[Senate Hearing 117-528]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-528
NATO ENLARGEMENT: EXAMINING THE PROPOSED
ACCESSION OF SWEDEN AND FINLAND
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 22, 2022
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
50-081 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey, Chairman
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire MARCO RUBIO, Florida
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut MITT ROMNEY, Utah
TIM KAINE, Virginia ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts RAND PAUL, Kentucky
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon TODD YOUNG, Indiana
CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii TED CRUZ, Texas
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
Damian Murphy, Staff Director
Christopher M. Socha, Republican Staff Director
John Dutton, Chief Clerk
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Menendez, Hon. Robert, U.S. Senator From New Jersey.............. 1
Risch, Hon. James E., U.S. Senator From Idaho.................... 3
Donfried, Karen, Assistant Secretary of State for European and
Eurasian Affairs, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC..... 4
Prepared Statement........................................... 6
Wallander, Hon. Celeste, Assistant Secretary of Defense for
International Security Affairs, U.S. Department of Defense,
Washington, DC................................................. 7
Prepared Statement........................................... 9
(iii)
NATO ENLARGEMENT: EXAMINING THE
PROPOSED ACCESSION OF SWEDEN AND
FINLAND
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 22, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:52 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert
Menendez presiding.
Present: Senators Menendez [presiding], Cardin, Kaine, Van
Hollen, Risch, and Hagerty.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY
The Chairman. This hearing will come to order.
As we sit here, Putin's forces continue to fire missiles at
innocent Ukrainians, his generals continue to bombard cities,
and his soldiers are committing war crimes.
Still, brave Ukrainians are fighting back, proving time and
again that Putin gravely miscalculated the resolve of the
Ukrainian people. He also grossly miscalculated how the rest of
the world would respond to his brutal, unprovoked aggression.
The United States, the overwhelming majority of Europe,
and, indeed, of the entire free world are now more united in
support of not just Ukraine, but of our collective resolve to
support democracies, the rule of law, and defend against brazen
authoritarian aggression--indeed, the very values that drove
the foundation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the
first place.
Perhaps, more than ever it is crystal clear that NATO plays
a vital role not only in the security of the United States, but
as a bulwark protecting peace and democracy, and I feel
confident when I say both the ranking member and I believe
carefully considering new candidates for NATO expansion is one
of the most important responsibilities this committee has.
Today, we will learn more about Finland and Sweden's
candidacies for NATO membership. These are two steadfast NATO
and U.S. allies with strong, durable military institutions and
democratic institutions.
They have every reason to participate in collective defense
against Russian aggression, and NATO has every reason to
embrace and welcome them into the Alliance without delay.
In many ways, Finland and Sweden are ideal candidates for
NATO membership. NATO is a defensive military alliance designed
to preserve, in part, by holding members to high democratic
governance and economic transparency standards.
Indeed, further to that point, democratic processes in both
countries have shown that the Finnish and Swedish people
themselves are strongly supportive of joining NATO.
While NATO has not yet formally prepared the accession
protocols for Finland and Sweden, we expect it will very soon.
There is tremendous urgency and a strong case for inviting
these countries. Expansion of NATO requires unanimous agreement
by all NATO member states, of course, and with time of the
essence, the 11th-hour concerns by Turkey standing in the way
of this process only serve Putin's interests.
In the meantime, and as members prepare to meet next week
in Madrid, it is imperative that we press ahead with our own
approval process, which is why we are having this hearing
today.
This may very well be one of the most important decisions
this committee and this Senate makes in the decade and beyond
as it relates to foreign policy.
Finland and Sweden are well positioned to integrate into
NATO. Both have large, technologically advanced, and growing
militaries. They have long partnered with NATO and have
contributed to NATO-led operations in the Balkans, Afghanistan,
and Iraq.
Since Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, they have
strengthened their relations with NATO even further, engaging
in regular dialogue and consultations, exchanging information,
and coordinating training and exercises.
In fact, given geography and history, Finland and Sweden
have long equipped their militaries and prepared their
societies for the prospect of Russian aggression.
Their participation in NATO would actively contribute to
burden sharing with the United States and the whole military
alliance.
Belonging to NATO is not just a measurement of military
capability. We were established as a club of democracies that
abide by a certain set of principles.
All U.S. administrations have used certain criteria for
assessing candidates for NATO membership: a functioning
democratic political system based on a market economy, fair
treatment of minority populations, a commitment to resolve
conflicts peacefully, an ability and willingness to make
military contributions to NATO operations, and a commitment to
democratic civil military relations.
I would like our witnesses to address how Finland and
Sweden fulfill these criteria. The required information the
departments have already provided give me great confidence, but
I believe it is important to address them in an open setting.
We thank Sweden and Finland for their partnership and
support. I look forward to welcoming you into NATO.
With that, I welcome Assistant Secretary of State for
European Affairs Karen Donfried and Assistant Secretary of
Defense for International Security Affairs Celeste Wallander.
Finally, it is my great pleasure to welcome Ambassadors
Karin Olofsdotter from Sweden and Mikko Hautala from Finland
here today for this hearing. We appreciate both ambassadors
being here with us, probably the first outside guests that we
have had. I could not think of better guests to have for a
better cause and a better moment.
With that, let me turn to the distinguished ranking member
for his remarks.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES E. RISCH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM IDAHO
Senator Risch. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, Assistant Secretaries. We are glad to have you
here to discuss this important subject, and welcome to both of
you ambassadors, and I want to thank you personally for
spending the time, both of you, and other officials from your
countries in discussing these important issues.
The ambassador from Finland and I were early to the party,
having met on this long before the invasion occurred, but with
the obvious view towards this day might come.
With that, let me say also that the chairman and I have
discussed this matter at length between ourselves and there is
no daylight between us as to our view of this matter either.
About 4 months ago, Russia's invasion of Ukraine sent a
seismic shock through the transatlantic community and it made
it abundantly clear that the assumptions many had made about
security in the 21st century were false or at least
misperceived and forced us to reconsider how we will restore
peace and preserve it.
Our immediate response has been strong, but there is no
doubt NATO needs serious updates and reforms if we hope to face
these emerging challenges over the long term, and it is going
to be a long term, obviously. One of these proposed changes is
the enlargement of our alliance to include Finland and Sweden.
In this hearing today, I look forward to a deep and
thorough discussion of Finland and Sweden's potential accession
to NATO. Any country that meets the requirements like Sweden
and Finland should be able to join if they want.
Sweden and Finland both have strong democracies and capable
militaries that will contribute immediately to NATO. Through
their participation in multiple joint combat operations they
have both proven their willingness and their ability to fight
alongside NATO allies, and through multiple NATO partnerships
programs they have proven their commitment to NATO's goals and
developed highly interoperable NATO standard forces.
Let us also be clear. Sweden and Finland in particular have
been guarding NATO's High North for decades. They have been
doing the mission of NATO from the outside. This has been an
asset to NATO and transatlantic security. It is fair that they
be allowed to finally sit at the table with everyone else.
With this hearing, the Senate will take its first official
step in considering this next wave of NATO enlargement.
Throughout this entire process, we must remember to take the
utmost care as we examine the details and implications of this
decision.
