Thread by @charlyjsp

Parliament of #Finland is set to begin debate about changed security environment and needed changes regarding 🇫🇮 security policy (read seeking NATO membership).

🧵 focusing on what’s said implicitly and explicitly (follow #turpo, as other Finns are also sure to comment)

First up is @Haavisto, presenting updated government report on security:

valtioneuvosto.fi/en/-/governmen…

Finnish formal conclusions:
1) Russian appetite for high-risk actions has increased
2) Russia can quickly focus large volume of mil forces against a neighbour
3) Increased loose talk of using non-conventional weapons (nukes); for which #Finland has little deterrence.

☝🏼 requires reevaluation of security policies, which per @Haavisto should occur w Sweden as it would enable a complete renewal of Nordic defence (clear public message to Sweden) - but says each country will make own decision (read: Finland is joining, Sweden has time to catch up)

Wrapping up: everyone should be ready for Russian reactions, but many preparations are ongoing in Finland. Irrespective of Russian actions, there is no going back.

Now social democrats (SDP) @AnttiLindtman: starts w robust criticism of Russia, and notes need for consensus about whether to join NATO or not. Only criteria: how best to secure #Finland. (Yes party is leaning to debate —> NATO)

A radical shift in 4 months.

The Finns party, @VilleTavio makes it clear: NATO membership would improve Finland’s security. It should be done quickly, latest by Madrid NATO summit, preferably w Sweden.

National Coalition Party @anttihakkanen - this is easy as party has supported memb for 16yrs.

Acknowledges risks in seeking membership but risks of not doing so are greater. Calls on Parliament to suspend non-critical work, to let all 200 parliamentarians focus on this matter.

Center party, @pylvas_juha, party
changed its position a few weeks ago, supporting NATO membership if all agree (consensus is most important ‘output’ of this whole parliamentary process). Urges further improvements in security of supply.

—> strong calls for unity & purpose.

Greens @AtteHarjanne, party is positive re NATO membership (no party decision yet) but agrees w report that 🇫🇮 & 🇸🇪 membership would strengthen deterrence in Baltic Sea Region —> increase stability in region.

Left Alliance @jussisaramo, makes case that this important decision must be made based on after in-depth debate in Parliament and cmtes, says membership would increase deterrence but also increase risk of conflict.

—> ‘split decision’ but more open to memb now than earlier.

SFP @adleande, party has also supported membership for years. Calls for unity, respectful debate, to ultimately maximise Finnish, Nordic & European security…so Mariupol could never occur in #Finland.

Christian Democratic Party @SariEssayah, makes similar argument to others, that even as members, Finland would need to ensure it continues to have robust nation defence and need for consensus.

—> not a definitive Yea but strong lean.

Liike Nyt @hjallisharkimo, urges speed and need for all to stand shoulder to shoulder when Russia reacts. Calls for Åland Island demilitarisation to be ended (agree).

—> a strong Yes

End of party speeches, in summary:
1) All parties agree consensus is important, a united front (against Russian interference)
2) Even as memb, #Finland would maintain robust defence capability

—> we will see a massive majority supporting membership when vote eventually comes.

PM @MarinSanna urges everyone to engage in debate

DefMin @anttikaikkonen: biggest impact of memb would be increased deterrence & participating in collective defence. What wouldn’t change: high will to defend, extensive reserve & national service.

Beautiful, @SariEssayah immediately (but kindly) points out that parliamentarians must provide examples re respectful debate (a 😘 to @jussisaramo).

Clear that @adleande gets how dramatically Finnish & Swedish NATO membership would change Nordic (and Baltic Sea) defence. A Nordic Castle indeed.

When those parties/individuals who’ve most opposed Finnish NATO memb are on the fence but open to supporting it after extensive debate then I think the direction of the wind and journey is clear - it truly is improving Finland’s security that *everyone* is focused on.

Did not expect a #TopGun reference in this debate...yes, the 80s teen in me is smiling. What was it?

One thing is clear: the wall of political unity & consensus being constructed - speech by speech - in the Finnish parliament is stronger than anything Russia could throw at it. The atmosphere is respectful (of differing views) and solemn, the purpose palpable.