russia! The Russian threat to Sweden isn't merely academic. There was even speculation a few years ago that Russia might invade the Swedish island of Gotland in order to better position their missiles towards Western Europe.

karaterobot 4y ago

So does everyone here speak Swedish except me, or are we all chatting about an article we can't read? Here's an English article saying the same, just to maintain the illusion. https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/14/europe/sweden-finland-nato-next-steps-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/14/europe/sweden-finland-nato-ne...

KptMarchewa 4y ago
There are a lot of great quality automatic translators - at least for some languages. https://www.deepl.com/translator https://www.deepl.com/translator works best for me.
- ossusermivami 4y ago
  it's great but isn't that limited to 5k words? not that i know if it reach the limit of the article since i havent tried,
proxysna 4y ago
Google translate is your friend. https://translate.google.com/?sl=sv&tl=en&text=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.svt.se%2Fnyheter%2Futrikes%2Ffinland-ger-natobesked&op=translate https://translate.google.com/?sl=sv&tl=en&text=https%3A%2F%2...
robin_reala 4y ago
There’s quite a big contingent of us (both native and immigrant) on HN. But yes, probably better to stick to English primary sources.
jimbob45 4y ago
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/16/russia-finland-sweden-nato-ukraine-war https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/16/russia-finland... Another article on the matter. I was in the same boat as you, friend.
teddyh 4y ago
https://www.thelocal.se/20220516/swedish-pm-and-opposition-leader-announce-decision-to-join-nato/ https://www.thelocal.se/20220516/swedish-pm-and-opposition-l...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jmyeet 4y ago

So let's recount what Putin has achieved in the last 3 months: 1. Failed to conquer all of Ukraine; 2. Failed to capture Kyiv; 3. Failed to make meaningful gains in the Donbass; 4. Failed to decapitate Ukraine's leadership; 5. Suffered huge casulaties; 6. Done massive damage to the perception of Russia's military (and thus the power it can project); 7. Done more for NATO solidarity than probably anything else in the last 20 years when previous to this, there wasn't a lot as much fervour for NATO; 8. Prompted Finland and Sweden to join NATO when previously they were happy being neutral; 9. Russia is now subject to broad sanctions where previously Europe was looking to increase gas dependence on Russia (eg Nord Stream 2). So Putin has quite literally achieved nothing. A lot of this was foreseeable too, which is why many (including myself) thought Putin wouldn't invade. The question now is what is Putin's state of mind? Is he aware of the true position (as in, is he getting accurate assessments and intelligence or just "yes men")? Does he still think he can "win"? What does "winning" even look like now? A rational person would be looking for a face-saving exit (think "mission accomplished"). I thought that might be occupying the Donbass and negotiating for some autonomy for the region but even that is starting to look out of reach. My concern is that someone cornered like this after making such a huge gamble at terrible cost is capable of doing something even more awful.

eschulz 4y ago
I agree. The Putin regime has paid such an enormous price over the last three months that I'm now concerned they might take egregious and insane steps at any time. These steps would be to save face, and I think they can in part be avoided if the regime could somehow package together something that they can sell as a victory to the Russian people and their sympathizers abroad.
theshrike79 4y ago
The worst part is that I can't see a valid "out" for Russia as a country from this. Even if Russians, by some miracle, manage to pry Putin out of power, what then? Will anyone trust any of their leadership? The level of sanctions on Russia is AFAIK unprecedented on a global scale, it's only been months and regular people are already feeling the effects. And if the sanctions go on for a few years, they'll be at Soviet Russia levels of living.

rainworld 4y ago

dang 4y ago

We have profound respect for other languages, but HN is an English-language site and articles here need to be in English. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20english-language%20site&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

aaomidi 4y ago
With various translation tools getting more and more powerful, is it potentially time to reconsider this policy? Something along the lines of please do English articles unless you absolutely can't?
- dang 4y ago
  Maybe, but I don't think so. The non-English articles that get submitted are usually current-affairs pieces. If we were seeing a lot of obscure, intellectually interesting content that really hit the HN sweet spot, that would be a stronger case—certainly such content exists in many languages. But it's not what people pick to post here.
  - aaomidi 4y ago
    Good point!
- AnnikaL 4y ago
  This article opens with a video clip of a reporter speaking in Swedish about Erdogan/Turkey's opinions on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Although there are captions, manually typing in each caption to a translation service seems very tedious.
TiredOfLife 4y ago
But paywalls somehow are allowed?
- dang 4y ago
  That's answered in https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html. If you read that and still have a question, there's more explanation here: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=paywalls%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989