The Daily Signal - INTERVIEW | What Finland Joining NATO Means for Russia, War In Ukraine, and How It Benefits America , National Security Expert Explains

Episode Date: April 4, 2023

Finland is joining NATO, and Victoria Coates says Russia is less than pleased.  Leaders in Moscow are “thoroughly outraged about this and claiming it causes some kind of intolerable threat to Russian security,” says Coates, a senior research fellow in international affairs and national security at The Heritage Foundation. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.)  Finland will become the 31st NATO member on Tuesday, a move that Coates says is likely an embarrassment to Russia because counties in the region appear to “not [be] interested in joining with Russia" in the war against Ukraine. Coates joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to explain the significance of Finland entering NATO and what it could mean for the ongoing war in Ukraine.  Coates also shares what we know about the imprisonment of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and how the Biden administration should be handling the situation.  Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The United States is unfortunately, so the administration is so consumed by Ukraine, I worry that they're not really focusing fully on the China threat. So as we look at those twin problems, Russia and China, they are increasingly becoming a single problem. This is the dayless little podcast for Tuesday, April 4th. I'm Brene Allen. And that was Heritage Foundation Senior Research Fellow in International Affairs and National Security, Victoria Coates. Today, Finland is joining NATO, and according to Coates, Russia is less than pleased by the news.

Coates joins the show today to explain the significance of Finland entering NATO and what it could mean for the ongoing war in Ukraine. Coates also shares what we know about the imprisonment of the Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gerskevick and how the Biden administration should be handling that situation. Stay tuned for our conversation after this. I'm Mark Geinney from the Heritage Foundation, and we are very pleased to bring you the next chapter in the Heritage Explains podcast. Over the years, this show has been so loved by so many people, and we want to keep bringing you the insights into policy and current events that you've come to expect here, while updating the show with a new sound, a new format, and some new voices.

Most notably, we're excited to upgrade this show from a one-off form, where we bring you different topics each week to a serialized format where we craft deep dives into hot button issues in the form of seasons series of shows that focus the intellectual weight of the heritage foundation on one topic first up a six episode series on the biggest existential threat to our nation right now the chinese communist party check out the new heritage explains wherever you get your podcasts we are joined today by heritage foundation senior research fellow in international affairs and now National Security, Victoria Coates. Victoria, thank you for being with us today. Thanks for having me, Virginia. Well, today or Tuesday, Finland is joining NATO. What is the significance of this move? This is, I mean, in the abstract, an extremely good thing.

Both Finland and Sweden joining NATO brings in two members with, you know, large flourishing economies and significant militaries, who have, quite frankly, been coasting along under the security umbrella provided by NATO without actually participating. And now they are signaling their willingness to formally join and, you know, start spending the percentage of GDP committed to by NATO members and presumably participate in a more coordinated fashion in the support for Ukraine. So I would see this as a good thing. And what are the benefits for Finland? What are they getting out of this? And for America, what's the benefit for us? Well, quite frankly, it's security for Finland.

I think, you know, Finland has a significant border with Russia. Russia has tried to sort of consume Finland before. And so I think when Putin went into Ukraine so brutally, it really had a way of focusing the attention of his other neighbors that, you know, that he is willing to follow up threats with force. And that, you know, for Finland, the obvious choice is to ban together with NATO. You know, the concern would be from a U.S. perspective is, you know, how strategically the Biden

administration has thought this through, because, of course, you know, when you admit new members, they come with the obligation of Article 5, which is the collective security agreement of NATO, in which military force is an option if another member is attacked. It does not guarantee military action. That's something that's not well known about Article 5, but it raises it as an option. So the United States needs to be prepared than the event of a Russian or some other invasion that we might be going to actual war to defend these allies. And I think very much in the case of Finland and Sweden, you know, if Russian goes into one of those countries,

we probably would be engaged. So, you know, NATO membership for them makes sense. But putting countries into NATO that do have these significant borders with Russia should not be taken lightly for that reason. So then what is Russia's perspective? Because we've seen that the Finnish foreign minister, he says that for Finland, they're very focused on support for Ukraine as they join NATO. What are the leaders of Russia saying about Finland joining NATO? Oh, they're all thoroughly outraged about this and claiming it causes some kind of intolerable threat to Russian security. But the fact of the matter is that no NATO member has ever invaded Russia.