In my mind, both countries have fully demonstrated their
worthiness to join NATO and the value they each will bring to
it, but we cannot leave any room for doubt about their place
and commitment in our alliance.
I also want to reiterate my expectation that once the North
Atlantic Council agrees and sends out the accession protocols,
that the Biden administration will swiftly prepare the final
reports and submit everything to the Senate quickly so we can
begin our consideration.
In closing, let me say raising the--addressing the issue
that the chairman also raised regarding Turkey's remarks about
not being in favor of accession at this time, we are told and
assured by both Sweden and Finland that they have been in good
faith involved with Turkey in discussions to resolve that.
I think that is best left to them, between they and Turkey,
without us at this point in time. Let there be no mistake, this
must be done. This is so important. It must be done.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Risch.
We will start with our witnesses. Both of your statements
will be included fully in the record, without objection.
Secretary Donfried, we will start with you. We would ask
you to summarize--both--in about 5 minutes or so so that we can
have a conversation with you.
The floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF KAREN DONFRIED, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR
EUROPEAN AND EURASIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Donfried. Thank you so much.
Chairman Menendez, Ranking Member Risch, distinguished
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to
appear before you today to discuss the critical role NATO plays
in our security and the safeguarding of our freedom and
democratic values, and Finland and Sweden's future place in the
Alliance.
I welcome the opportunity to share with you today why the
Administration strongly and unequivocally supports Finland and
Sweden membership in NATO.
We strongly support NATO's open door policy and firmly
believe that these two countries' membership in the Alliance
would benefit the national security of the United States and
strengthen the collective defense of NATO and the broader
security of the Euro-Atlantic region.
As President Biden said when he welcomed Finnish President
Niinisto and Swedish Prime Minister Anderson to the White House
last month, we are proud to offer ``the strong support of the
United States for the applications of two great democracies and
two close highly capable partners to join the strongest, most
powerful defensive alliance in the history of the world.''
Likewise, I want to thank the more than 80 senators who
signaled their full support for Sweden and Finland's
applications for NATO membership in a letter to the President,
as well as the bipartisan Senate Resolution 646 in support of
their NATO accession.
This provided yet another endorsement for these two strong
and capable democracies. The Administration has provided
reports to Congress on Finland and Sweden's accession as called
for in the Senate's resolution of ratification of the NATO
accession protocols for Poland, Hungary, and the Czech
Republic.
Russia's unprovoked February 24 full-scale invasion of
Ukraine caused a seismic change in both Swedish and Finnish
public support for NATO membership.
Each country carried out inclusive and thorough democratic
processes, leading to the decision to apply for NATO
membership.
In an historic foreign and security policy shift, Finland
and Sweden together officially applied for NATO membership on
May 18. Since its inception, NATO's goal is to achieve a
lasting peace in the North Atlantic area through collective
security based on the common values of democracy, the rule of
law, and individual liberty.
As advanced democracies that uphold the rule of law and
world leaders in protecting and promoting global human rights,
Finland and Sweden would strengthen NATO as an alliance of
values and expand the circle of North American and European
democracies committed to defending each other.
The United States has close bilateral defense relationships
with both Finland and Sweden and has built robust cooperation
and interoperability with these two countries through exercises
and presence in the Baltic Sea region and elsewhere.
In addition, Finland and Sweden both are already active in
NATO political dialogues, exercises and operations, and are
highly interoperable with NATO.
Since Russia's further invasion of Ukraine in February
Finland and Sweden have drawn even closer through enhanced
political dialogue and sharing of information with the
Alliance.
The two countries began cooperating with NATO in 1994
through the Partnership for Peace program. In 2014, Finland and
Sweden were granted enhanced opportunities partner status,
which affords partners the closest level of cooperation short
of being a member.
Sweden has participated in NATO missions since 1995,
including in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, and Libya, share cyber
defense information, is home to a world-class defense industry,
and is steadily increasing defense spending with the stated
goal of reaching 2 percent of GDP as soon as possible.
Finland has contributed to NATO missions in Afghanistan,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iraq, and Kosovo, and will spend 2.16
percent of its GDP on defense in 2022.
In 2026, Finland will receive the first of its 65 F-35As
from its $12 billion deal, the largest national procurement in
Finland's history and one that will give Finland a significant
military capability, increase interoperability with the United
States and other NATO allies, and have a positive economic
impact on both the U.S. and Finnish economies. Both countries
will enhance NATO's situational awareness and capabilities in
the High North.
In short, I concur with what you both and many other
senators have said already. NATO enlargement that includes
Finland and Sweden would further bolster the Alliance. They
would be net providers of security to NATO and would enhance
the national security interests of the United States.
Turkey has raised concerns about some of Finland and
Sweden's policies in advance of NATO accession. We recognize
Turkey's legitimate concerns regarding terrorism, which NATO
Secretary General Stoltenberg has also highlighted.
We continue to encourage Stockholm, Ankara, and Helsinki to
work together to find a path forward that addresses the
security concerns of all allies and urge the Alliance to reach
consensus on the accession process in an expeditious manner.
We are confident Sweden and Finland would be net
contributors to the alliance and their membership will bolster
the security of every NATO member.
Thank you so much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Donfried follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ms. Karen E. Donfried
Chairman Menendez, Ranking Member Risch, and distinguished members
of the Committee: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today to discuss the critical role NATO plays in our security and the
safeguarding of our freedom and democratic values, and Finland and
Sweden's future place in the Alliance. I welcome the opportunity to
share with you today why the Administration strongly and unequivocally
supports Finland and Sweden's membership in NATO. We strongly support
NATO's Open Door policy and firmly believe that these two countries'
membership in the Alliance would benefit the national security of the
United States and strengthen the collective defense of NATO and the
broader security of the Euro-Atlantic region. As President Biden said
when he welcomed Finnish President Niinisto and Swedish Prime Minister
Andersson to the White House last month, we are proud to offer ``the
strong support of the United States for the applications of two great
democracies and two close, highly capable partners to join the
strongest, most powerful defensive alliance in the history of the
world.'' Likewise, I want to thank the more than 80 senators who
signaled their full support for Sweden and Finland's applications for
NATO membership in a letter to the President, as well as the bipartisan
Senate Resolution 646 in support of their NATO accession. This provided
yet another endorsement for these two strong and capable democracies.
The Administration has provided reports to Congress on Finland and
Sweden's accession, as called for in the Senate's Resolution of
Ratification of the NATO Accession protocols for Poland, Hungary, and
the Czech Republic.
Russia's unprovoked February 24 full scale invasion of Ukraine
caused a seismic change in both Swedish and Finnish public support for
NATO membership. Each country carried out inclusive and thorough
democratic processes leading to the decision to apply for NATO
membership. In an historic foreign and security policy shift, Finland
and Sweden together officially applied for NATO membership on May 18.
Since its inception, NATO's goal is to achieve a lasting peace in
the North Atlantic area through collective security based on the common
values of democracy, the rule of law, and individual liberty. As
advanced democracies that uphold the rule of law and world leaders in
protecting and promoting global human rights, Finland and Sweden would
strengthen NATO as an alliance of values and expand the circle of North
American and European democracies committed to defending each other.
