Finland therefore opted for an intermediate solution. “has With this purchase, Finland wants to indicate that it has the technological means to neutralize an incoming threat to Russia, i.e. to warn of an incoming ballistic missile.“, believes Alain de Neve.
Could anti-missile defenses on the border between Russia and NATO prevent Russia from dropping a nuclear bomb on a country that has been at war in Ukraine for more than a year and a half? Is it an effective deterrent? For the researcher, this question can be answered in two different ways. He distinguishes “two schools”:
“The first school holds that ‘anti-missile defense systems are systems that upset the strategic balance of nuclear deterrence asserted by the United States, France and the United Kingdom’. Because we want to prevent the Russians from fully deploying these anti-missile systems, we can increase the level of testing that strikes NATO territory. So it will be a crisis accelerator.”
“And then there’s another school that says: ‘No, anti-missile defense is a form of assurance. If deterrence fails, we always have an anti-missile defense that can, if necessary, neutralize an opposing ballistic attack.“
One thing’s for sure, Finland isn’t just sending a message to Russia. He also addresses the NATO members he joined last April. “At the NATO level, we must realize that the system that the Finns have just acquired will be integrated into the ‘NATO’ anti-aircraft defense. So it has a contribution somewhere Finland in anti-missile defense is, of course, its territory, but also the territory of allies“, continues the expert.
“Total coffee junkie. Tv ninja. Unapologetic problem solver. Beer expert.”