Prior to the start of the war, Russia wanted guarantees that Ukraine would not join NATO, a resolution to the war in Donbass, recognition of Crimea, American nuclear missiles to be withdrawn from Europe, and for the removal of American missile installations from Romania and Poland. Putin specifically stated that American hypersonic missiles, if stationed in Ukraine, could reach Moscow in 4 minutes, and that it would be like living with a knife to their throat. If Russia takes the south and east of Ukraine, integrating Novorussia into Russia, and demilitarizes the north and west, Russia's borders with Ukraine drop from 1300 miles to a mere 300 miles stretching from Kiev to Transnistria. It also allows them to securely control the entire northern coast of the Black Sea. That could be the end of it.
If Finland were to join NATO, however, a new Ukrainian threat emerges spanning 800 miles on the north west of Russia's borders. It would be even worse than Ukraine in NATO from a hypersonic missile perspective. As it stands, the Baltics have been declared a nuclear free zone. By adding Sweden and Finland into NATO, the threat from the north becomes far more severe to Russia. Russia only has two major cities, St. Petersburg and Moscow. St. Petersburg is only 110 miles from the Finnish border. American hypersonic missile installations in Finland could reach Russia's second largest city in less than a minute, and the equivalent time as from from Ukraine to Moscow, in just 4 minutes. Additionally, Russia has strategic military installations to protect them in the Arctic in the Kola Peninsula, near Murmansk. The Kola Peninsula is less than 150 miles from the Finnish border, and is the centerpiece of Russia's military establishment in the west Arctic. This is simply an intolerable situation for Russia to allow American military installations so close to their vital cities and Arctic defenses, after all American nuclear ICBMs targeting Moscow would come from the Arctic.
Now that Finland and Sweden have applied for membership into NATO, it will take several months to complete. Unless Russia can accomplish a diplomatic victory, where a European country firmly vetoes the ascension of Finland, and doesn't merely use it as a bargaining tool as Turkey and Croatia appear to be doing, then it's possible that Russia will strike before the vote takes place. If Russia is going to war with Finland, better that it acts before they officially become a part of NATO. In anticipation of this, the warmongering Brits just this week signed a security pact with both Finland and Sweden, just like they did with Poland before WWII. London wants a broader war with Russia, and to drag America in if possible. If this line of thinking is in fact correct, and Russia cannot allow Finland into NATO, then Russia must soon enter into a wartime economy and full mobilization of it's manpower. The alternative would be hundreds of nuclear tipped hypersonic missiles targeting Finland and the entire region, with eventual reciprocal American missiles, all on a hairpin trigger with less than 60 seconds to clarify a possible strike. Is this a tolerable security situation in which to live for the Russians, or for Europeans for that matter? Would D.C. tolerate living under these conditions? Not for a second.
Or Russia could wait for Finland to join NATO, and strike if an when American military assets are moved into the region, although this risks triggering article 5 and starting a direct confrontation with NATO sometime down the line. If they take this approach, in the meantime, they could try to fracture Europe and NATO economically and politically, though at the risk of a direct conflict with NATO at a later time if America decides to move assets into Finland. They might take this approach, because the UK's security pact signed with Sweden and Finland this week risks drawing in America anyway. They also have Europe by the short hairs economically through their control of commodities. I think that this is the more sensible approach. It's impossible to predict because we simply don't know what Russia's level of military preparedness is now, including stocks of hypersonic missiles and other military equipment. We'll have an indication soon if Putin drops the special military operation, declares war on Ukraine, and Russia begins mobilization. Full mobilization would mean a dramatic escalation of the intensity of the war in Ukraine, with not hundreds of thousands, but millions of Russian soldiers fighting in both Ukraine, and possibly Finland and Sweden if Russia were to head off their ascension to NATO.
This escalation could have been prevented if Finland and Sweden's feminist leaders did not abandon neutrality, and attempt to join NATO. Are Finland and Sweden about to become the first national examples of get woke, go broke?