The United States has close bilateral defense relationships with
both Finland and Sweden and has built robust cooperation and
interoperability with these two countries through exercises and
presence in the Baltic Sea region and elsewhere. In addition, Finland
and Sweden both are already active in NATO political dialogues,
exercises, and operations, and are highly interoperable with NATO.
Since Russia's further invasion of Ukraine in February, Finland and
Sweden have drawn even closer through enhanced political dialogue and
sharing of information with the Alliance. The two countries began
cooperating with NATO in 1994 through the Partnership for Peace
program. In 2014, Finland and Sweden were granted ``Enhanced
Opportunities Partner'' status, which affords partners the closest
level of cooperation short of being a member. Sweden has participated
in NATO missions since 1995 including in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, and
Libya; shares cyber defense information; is home to a world-class
defense industry, and is steadily increasing defense spending with the
stated goal of reaching 2 percent of GDP as soon as possible. Finland
has contributed to NATO missions in Afghanistan, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Iraq, and Kosovo and will spend 2.16 percent of its GDP on
defense in 2022. In 2026, Finland will receive the first of its 64 F-
35As from its $12 billion deal--the largest national procurement in
Finland's history--and one that will give Finland a significant
military capability, increase interoperability with the United States
and other NATO Allies, and have a positive economic impact on both the
U.S. and Finnish economies. Both countries will enhance NATO's
situational awareness and capabilities in the High North. In short, I
concur with what many of you have said already: NATO enlargement that
includes Finland and Sweden would further bolster the Alliance. They
would be net providers of security to NATO and would enhance the
national security interests of the United States.
Turkey has raised concerns about some of Finland and Sweden's
policies in advance of NATO accession. We recognize Turkey's legitimate
concerns regarding terrorism, which NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg
has also highlighted. We continue to encourage Stockholm, Ankara, and
Helsinki to work together to find a path forward that addresses the
security concerns of all Allies, and urge the Alliance to reach
consensus on the accession process in an expeditious manner. We are
confident Sweden and Finland would be net contributors to the Alliance
and their membership will bolster the security of every NATO member.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and distinguished Members of this
Committee, Finland and Sweden are NATO's closest partners, and we look
forward to welcoming them into the Alliance. Neither country's
membership would detract from the ability of the United States to meet
or fund its military requirements outside the North Atlantic area. We
believe U.S. and overall Transatlantic security will be strengthened by
their membership. Once the accession protocols are signed, we urge the
Senate at the earliest opportunity to provide its advice and consent.
Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Secretary Wallander.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CELESTE WALLANDER, ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, WASHINGTON, DC
Dr. Wallander. Chairman Menendez, Ranking Member Risch, and
members of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you
today alongside Assistant Secretary Donfried to express the
Department of Defense's unwavering support for NATO membership
for the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden.
Thank you for holding this important hearing. This historic
moment builds on the positive relationship that the Department
of Defense enjoys with Ministries of Defense and Armed Forces
of both Finland and Sweden.
DoD strongly assesses that the membership of both Sweden
and Finland would be an asset to the North Atlantic Treaty as a
values-based organization for defense and security.
Both countries maintain a high degree of interoperability
and cooperation with NATO and are capable military partners
whose values align closely with that of the United States.
A few key points on each of these NATO aspirants.
On Finland, general conscription, a well-manned and trained
reserve, and a strong will to defend the country are the
foundations of Finland's defense. Finland's location on the
Baltic Sea, diplomatic experience with Russia, and advanced
capabilities make it an asset to the Alliance.
Finland spends more than 2 percent of its GDP on defense
and possesses unique military capabilities and expertise,
particularly operating in the Arctic environment.
As a democracy and market economy, Finland's foreign policy
is underpinned by a commitment to and the promotion of
democracy, individual freedom, and rule of law. Finland is a
modern, highly industrialized democratic country with one of
the highest standards of living in the world.
The country has a well-educated and media savvy population,
making its citizenry and institutions resilient to
misinformation and malign influence while serving as a model to
others.
In particular, Finland would augment NATO's capacity to
defend critical infrastructure, operate in the cyber domain,
and strengthen individual and collective resilience.
Finland first participated in a NATO-led operation in 1996
and became a NATO enhanced opportunities partner in 2014. It
has contributed to or otherwise supported NATO missions in
Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iraq, and Kosovo.
The Finnish Defense Forces comprise a total active and
reserve force and strength of 280,000 with an additional
900,000 trained individuals available for military service.
Unlike many other European countries, Finland has
maintained a general conscription model for defense. This
allows Finland to rapidly call up its reserve force when needed
at a lower overall training cost.
On Sweden, Swedish accession to NATO would further the
principles of the North Atlantic Treaty by combining a first-
rate and rapidly growing military with a principled foreign
policy that ardently defends democracy and human rights.
Sweden is both a highly capable military partner and home
to a world-class defense industry. Its military expertise in
the Arctic and undersea environments would substantially
advance Alliance capabilities.
Sweden already maintains a high degree of interoperability
and cooperation with NATO, having become a NATO Partnership for
Peace member in 1994 and a NATO enhanced opportunities partner
in 2014.
Sweden has contributed to or supported NATO missions in
Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iraq, Kosovo, and Libya.
Sweden's membership in NATO will strengthen the security of the
Baltic Sea region, which remains an active area for Russian
military activity, and accelerate regional maritime and air
domain awareness.
Our bilateral defense relationship currently focuses on
deepening interoperability, enhancing Sweden's defense
capabilities, building regional air and maritime domain
awareness, increasing Swedish contributions to multinational
operations, and aligning strategic communications.
In particular, Sweden has an acknowledged level of
competency in domestic crisis resilience and preparedness that
distinguishes it as a leader among European nations.
The Department of Defense is confident the accession of
Sweden to NATO will have a positive effect on the Alliance's
military effectiveness based on Sweden's defense capabilities,
support of U.S. and allied actions in multiple theaters, and
expectation that Sweden will be able to contribute available
capabilities to operations.
In closing, the Department of Defense assesses that Finland
and Sweden are ready for NATO membership. Their accession will
provide additional security and stability in Europe.
They already have close bilateral defense relationships
with the United States, close working relationships and
military interoperability with NATO as enhanced opportunity
partners, and are thriving democracies that share our values
and fit the ideals of the North Atlantic Treaty.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Wallander follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Celeste Wallander
introduction
Chairman Menendez, Ranking Member Risch, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for this opportunity to express the Department of
Defense's support for NATO membership for the Republic of Finland and
the Kingdom of Sweden. This historic moment builds on the positive
relationship that the Department of Defense enjoys with Ministries of
Defense of Finland and Sweden and the interoperability we have worked
to develop with each country's Armed Forces. The Department fully
supports both countries' sovereign choice to apply for NATO membership.
finland
Finland is a highly capable military partner whose democratic
values align closely with those of the United States. General
conscription, a well-prepared and trained reserve, and a strong will to
defend the country are the foundations of Finland's defense
capabilities. At the core of Finland's will to defend itself is the
belief that the Finnish way of life is worth protecting. Finland's
location on the Baltic Sea, experience with Russia as a frontline
state, and advanced capabilities would make it an asset to the
Alliance. Finland spends more than 2 percent of its GDP on defense and
possesses unique military capabilities and expertise, particularly its
experience operating in the Arctic environment.
