[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]