Finland urges US not to call security guarantees for Ukraine "Article 5-like" - Politico
Finland has called on US officials not to refer to future security guarantees for Ukraine as "similar to Article 5" of NATO, as this could undermine the mutual defense clause that underpins NATO.
This is reported by Politico, as relayed by Censor.NET.
What is known?
A telegram sent from the US Embassy in Helsinki to Washington hints at concerns in some circles about the terminology used during peace talks. It notes that certain phrases in the field of national security are sensitive, even when officials are simply trying to offer analogies for different audiences.
Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen discussed this issue on January 19 with US House of Representatives lawmakers Jack Bergman, a Republican, and Sarah Elfreth, a Democrat, who are members of the Armed Services Committee.
Valtonen stressed that Russia is a "long-term strategic threat" and warned against a "weak" peace agreement for Ukraine that would hinder Ukraine's ability to defend itself against future Russian aggression, the publication quotes the telegram as saying.
Article 5 NATO
At the same time, the foreign minister warned against describing "Article 5-like" security guarantees for Ukraine after the war.
According to her, this could lead to the guarantees of Article 5 of the NATO Charter being mixed up with any bilateral promises made to Ukraine.
She also noted that there should be a "barrier" between NATO and future security guarantees for Ukraine.
The Finnish Minister of Defense expressed similar views at the meeting.
The publication reminds us that Article 5 is a critically important point in the NATO pact, meaning that an armed attack on one member of the 32-member alliance will be considered an attack on all members. NATO has invoked this article only once: after the attack by Islamist terrorists on the United States on September 11, 2001.
Other Finnish officials have stated that although they want to help Ukraine, the concept of security guarantees is a more serious issue that they are not yet ready to agree to.
A Finnish official said that Valtonen's office would not comment on confidential discussions, although they did mention Helsinki's long-standing goal of Ukraine's accession to NATO.
Former NATO officials and analysts said the telegram reflects growing concern in various capitals about how engagement with post-war Ukraine could affect individual countries in the long term.
One potential problem is that the use of the term "Article 5" in other contexts implies NATO involvement, which is not actually part of any of these proposed agreements.
Finland and many other NATO members want to make sure that everyone understands that Article 5 is unique to NATO," explained former NATO official Edward Wroeng.
The US State Department declined to comment.
Problems
Josh Shifrin, a researcher at the University of Maryland, believes that one of the problems is that, by referring to Article 5, even with the addition of the word "like," national leaders can provide opposition groups with a political weapon.
There is also a possibility that framing security commitments for Ukraine as "similar to Article 5" could prompt Russia to test what that actually means.
Rachel Ellhuus, a former Pentagon official in the Biden administration, believes that if Russia launches an armed attack and countries supporting Ukraine are unable to respond, it could cast doubt on the strength of NATO's Article 5.
"I suppose the Finns don't want to make too many promises and then fail to deliver on them," she added.