In 2016, DoD and the Finnish Defense Ministry signed a Statement of
Intent to increase practical cooperation. Our bilateral defense
relationship currently focuses on deepening interoperability, enhancing
Finland's defense capabilities, building regional air and maritime
domain awareness, increasing Finnish contributions to multinational
operations, and aligning strategic communications. Finland and the
United States have enjoyed strong military-to-military cooperation
dating to Finland's acquisition of F/A-18 Hornets in the mid-1990s. In
December 2021, Finland announced plans to purchase 64 F-35A fighter
jets, which will only deepen our cooperation and ensure another
generation of close bilateral defense ties.
Finland also maintains a high degree of interoperability and
cooperation with NATO. Finland first participated in a NATO-led
operation in 1996 and became a NATO Enhanced Opportunities Partner in
2014, the closest level of partnership with the Alliance. It has
contributed to or otherwise supported NATO missions in Afghanistan,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iraq, and Kosovo.
Finnish membership in NATO would further the principles of the
North Atlantic Treaty and enhance the security of the North Atlantic
area. As a democracy and market economy, Finland's foreign policy is
underpinned by a commitment to and the promotion of democracy,
individual freedom, and rule of law. Finland is a modern, highly
industrialized democratic country with one of the highest standards of
living in the world. Finland has a well-educated and media-savvy
population, making its citizenry and democratic institutions resilient
to misinformation and malign influence while serving as a model to
others. As an advanced democracy, Finland's support of values enshrined
in NATO's founding Washington Treaty--including democracy, human
rights, and respect for territorial integrity--align strongly with
those of the United States.
Finland's NATO membership will be an asset to the Alliance as a
values-based security organization. Finland is a world leader in
advanced telecommunications. As a NATO Ally, Finland would augment
NATO's capacity to defend critical infrastructure, operate in the cyber
domain, and strengthen individual and collective resilience. A founding
member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE) and a member of the European Union (EU) since 1995, Finland has
demonstrated for decades its commitment to individual liberty,
democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Finland emphasizes the
importance of international cooperation to collectively resolve the
world's most pressing global challenges, including climate change,
international terrorism, defending human rights, and promoting open and
fair trade. Finland has a seat on the UN Human Rights Council from
2022-2024, will serve as OSCE Chair in 2025, and has ambitions to join
the UN Security Council in 2029-2030.
The Finnish Defense Forces comprise a total active and reserve
force end-strength of 280,000, with an additional 900,000 trained
individuals available for military service. Unlike many other European
countries, Finland has maintained a general conscription model for
defense. This allows Finland to rapidly call up its reserve force when
needed, at a lower overall training cost.
In addition to military forces, Finland maintains a comprehensive
security model with a whole-of-society approach to security and
preparedness. Vital societal functions are handled together by
government authorities, businesses, NGOs, and citizens ensuring that
every part of society is invested and understands the role they play in
defense of the country.
Finland's accession to NATO is likely to decrease the United
States' overall cost-share percentage of NATO's common funded budgets.
Relative to other accessions, Finland's modem military forces and
existing close partnership with NATO will reduce the time, effort, and
costs associated with its integration into NATO structures. Finland
would provide a net increase in security and military power to the
Alliance. Given Finland's capable military forces, high level of
readiness, and ability to provide for its self-defense, Finland's NATO
membership presents no discernable additional cost requirements to the
U.S. defense budget.
The Department of Defense is confident the accession of Finland to
NATO will have a positive impact on the Alliance's military
effectiveness. This high level of confidence is based on Finland's
defense capabilities, its support of U.S. and NATO actions in multiple
theaters, and its ability contribute available capabilities to
operations.
sweden
Swedish accession to NATO would further the principles of the North
Atlantic Treaty as Sweden will combine a first-rate and rapidly growing
military that will contribute to the collective defense of the North
Atlantic area, with a principled foreign policy that ardently defends
democracy and human rights.
Sweden is a modern, highly industrialized democratic country with
one of the highest standards of living in the world. A member of the
European Union (EU) since 1995, Sweden's commitment to democracy,
individual freedom, and rule-of-law align closely with those of the
United States.
Sweden is a highly capable military partner and home to a world-
class defense industry. Sweden's military expertise in the Arctic and
undersea environments would further the Alliance's capabilities. The
Swedish Armed Forces, which has about 60,000 personnel, set a goal in
2020 to reach 90,000 by 2025. Sweden is working to increase military
spending to 2 percent of GDP as soon as practically possible, expecting
to meet this benchmark not later than 2028.
Sweden also maintains a high degree of interoperability and
cooperation with NATO, having become a member of Partnership for Peace
in 1994. Sweden first participated in a NATO-led operation in 1995 and
became a NATO Enhanced Opportunities Partner in 2014, the closest level
of partnership with the Alliance. Sweden has contributed to or
supported NATO missions in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iraq,
Kosovo, and Libya.
Sweden is a capable military partner that would be a net
contributor to Alliance and transatlantic security should it be
approved for NATO membership. Sweden has an acknowledged level of
competency in domestic crisis resilience and preparedness that
distinguishes it as a leader among European nations. In 2016, the
Department of Defense and Swedish Ministry of Defense signed a
Statement of Intent (SOI) to increase practical cooperation. Our
bilateral defense relationship currently focuses on deepening
interoperability, enhancing Sweden's defense capabilities, building
regional air and maritime domain awareness, increasing Swedish
contributions to multinational operations, and aligning strategic
communications.
Sweden would be a net provider of security and military power to
the Alliance area, thus enhancing the national security interests of
the United States and all NATO Allies. Sweden considers the United
States and Finland to be its two most significant strategic partners.
Both the governing coalition and the opposition are committed to strong
ties with the United States. Sweden's inclusion will not detract from
the ability of the United States to meet or fund its military
requirements.
Sweden's membership in NATO will strengthen the security of the
Baltic Sea region, which remains an active area for Russian military
activity. Swedish NATO membership will accelerate regional maritime and
air domain awareness.
Sweden's accession to NATO is likely to decrease the United States'
overall cost-share percentage of NATO's common funded budgets. Sweden's
modern military forces and existing close partnership with NATO will
reduce the time, effort, and costs associated with Sweden's integration
into NATO structures, relative to other recent accessions. Given
Sweden's capable military forces, high level of readiness, and ability
to provide for its self-defense, its NATO membership presents no
discernable additional cost requirements to the U.S. defense budget.
The Department of Defense is confident the accession of Sweden to
NATO will have a positive impact on the Alliance's military
effectiveness. This high level of confidence is based on Sweden's
defense capabilities, Sweden's support of U.S. and Allied actions in
multiple theaters, and expectation that Sweden will be able to
contribute available capabilities to operations.
In closing, the Department of Defense assesses Finland and Sweden
are ready for NATO membership. Finland and Sweden's accession will
provide additional security and stability in Europe. They have close
bilateral defense relationships with the United States; already enjoy
close working relationships and military interoperability with NATO as
Enhanced Opportunity Partners; and are thriving democracies that share
our values and fit the ideals of the North Atlantic Treaty.
