Nato expansion has wide consequences

Concurrent decisions by Sweden and Finland to apply to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) are by far the most significant geopolitical consequence of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, now approaching its fourth month. While Sweden remained neutral all along for ideological reasons, Finland's move thus far to steer clear of Nato was prompted by practical considerations - wars it had fought with the erstwhile Soviet Union. It is not a done deal - new membership has to be ratified by each of Nato's 30 member states and Turkey, for one, has made clear that it isn't signing on yet. But an eventual entry by the two Nordic states looks inevitable. It will mean that Nato's borders with Russia will double.

This is precisely what Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to prevent. Indeed, his decision to invade Ukraine was prompted by anger and fear that a nation once part of the Soviet empire would want to plough a furrow that aligns itself closer to the European Union and, eventually, Nato. If unfolding events suggest that matters are if anything going the other way, Russia has only itself to blame. The unwarranted invasion it initiated in late February has evaporated sympathy for the country in many parts of the world, led countries to recalculate their security interests, and raised doubts about a peaceful Russian rise fuelled by energy exports. Its adventurism has been an overwhelming miscalculation.