[Goose]

The gulf of Finland is 50 miles across from Talinn to Helsinki, which is why if the effect of the Ukraine war is to drive Finland to NATO, it will have been a colossal mistake for Russia, never mind if Sweden joins and the entrance to the Baltic is controlled by NATO.

Why so BC? Nobody is going to be running ships in the Gulf of Finland as long as Tallinn is NATO and St. Petersburg and points to the West are Russian. It will be a no-go zone anyway. If Tallinn is taken by Russia, it might matter. One also has to consider that Finland is already as "associated state" of NATO. I think there are lots of NATO folks that actually prefer that. Finland isn't joining because it wants to send troops to Romania in the event of war or to keep Tallinn free. For many decades Finland survived just fine with the Baltic states as part of the Soviet Union. While that isn't their preference, it isn't of itself fatal.

Finland is joining NATO to deter Russia from attacking it and to obtain help if Russia does. For many, many years both Finland and Sweden have concentrated on defensive armaments and systems to make attacking them just too expensive (they hoped). So far, it has worked, but now there is a fear it won't. That doesn't mean that Finland and Sweden add a lot to NATO's offensive power. They have been in the recent past my customers and I have great respect for their capabilities, but their mind set is not on projecting power. I would not want to be attacking them. They are very good in many respects. They bring some useful capabilities to NATO. They also bring very large liabilities.

That is why Russia keeps its Baltic fleet in Kaliningrad, but Kaliningrad is completely surrounded by NATO members.

BC

Indeed, and worse still Kaliningrad dominates the Baltic Sea in that region with anti-ship missiles and GMCs of various descriptions. Sweden is prepared to contest ownership of these waters to prevent/hinder their use by Russia to attach Sweden, but Sweden in the past has never developed the power to do more than that. 5 Visbys just won't cut it. The pinching out of Kaliningrad will be a NATO priority, but if Russia intends to take the Baltics, the schwerpunkt will be the Suwalki corridor. Look at https://cepa.org/the-suwalki-corridor/. If Russia succeeds there, it is probably game over in the Baltics. If, OTOH NATO can hold the Suwalki corridor and pinch out Kaliningrad, or bomb it to helplessness NATO can control the Baltic sea as far East as Riga (air power issues aside), which is all we need. This is true whether Sweden and Finland fight or not. It is only necessary that they don't fall to Russia while this is all going on.

[Goose]

The gulf of Finland is 50 miles across from Talinn to Helsinki, which is why if the effect of the Ukraine war is to drive Finland to NATO, it will have been a colossal mistake for Russia, never mind if Sweden joins and the entrance to the Baltic is controlled by NATO.

Why so BC? Nobody is going to be running ships in the Gulf of Finland as long as Tallinn is NATO and St. Petersburg and points to the West are Russian. It will be a no-go zone anyway. If Tallinn is taken by Russia, it might matter. One also has to consider that Finland is already as "associated state" of NATO. I think there are lots of NATO folks that actually prefer that. Finland isn't joining because it wants to send troops to Romania in the event of war or to keep Tallinn free. For many decades Finland survived just fine with the Baltic states as part of the Soviet Union. While that isn't their preference, it isn't of itself fatal.

Finland is joining NATO to deter Russia from attacking it and to obtain help if Russia does. For many, many years both Finland and Sweden have concentrated on defensive armaments and systems to make attacking them just too expensive (they hoped). So far, it has worked, but now there is a fear it won't. That doesn't mean that Finland and Sweden add a lot to NATO's offensive power. They have been in the recent past my customers and I have great respect for their capabilities, but their mind set is not on projecting power. I would not want to be attacking them. They are very good in many respects. They bring some useful capabilities to NATO. They also bring very large liabilities.

That is why Russia keeps its Baltic fleet in Kaliningrad, but Kaliningrad is completely surrounded by NATO members.

BC

Indeed, and worse still Kaliningrad dominates the Baltic Sea in that region with anti-ship missiles and GMCs of various descriptions. Sweden is prepared to contest ownership of these waters to prevent/hinder their use by Russia to attach Sweden, but Sweden in the past has never developed the power to do more than that. 5 Visbys just won't cut it. The pinching out of Kaliningrad will be a NATO priority, but if Russia intends to take the Baltics, the schwerpunkt will be the Suwalki corridor. Look at https://cepa.org/the-suwalki-corridor/. If Russia succeeds there, it is probably game over in the Baltics. If, OTOH NATO can hold the Suwalki corridor and pinch out Kaliningrad, or bomb it to helplessness NATO can control the Baltic sea as far East as Riga (air power issues aside), which is all we need. This is true whether Sweden and Finland fight or not. It is only necessary that they don't fall to Russia while this is all going on.