The Chairman. Thank you both for very comprehensive
testimony.
We have votes going on on the floor. It is the chair's
intention to just continue through and rotate to somebody
presiding so we can get through the hearing.
Let me start with you, Assistant Secretary Wallander.
Some of this you have--both have referred to, but I want to
just detail the record. Is it accurate to say that Finland and
Sweden have large, technologically advanced militaries and both
have long partnered with NATO contributing to NATO operations,
including in the Balkans and Afghanistan, and also understand
that both countries either meet or have plans to meet the 2
percent NATO spending benchmark?
Dr. Wallander. Yes, Senator. That is accurate.
The Chairman. Since Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine,
popular support for joining NATO in Finland and Sweden and
their governments' commitments to NATO have grown
significantly.
Secretary Donfried, can you speak to how attitudes towards
joining NATO in Finland and Sweden have changed and where those
countries stand today on the subject?
Ms. Donfried. Yes. I agree with your analysis that February
24 fundamentally changed the perspective of both Finland and
Sweden. We saw Finland very decisively make a decision then to
move on NATO membership, and Sweden shortly joined Finland in
that membership aspiration.
I think--it is interesting, there is a colleague of mine
who works for the European Union who has talked about February
24 as Europe's 9/11, and I think for many Europeans it was
unthinkable before February 24 that Russia would undertake a
full-scale, brutal, unprovoked invasion of its neighbor,
Ukraine, and that action fundamentally shifted security
perspectives.
I agree with you that is how to understand the change in
public opinion that we have seen in both countries and the
strong support for NATO membership.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Respect for human rights, commitments to
transparency, rule of law, democracy, are values that NATO
members share and which are important to look at in assessing
candidates for NATO membership.
Assistant Secretary Donfried, can you speak to how Finland
and Sweden exemplify those values?
Ms. Donfried. I would be happy to do so.
When we are talking about Finland and Sweden, we are
talking about two of our closest partners, and one of the
fundamental things that unites us is our respect for democracy
and human rights.
If you look at Sweden, there are so many examples that we
could point to. One would be Sweden's 1-year OSCE
chairpersonship in 2021 where they played an important
invisible role on so many issues--Ukraine already at that time,
Belarus, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in Transnistria--and
Sweden brought to all of these conflicts its deep commitment to
global democracy and human rights.
We also see gender equality as a fundamental aim of Swedish
foreign policy and we also see Sweden as having been an active
contributor to last December's Summit for Democracy where
Sweden co-hosted a side event on women's economic empowerment.
I think there is no question that Sweden is deeply
committed to advancing democracy, human rights, and the rule of
law, and will do so also in its upcoming presidency of the
European Council of the European Union in 2023.
Then if we shift our attention to Finland, Finland, too, in
all of its foreign policy has shown a deep commitment to
promoting democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.
Finland has emphasized the importance of the rules-based
international system to collectively resolve the world's most
pressing global challenges.
Finland, too, has been a leader in international fora,
whether it is the number of Finns in the U.N. system and other
key international organizations, whether it is promoting
democracy in the OSCE in the Human Rights Council, and I
believe that we will see Finland continue to cooperate strongly
with the United States, with the EU, and will bring that
sensibility to NATO membership.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Secretary Wallander, Finland has a long history of opposing
Russian military advances and Sweden has a well-equipped
fighting force.
Could you confirm that enlarging NATO to include Finland
and Sweden will reduce the burdens including defense burden on
the United States rather than increase them?
Dr. Wallander. Senator, membership in NATO of Sweden and
Finland would enhance the capabilities of the NATO Alliance on
both the ground, air, and sea domain and in new domains of
importance, including the cyber domain and combating Russian
malign influence in the area of disinformation, and both
countries bring strong economies and strong democratic support
for defense spending.
The Department of Defense sees no negatives in the
membership of Sweden and Finland on burden sharing or on the
capabilities of the Alliance.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Congress has a long and bipartisan track record of support
for Baltic security as well as a more generally robust defense
of NATO's eastern flank.
How would Sweden and Finland's membership in NATO affect
our security posture in the eastern part of the Alliance?
Dr. Wallander. We have already seen in just the last month
the potential of an improved--enhanced capability of NATO from
the membership of Sweden and Finland with a participation in
the BALTOPS exercise, which is vital for the ability of the
NATO Alliance to enhance the security in the Baltic region
where Russia is active and often irresponsible in its military
presence.
Already BALTOPS has benefited from Swedish and Finnish
participation as partners, but having a higher degree of
interoperability and integration from members of the Alliance
would further support those kinds of planning and exercises.
The Chairman. Finally, Secretary Donfried, even though we
do not yet have texts of accession protocols, all NATO
accession protocols are substantively identical and we are well
positioned to assess the candidacies of Finland and Sweden even
prior to the signature of the protocols.
Would you say that that is your understanding as well as it
relates to the protocols?
Ms. Donfried. Yes. My understanding is that once the
accession protocols are signed, we would then urge the Senate
at its earliest opportunity to provide its advice and consent.
The Chairman. Thank you.
I am strongly supportive of accession and will work both
with the ranking member through the committee and on the floor
to get this ratified.
Senator Risch.
I am going to ask Senator Kaine to preside so I can go
vote. Thank you.
Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I think we have had a really good robust
discussion here and one of the reasons is because we are all
ready and we have all been expecting this, and as the chairman
just pointed out, I wrote a letter--I do not know--2 weeks
ago--maybe it is 3 weeks ago now--to both the White House and
State directing your attention to the fact that this was coming
down the pipe pretty quickly and to start work on it.
Can you give us any kind of a time frame? You talked about
as early as possible and what have you. How quickly can you get
that material to us, I guess, is the question I would have?
Ms. Donfried. So the accession protocols--what is happening
now, as was already mentioned, is there is a conversation
happening among Turkey, Finland, and Sweden, and the decision
within NATO is a consensus decision, and Turkey has raised some
concerns relating to terrorism in the approach of Sweden and
Finland.
Of course, the United States, along with Turkey, shares a
desire to end the scourge of terrorism and we all take this
very seriously. My understanding is those conversations are
moving at pace. They are happening among those three countries.
What we saw this week is that NATO Secretary General Jens
Stoltenberg also invited the parties to have a conversation
that he mediated. That was on Monday. We understand that was
constructive.
We are confident that there will be progress here and that
will allow the accession protocols to be signed and the
ratification process here to move forward.
Senator Risch. Are you intending to be in Madrid next week?
Ms. Donfried. Yes, sir. I am.
Senator Risch. Okay.
Again, I come back to time wise. We all want to work as
quickly as possible. Can you give us--let us assume that we get
this one wrinkle ironed out next week. How quickly can we
expect to see something here in the Senate?
Ms. Donfried. I think, to use your term, Ranking Member
Risch, once that wrinkle is ironed out I think it would move
immediately.
Senator Risch. That is important.
I think you indicated about consensus. By the word
consensus did you mean unanimously, essentially?
Ms. Donfried. Yes. Yes.
Senator Risch. So have a clear understanding of that.
All right. That is clear, and as you have heard from the
chairman and I, we are all in on this and we want this to
happen as rapidly as possible.
