Watchkeeper
New Member
Hi all,
This is my first post here, so I just thought to tell you all some information about myself with a couple of lines, otherwise I try to strictly stay on-topic. I am just a 22-year old university student, who has been lurking on the forum for some time now. I performed my military service in the Finnish Navy in 2010 (Finland has a compulsory military service for all males) and have also been involved with the Navy Reserve since then. That is enough about me for now, and back to the topic.
The question I have concerns the geopolitical status of Finland and the geostrategic issues of the whole Northern Europe.
Finland is currently undergoing a financial crisis as most of the Europe does. As consequence, defence budgets have faced some cuts and money is also tight for the future. Currently, Finland's defence budget is little over 2,25 billion euros or roughly 1.5 % of GDP. The Finnish defence forces is based on a universal male conscription. All men above 18 years of age are liable to serve either 5,5, 8,5 or 11,5 months. Yearly over 20 000 conscripts are trained. Finland’s maximum wartime capacity is officially 350,000 soldiers, including the Army, Navy and Air Force, although it will diminish to 250 000 soldiers during the 2010s.
Currently, Finnish Defence Forces, FDF, is undegoing a Defence Forces Reform. The official objective of the reform is that in 2015, Finland will have a Defence Forces that are capable of fulfilling their statutory duties, are close to the ordinary citizen, use state funds economically and remain a good employer of Finnish men and women. According to the parliamentary Finnish Security and Defence Policy Report the principles of defence of the entire country, general conscription and military non-alliance will be maintained also in the future. The activities that have been most affected by the reform are support activities and service provision arrangements. The goal is to have a smaller peacetime organisation with which wartime readiness and troops can be produced cost effectively.
The Finnish Army is also adopting a new land warfare doctrine. The new doctrine is needed because the end strength of FDF is decreasing. The new doctrine endorses a more adjustable process whereby land forces will strive to cause the opponent maximal loss while still maintaining its own fighting capability. Being active, taking the initiative, mobility and flexibility will become all the more important. In a sense the new doctrine is reminiscent of the cancelled US Army's Future Combat Systems, adopted to the smaller Finnish context. Like the FCS, the new doctrine emphasizes mobility and networks, the idea is to use superior situational awareness to cause unacceptable losses to a much larger opponent.
As some of you likely know, Finland is a member state of EU, but not a NATO member. We have good relations with the US, a small contingent of Finnish soldiers is still taking part in ISAF mission in Afganistan. However, all strategic considerations with Finland have to take into consideration our limited resources and a long, over 1000 kilometre, border with the Russia.
Possible NATO-membership is a really controversial subject in Finland. The majority of people and politicians are against a membership, and I personally do not see it happening any time soon. There is also doubt that with the US pivoting to Asia-Pacific, NATO would not be able to really help us in a crisis situation.
So, with that background information (more information can be found in the attached 2012 annual report of Finnish Defence Forces), to my guestion. I want to have an outsider's view about the future of Finland and FDF. What is the best way forward for Finland in terms of ensuring it's security and maintaining the stability and peace of Northern Europe? In other words, what should Finland do to maintain affordable, but credible defence and military forces?
There has of course been a lot discussion about these issues in Finlad, I have my own views too, but it would be interesting to sometimes hear the views of the defence professionals and other people abroad. At the end of the day, it is our neighboring countries that define whether we have credible armed forces and whether it is worth taking the risk to resort to military force against Finland. Fair enough, there is not at the moment any military threats that pose a real danger to us, but things can change rapidly in the future.
This is my first post here, so I just thought to tell you all some information about myself with a couple of lines, otherwise I try to strictly stay on-topic. I am just a 22-year old university student, who has been lurking on the forum for some time now. I performed my military service in the Finnish Navy in 2010 (Finland has a compulsory military service for all males) and have also been involved with the Navy Reserve since then. That is enough about me for now, and back to the topic.
The question I have concerns the geopolitical status of Finland and the geostrategic issues of the whole Northern Europe.
Finland is currently undergoing a financial crisis as most of the Europe does. As consequence, defence budgets have faced some cuts and money is also tight for the future. Currently, Finland's defence budget is little over 2,25 billion euros or roughly 1.5 % of GDP. The Finnish defence forces is based on a universal male conscription. All men above 18 years of age are liable to serve either 5,5, 8,5 or 11,5 months. Yearly over 20 000 conscripts are trained. Finland’s maximum wartime capacity is officially 350,000 soldiers, including the Army, Navy and Air Force, although it will diminish to 250 000 soldiers during the 2010s.
Currently, Finnish Defence Forces, FDF, is undegoing a Defence Forces Reform. The official objective of the reform is that in 2015, Finland will have a Defence Forces that are capable of fulfilling their statutory duties, are close to the ordinary citizen, use state funds economically and remain a good employer of Finnish men and women. According to the parliamentary Finnish Security and Defence Policy Report the principles of defence of the entire country, general conscription and military non-alliance will be maintained also in the future. The activities that have been most affected by the reform are support activities and service provision arrangements. The goal is to have a smaller peacetime organisation with which wartime readiness and troops can be produced cost effectively.
The Finnish Army is also adopting a new land warfare doctrine. The new doctrine is needed because the end strength of FDF is decreasing. The new doctrine endorses a more adjustable process whereby land forces will strive to cause the opponent maximal loss while still maintaining its own fighting capability. Being active, taking the initiative, mobility and flexibility will become all the more important. In a sense the new doctrine is reminiscent of the cancelled US Army's Future Combat Systems, adopted to the smaller Finnish context. Like the FCS, the new doctrine emphasizes mobility and networks, the idea is to use superior situational awareness to cause unacceptable losses to a much larger opponent.
As some of you likely know, Finland is a member state of EU, but not a NATO member. We have good relations with the US, a small contingent of Finnish soldiers is still taking part in ISAF mission in Afganistan. However, all strategic considerations with Finland have to take into consideration our limited resources and a long, over 1000 kilometre, border with the Russia.
Possible NATO-membership is a really controversial subject in Finland. The majority of people and politicians are against a membership, and I personally do not see it happening any time soon. There is also doubt that with the US pivoting to Asia-Pacific, NATO would not be able to really help us in a crisis situation.
So, with that background information (more information can be found in the attached 2012 annual report of Finnish Defence Forces), to my guestion. I want to have an outsider's view about the future of Finland and FDF. What is the best way forward for Finland in terms of ensuring it's security and maintaining the stability and peace of Northern Europe? In other words, what should Finland do to maintain affordable, but credible defence and military forces?
There has of course been a lot discussion about these issues in Finlad, I have my own views too, but it would be interesting to sometimes hear the views of the defence professionals and other people abroad. At the end of the day, it is our neighboring countries that define whether we have credible armed forces and whether it is worth taking the risk to resort to military force against Finland. Fair enough, there is not at the moment any military threats that pose a real danger to us, but things can change rapidly in the future.