Abstract
Does the accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO alter the strategic balance in the Baltic? The recent decision by Sweden and Finland to join the alliance has rendered most analyses on this question moot, as extant scholarship has focused on how the two countries could cooperate with NATO outside the alliance. To redress this gap, this paper assesses how Nordic NATO expansion shifts the military balance in northeast Europe using a mixed-methods approach with campaign models and elite interviews. Specifically, it employs logistics and combat models to evaluate Russia’s ability to deploy force against Finland. It further assesses the implications of the extension of the Russia-NATO border on force density levels and Baltic conflict scenarios. Finally, it models how control of the port of Stockholm and island of Gotland alters NATO maritime logistics capacity in the event of the closure of the Suwalki Gap. Our findings suggest the addition of Sweden and Finland meaningfully diminishes Russian force projection capabilities while simultaneously increasing NATO’s regional maritime control and logistical capacity. Interviews allow us to corroborate these findings against the strategic assessments of key NATO and European policymakers, to explore how NATO officials’ perceptions of strategic balance shape their engagement with and understanding of feasible operational concepts vis-à-vis the Baltic, and to probe the extent to which their strategic judgements mirror popular discourse around NATO expansion. Our findings contribute to the academic literature on territorial control and conflict, and they have important implications for ongoing policy debates by suggesting that NATO’s Nordic expansion is net positive for the alliance. It substantially enhances the regional power of the alliance and reduces the viability of a Russian fait accompli in the Baltic.