It is something that is--it will be a great addition for
NATO, for the North Atlantic, and I appreciate your work on it.
With that, I am going to yield back, Mr. Chairman, as we
have had a--or Mr. Acting Chairman.
Senator Kaine [presiding]. Mr. Acting Chairman. Thank you,
Mr. Ranking, and to our witnesses and others.
I, actually--oh, excuse me, do we have either--anyone on by
WebEx right now?
All right. That means I am next.
I want to thank, actually, Chairman Menendez and Ranking
Member Risch. Apropos of this discussion, this committee acted
in the last couple of months on a resolution I have with
Senator Rubio to make clear that no president of the United
States can withdraw from NATO without congressional approval.
The Constitution is silent about exiting treaties. It is
very clear about entering treaties. A two-thirds Senate vote is
needed.
It is squarely within the jurisdiction of this committee,
and the chair and ranking had a markup on this and it passed
overwhelmingly in the committee. They gave me permission--a
clearance--to try to get it added to the annual defense
authorizing bill, which we passed out of the SASC Committee
last week overwhelmingly.
Because SASC will not consider matters in the jurisdiction
of another committee, even with the agreement of the chair and
ranking, I was not able to get it added.
I was trying to get it added because I thought it would
send a really powerful signal about congressional support for
NATO on the verge of this next NATO meeting, but we can have
another opportunity.
Senator Risch. There is other ways of doing that, as the
senator well knows.
Senator Kaine. Yes. We will look for other ways to do it. I
just wanted to thank the chair and ranking for being willing to
let us try it in the Armed Services bill. We will look for
another way.
One of the things that I think is interesting about Sweden
and Finland--and we have talked about their respective
capacities, economic strength, worked together with the United
States in the past--is the fact that on these defense matters
they also have a really significant cooperation among them.
So you are not just getting two different new allies. You
are getting two allies that have significant capacity, but that
also do a lot together, and the fact that they would both
approach this NATO membership together is also interesting to
me.
Talk a little bit about the long-term defense and
diplomatic relationship between Sweden and Finland, because I
think that actually brings an additional element to the table
as we consider NATO accession for the two countries.
Ms. Donfried. I am happy to start, and you may want to
weigh in as well.
I think your observation is on point, and it is striking
how closely Finland and Sweden do cooperate in the security and
defense area, and, interestingly, we saw Finland be the first
to announce its intention to seek NATO membership and then
Sweden followed.
If you look at public opinion in Sweden, you saw about a 10
percentage point jump when the Finns announced their commitment
to pursuing this and I think that get to your point of how
joined up these two countries are when they think about their
own security and it also relates to how current NATO member
states see this.
There was a question earlier about the BALTOPS, and it is
interesting because if Finland and Sweden or when Finland and
Sweden join NATO, the Baltic littoral, with the exception of
the Russian coast on the Gulf of Finland and Kaliningrad, would
be ally territory, which enables NATO to better monitor
activity in and plan the defense of the entire vital region.
You have seen the Baltic foreign ministers state publicly
that they and NATO will benefit from Finland and Sweden's
strong military capabilities so I think you see that benefit
both on the diplomacy side and on the military side.
Over to you.
Senator Kaine. Secretary Wallander, do you have anything to
add to that?
Dr. Wallander. Thanks. Yes.
Finland and Sweden bring not only common advantages as
strong potential allies, but have, through their own
complementary capabilities, worked together, participated in
NATO-led or, simply, multinational exercises in really
constructive ways.
I will give you a couple of examples. One is Finland,
obviously, has a very strong territorial defense capability,
very important for a country with an over 800-mile border with
Russia and experience of fighting the Soviet Union in the 1930s
and doing so effectively.
Sweden has been--has substantial capabilities in the
maritime domain and has carefully monitored Russian maritime
and air activity over the Baltics, and Sweden also has
participated in bilateral programs and cooperation with the
United States in the area of Special Operations Forces as well.
The two potential allies--aspirant allies bring similar
strengths in their democracies, in their market economies, in
their strengths as European countries, and then they each bring
their own complementary military capabilities that will further
strengthen the NATO Alliance.
Senator Kaine. That is excellent.
Secretary Donfried, I want to ask you a question. You said
that some of your colleagues in Europe have described this
moment, the February 24 attack of Ukraine, as Europe's 9/11,
and I am pretty sure I know what you mean by that, but I kind
of wanted to dig into it further.
People who are not spending a lot of time in Europe and do
not know the European reality might think, oh, but Finland and
Sweden, they are quite a ways away from Ukraine so why would
they view an attack on Ukraine as the equivalent of a 9/11
style attack on Europe.
Just dig into that a little bit more. I think I know what
you mean, but I think it would be important to get this
testimony out there.
Ms. Donfried. Thank you for the question.
I will tell you how I heard it, in fairness to the
individual who said it, but the way I heard it was just the
sense of shock that Russia, in 2022, would undertake this full-
scale, unprovoked, unjustified brutal invasion of its neighbor,
Ukraine.
Of course, in the first instance, that has tragic
implications for Ukraine, and I think we have all been inspired
by the bravery of Ukrainians in meeting that challenge and
their resilience.
It also fundamentally alters the European security
landscape, and so that is how I understood it, that every
country in Europe recalculated its own assessment of its
security, and I think Finland and Sweden in so doing, whereas
in the past they always believed their security interests were
best served by having a NATO partnership, but not being
members, that changed almost overnight.
That was how I understood the comment.
Thanks.
Senator Kaine. Thank you very much for that.
This is one where in my 10 years here I have never seen a
bigger gulf between the United States and our European allies
on our predictions about what was going to happen.
We shared the hopes for what would happen or would not
happen and we were sharing the same set of facts upon which to
make a prediction.
I agree, I think there was a degree--and I can, certainly,
understand that wishful thinking is a somewhat derogatory
phrase, a deep hope that, of course, Russia is not going to
invade. I mean, it is a muscle flexing exercise.
When it became a reality, which much of U.S. intel was
saying it was going to become a reality, I can see that that
caused this kind of continent-wide recalibration as you
describe.
I am going to--oh, please.
Ms. Donfried. I should just--I should not lump all of
Europe together. I want to be clear.
Senator Kaine. Yes.
Ms. Donfried. I do think there were differences in
perception----
Senator Kaine. Yes.
Ms. Donfried. --across the European continent, just to be
clear. I do not mean to say all of them.
Senator Kaine. Yes. I hear you.
There being no senators on WebEx now, Senator Hagerty, you
are up next.
Senator Hagerty. Okay. Thank you very much, and to our
witnesses here today, Assistant Secretaries Donfried and
Wallander, welcome to you. Thank you for being here to discuss
an important topic regarding strengthening the NATO Alliance.
I would like to take you back to my service as U.S.
Ambassador to Japan. There, I spent a tremendous amount of my
time and effort in increasing the capabilities of the U.S.-
Japan alliance on a military front, trying to ensure that the
agility, the interoperability, and the overall military
capability was being maximized for our combined forces.
I worked very often with then Prime Minister Abe on this
topic. I support our current Ambassador Emanuel as he works
with current Prime Minister Kishida in the same arena. It is
very important.
Up front, I would like to say I support Finland and
Sweden's accession to NATO because their addition will be
accretive to the overall capabilities of the Alliance, and I
appreciate that.
As the United States advances its NATO policy in the 21st
century, I believe it is going to be important to get back to
the basics. There, I mean, in the very first instance, NATO is
a military alliance that needs to focus on deterring military
threats with real military capabilities, and if the last year
has demonstrated anything it is that the NATO Alliance must
stand stronger to better deter Russia's military threat to us
and to our allies.
My first question will be to you, Assistant Secretary
Wallander.
When will Finland and Sweden, respectively, meet the goals
of spending 2 percent of GDP on defense? I know that Finland is
closer than Sweden, but both were on track, as I understand it.
Can you give me your sense of when they will meet their
goals?
Dr. Wallander. Sure. It is a great question, Senator, and I
share your commitment to making sure that NATO allies are
contributing to security of the Alliance.
Finland already in 2022 does meet the 2 percent floor--the
Wales Pledge. Finland's defense spending is at 2.2 percent of
GDP and Sweden is----
Senator Hagerty. That is projected for 2022?
Dr. Wallander. This is for 2022. Sweden's government has
committed to meeting the 2 percent pledge as soon as possible
and no later than 2028.
I would note also that Sweden meets the NATO--the less
cited, but no less important NATO standard of spending at least
20 percent of its defense budget on acquisition of capability.
Senator Hagerty. I met with Sweden's ambassador recently
and she told me in very encouraging terms that they were doing
everything they could to accelerate their progress toward that
goal. So thank you for that.
Assistant Secretary Wallander, you also talked with Senator
Kaine about some of the current capabilities that Finland and
Sweden will contribute to the Alliance.
Can you give me a sense of what you would like to see them
develop for the future?
Dr. Wallander. Certainly, one of the hopes would be that
both countries would contribute and, I believe, will contribute
to the battle groups on the eastern flank, the eight eastern
front countries of NATO.
Finland and Sweden both have very strong bilateral
relations with the Baltic countries, in particular----
Senator Hagerty. Yes. Yes.
Dr. Wallander. --and they--Sweden and Finland can become
not just strong defense partners or allies of the Alliance, but
strong contributors as those countries face Russian aggression
right on their borders.
Senator Hagerty. I hope you will work to guide their
acquisition strategies in that direction and I look forward to
their contributions.
I want to sum it up, though, with you, Assistant Secretary
Wallander.
It is your testimony today, I presume, that from the
Defense Department's perspective that adding both Sweden and
Finland to the NATO Alliance will, indeed, strengthen NATO's
military capabilities and, therefore, their deterrence
capabilities?
Dr. Wallander. Yes, Senator. That is the Department of
Defense assessment.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you very much.
I would like to turn to you, Assistant Secretary Donfried.
I support adding Finland and Sweden to the NATO Alliance,
as you know, but I also want to ask you about other important
things that the United States should be doing to counter and,
to frankly, defund Russia's military aggression.
The Biden administration's energy policies have perversely
helped to fund Putin's war machine in Ukraine. Do you dispute
the fact, or the assessment at least, that despite
international sanctions, Vladimir Putin's regime has earned
nearly $100 billion from energy exports during the first 100
days of Russia's unprovoked and unjustified invasion of
Ukraine?
Ms. Donfried. Senator Hagerty, thank you for that question.
What I would say is I think it is a complicated equation
because what we have seen is that as more Russian oil is going
off the market we are also seeing that Russia has declining oil
profits as a result of being forced to sell its oil at steep
discounts.
So there is a calculation about what is the discounted
price of that Russian oil and then how does that affect the
scarcity of supply. So I----
Senator Hagerty. Actually, what has happened is there has
been a windfall that has come to Russia. Do you accept the fact
that oil and gas markets are global markets?
Ms. Donfried. Yes, they are.
Senator Hagerty. All other things being equal, if the
United States were to actually ramp up its oil and gas
production, would the increase of energy supplies actually
lower the global price of energy?
Ms. Donfried. An increase in energy supply should reduce
the price.
Senator Hagerty. It certainly should. If you think about
Russia's energy exports, they made up half of Russia's budget--
more than half of their budget before the windfall that has
come into the marketplace took place.
Is that--is a price increase actually helpful or hurtful to
Vladimir Putin?
Ms. Donfried. A price increase is helpful, but if you are
having a challenge selling Russian oil because of the
sanctions, that is what has forced some price decline on
Russian oil, in particular.
Senator Hagerty. The reports are that Russia has actually
had a massive increase in its revenues from oil sales just in
the first 5 months of this year. Its oil sales are up close to
$100 billion. That is more than enough--in fact, almost one and
a half times its annual military budget.
In effect, we are inadvertently funding Vladimir Putin's
war machine. That is the point that I am trying to make, and I
want to encourage you to please take the message back home that
when President Biden decided to wage the war on fossil fuels
here in America, it has a global impact and that global impact
not only hurts American consumers here at home, but it also is
hurting the brave Ukrainians that are trying to fight right now
because they are also a casualty of President Biden's anti----
The Chairman. [Presiding.] The time of the senator has
expired. I just want him to acknowledge I have given him a
significant amount of time over the time.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope this will
change.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I was watching part of the hearing on WebEx and, of course,
we were interrupted by votes.
Let me, first, thank our witnesses for their work.
As has been already demonstrated in this hearing, there is
strong support for NATO expansion in Finland and Sweden, and we
recognize there is a process we go through and we also
recognize, as you have already pointed out, that all NATO
members have to agree and you want to give space for Turkey to
be able to have the conversations it needs with the aspirant
countries.
We all appreciate that, but we certainly urge that we have
to make sure that that is constructive and timely and we would
hope that the--our leadership would help provide that type of
accommodations so that those conversations take place, but they
do not unnecessarily delay the considerations of their entry
into NATO.
I want to sort of follow up on the impact that this is
having on Russia's calculation--Mr. Putin's calculation. He is,
obviously, watching very closely what is happening with Sweden
and Finland. He is also watching what is happening with the
European Union and their invitations in regards to Moldova and
Ukraine.
Can you just tell us how you feel these expansions, whether
of the EU or of NATO, would affect Mr. Putin's calculations in
regards to his aspirations for a greater Russia?
Dr. Wallander. Let me start on the defense and military
side.
The accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO would
significantly complicate Russian military planning for any kind
of military operations against NATO by doubling the length of
Russia's front border with NATO allies and by strengthening
NATO-allied capabilities in the Baltic Sea region and in the
Arctic High North.
There is no question that this accession of Finland and
Sweden is something that is not welcome in Moscow as it plans
for a hostile relationship with NATO. NATO is a defensive
alliance, but the Russian military would have to take this into
account.
I would simply also note that for 20 years Russia has
sought to divide the NATO Alliance on multiple issues, sought
to fracture it in order to paralyze it diplomatically and
militarily, and the strength with which the--and the public and
political strength of the desire to accede to NATO by both
Finland and Sweden has further strengthened the Alliance and
has shown to the Kremlin that its efforts to weaken the
Alliance have not only failed, but have actually reverberated
negatively.
Ms. Donfried. If I could just make two quick comments in
response to your question, Senator Cardin.
First, in terms of your question about the impact on
Russia's calculation, the irony here is that Vladimir Putin
said one of the reasons he was engaging in this brutal assault
on Ukraine was his concern about NATO getting too close to
Russia's borders.
Well, what a miscalculation. What a strategic
miscalculation. If that was his concern, he now has Finland
with an 830-mile border with Russia and Sweden saying they want
to join NATO. That is quite striking.
The second point is, of course, we are concerned also about
the security of Finland and Sweden in this interval between
their application and accession. We are confident that we and
our allies are well positioned to help these two countries
address their security needs and any concerns that they might
have in this interim period, and President Biden said on May 18
that while their applications for NATO membership are being
considered, the United States will work closely with both
countries to remain vigilant against any threats to our shared
security and to deter and confront aggression or the threat of
aggression.
As has already been mentioned, we exercise regularly
together in the Baltic Sea region and the U.S. military
routinely maintains presence in the vicinity of both countries.
We feel that we are also being vigilant during this interim
period.
Thank you.
Senator Cardin. Let me just make a comment. We are, today,
concerned about the expansion as it relates to Finland and
Sweden, but we also need to be concerned of the focus in the
Black Sea.
Russia clearly is interested in dominating the Black Sea,
and with Ukraine being compromised by the Russian presence, it
even makes it more urgent for us to shore up NATO's capacity
within the Black Sea.
I just mention that because I think we need to look at that
as the next chapter of our challenges in regards to national
security threats.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Great to see both of you here. Thank you for your service.
Just for the record, President Biden has been calling upon
oil refiners in the United States to increase their capacity.
In fact, the other day he said he might--he is looking at the
Defense Production Act as a potential tool to push that in the
right direction.
I am a strong believer that having both Sweden and Finland
as part of the NATO Alliance would be good for the Alliance and
good for those countries. They are both democracies. They both
believe in the rule of law.
We already have strong security partnerships and they would
be great additions, in my view, to the NATO Alliance.
My question to you, Assistant Secretary Donfried, we have
the Madrid Conference coming up. What is the likelihood that we
will be in a position to offer a formal invitation to Sweden
and Finland to join the Alliance at the upcoming Madrid
Conference?
Ms. Donfried. Thank you, Senator Van Hollen, for that
question.
What has been happening is that Turkey, which has expressed
its concerns about, in particular, Swedish and Finnish stances
with regard to the fight against terrorism, has been engaged in
conversations with Finland and Sweden to find a resolution to
their concerns, and this week we saw the NATO Secretary General
help in mediating that conversation. On Monday there were
meetings among those parties, which we heard were quite
constructive.
So we are confident that this will be resolved in a
positive way. There is broad and deep support across the NATO
Alliance for Finnish and Swedish accession. We are hopeful that
we will soon achieve a positive resolution.
Senator Van Hollen. Look, I am hopeful as well and I am
glad to hear the talks are coming along, but let us be clear on
what we mean by Turkey's so-called concerns about Sweden and
Finnish positions in the fight against terrorism.
We are specifically talking about President Erdogan's
concerns about support for the SDF and elements of the SDF,
right?
Ms. Donfried. It is a concern, in the first instance, about
the PKK, which we all recognize is a terrorist organization,
and then you are right, it has to do with those PKK-affiliated
groups.
Senator Van Hollen. Right, but just to be clear, Sweden
already has a law on the books that recognizes or identifies
the PKK as a terrorist organization, correct?
Ms. Donfried. Yes.
Senator Van Hollen. They are in line with the United States
and most of our other partners. Is it not the case that the
United States has been a strong partner with the SDF in the
fight against ISIS?
Ms. Donfried. Yes.
Senator Van Hollen. Right.
Just to be clear, I mean, we want to work this out, but we
should make clear to President Erdogan that they are
criticizing Sweden and Finland for taking actions the United
States Government has taken.
President Erdogan also wants to extradite Gulen. We are a
country that recognizes the rule of law. So are Sweden and
Finland. Again, we have had concerns here about the deployment
of Russian S-400s by Turkey and have taken action in this
committee and the Congress.
I want to, amend, support the ongoing talks, but let us
recognize, I think, that the positions that Sweden and Finland
have taken are pretty much on the same page with the position
the United States has taken with respect to the SDF and the
very important fight against ISIS and terrorism.
Sweden and Finland have been, in my view, on the right side
in that fight against ISIS.
Can you just lay out what you see as the time line, again,
whether you are--whether you believe that we will be successful
at getting everybody on the same page, including Turkey, by the
time the Madrid Conference comes around?
Ms. Donfried. I will say that we certainly are pushing for
that.
Senator Van Hollen. All right. I am going to end there.
Again, I think we all recognize what the challenge is here. We
want to make sure these are constructive talks.
Sweden and Finland have already taken measures in response
to Turkey's concern. Is that not correct?
Ms. Donfried. That is correct. Finland and Sweden have been
engaging very constructively in these talks and they have been
forward-leaning in terms of being responsive to the concerns
raised.
Senator Van Hollen. Right. I mean, Sweden, as I understand
it, ended their arms embargo against Turkey. Is that right?
Ms. Donfried. That is correct.
Senator Van Hollen. Got it. All right.
Thank you both. I think we would all like to see for the
good of the Alliance and to make sure we send a strong signal
to Putin that what he is doing is an attack on democracy, on
the rule of law, and I would hate to see--this moment, which
you described, would underscore the fact that Putin's invasion
of Ukraine is a strategic failure because it actually
encouraged Sweden and Finland to join this defensive alliance.
I would hate to see that moment squandered because of an
inability to address the issues that we are talking about
today.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Let me just echo Senator Van Hollen's bit of frustration
about the comments we make about Turkey, Sweden, and Finland as
it relates to urging them to work together.
As, Secretary Donfried, you know I had the opportunity to
speak to the chiefs of missions this morning--all of our
ambassadors around the world and several others. I know you
were there.
I am not constrained by the constraints maybe you all feel
you have at the State Department. I believe you call out
whoever is wrong on something, and if there are multiple
parties that are wrong then you call out multiple parties.
As Secretary Van Hollen has said, Secretary, there is a
possibility in the future--as Senator Van Hollen has said, the
reality is is that Finland and Sweden are aligned with our own
policies as it relates to the PKK and the SDF and our fight
against ISIS. So it is a little disingenuous to suggest we urge
all parties to work together.
Of course, it would be great for them all to work together
and come to a conclusion. I do not know what Turkey is trying
to extract from them.
At the end of the day, that is what this is about, and
maybe if we get in the game they want to extract from us, too,
which I will be vehemently opposed to.
We do not need for any extraction to take place or any
concessions to take place to have two great democracies join
NATO.
Having said that, I just think, for the record, it is one
of the things that for 30 years of doing foreign policy irks me
about the State Department, regardless of which Administration
is in, that we call upon all parties to do something when not
all parties are responsible, at the end of the day, for the
conflict that we have, with the issue that we have, or the
problem that we have.
I have extended the time here to--I know there are some
members who had an interest, but there is no member presently
before me either on--virtually or in the committee.
So with the thanks of the committee for your participation
and for your insights, this record will remain open until the
close of business tomorrow.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:50 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]