NATO is inherently a defensive posture to guard against Russian aggression. So if the Russians do not invade NATO members, they literally have nothing to fear. Historically, it has never happened that this has been a problem. And so I think, you know, the sort of faux outrage out of Moscow is more embarrassment that these countries are not interested in joining with Russia. One can see why. And that they are interested in partnering with Western Europe and the United States. Are there any key objectives that NATO has on its docket right now? I mean, as they're moving forward and maybe entering a little bit of a new season with Finland being a part,

of NATO? Are there any key objectives that they have announced as far as the focus this year? Well, you know, we have the upcoming NATO meeting, which is actually in Vilnius in Lithuania, in, I believe, about a month, might be sooner. But there are a number of things on the docket. For the first time, energy security is on the docket, which is a critical point that has been brought home to Europe since the Ukraine invasion as well. China is on the docket. And this is a point, you know, I would hope the United States is really leaning forward on because, you know, unlike Europe, the United States is both an Atlantic and a Pacific power.

And, you know, in the event of a conflict with China, Europe, I'm 100% sure, would say that is an American issue that America should lead on because America is a Pacific power. All of which is true. But, you know, in that case, I think we also need to put. point out to them that Ukraine is essentially a European war and that we need Europeans to be very much at the forefront of that. And for Finland and Sweden to come in to NATO, that gives us an opportunity for more large countries who can provide more support for Ukraine than we're getting out of Europe currently. Let's take a few minutes and talk a little bit about America's

current relationship with Russia as a whole, as we covered on the Daily Signal's top news show last week, Russia has arrested a Wall Street Journal reporter named Evan Gershevik, and they've arrested him on charges of spying. Tensions are already very high between America and Russia. Is Russia, in a way, testing America here by arresting this Wall Street Journal reporter? Oh, I think they're certainly probing. The Biden administration for what kind of resolve they have. And I think that either the arrest of a reporter like this just shows you how blatantly, you know, Putin is willing to crack down

on information that he doesn't like. And so I think it's probably full-hearty to say that the relationship between the United States and Russia has hit its low point because every time I think we've hit our low point, he Putin figures out a way to make it worse. The administration has been trying to keep channels open. We know Secretary Blinken spoke to his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Lavrov, over the last 24 hours to insist on Evans' release. I don't know that that really does much good.

I think that Putin responds much, much more to, you know, forceful behavior rather than the outstretched hand. But, I mean, I guess they're still trying. But it doesn't give much comfort, I think, to either Evan or his family. Then how do you think America should be responding? Well, I mean, I think we have both the episode of the, you know, the jet and the drone last month. And then we have this episode. And apparently Secretary Austin said that the response of the U.S. Air Force was to start flying around where the Russians are. So we accommodated them.

You know, the hostage taking goes back, you know, both to Paul Whalen, who's been left to languish in Moscow and the Britney Griner situation where we accommodated them with Victor Boot. And so I think these are all really, you know, unfortunate examples of Putin getting the signal that he can push forward if he wants. And so I think that that is, you know, for example, with the drone situation, I would have put two drones up there and, you know, figured out a way to establish our space, you know, because, you know, how do you respond to a bully? If you keep accommodating them, they're going to keep pushing. If you push back, they tend to back down. So then given that, what we've seen recently from the Biden administration, even though, like you mentioned, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, is calling on Russia to release Gerkervik now, what's the likelihood that he is going to be released sooner than I think they've given a date in May when they say that they'll release him? I would say zero, unless, you know, the administration provides some kind of. of, you know, some kind of payment, essentially, you know, some sort of ransom for him,

whether it be another Russian national that we're holding or, you know, relaxation of sanctions or not putting on additional sanctions. Absent that, I don't, I don't see any hopes that he's coming home anytime soon. Do we know anything about how he's being treated in that Russian prison? No, to my knowledge, we have, we have not had consular access by which. which we mean that the U.S. embassy personnel have been able to visit with him, make sure that he's not being abused, you know, and has some legal representation. But we have not been provided that access to date. And that's really egregious. I mean, that's pretty much the sort of rock bottom of diplomatic protocol would be consular access.

And they're not even granting that. How common is this that a journalist, whether American or maybe from a European country, is arrested in Russia? Have we seen this happen many times before? Oh, Putin is famous for his abuses of the press. Most usually his domestic press if it steps out of line. I mean, people have been murdered, assassinated for attempting to get the truth out of Russia. But very, very rare for an American. This hasn't really happened since the Cold War, so it's been some 30.

years or more since an American has been targeted that way. And so this is this is an escalation on Putin's part, make no mistake about it. Victoria, I want to get your thoughts on an incident that happened Sunday in Russia. On Sunday, a pro-Russian propagandist was killed by an explosion in a cafe in St. Petersburg, Russia. The man was known by the pseudonym Ladlin Tanskansky. And And he was speaking at a party, it seemed, at a cafe. It's reported that a woman handed him sort of this small figurine or statue of a minor. He was a minor. And then the statue exploded, killing him and injuring others in that cafe.

What do we know about this incident? Well, it's extremely sketchy. I mean, clearly this was some kind of targeted assassination by folks who didn't. appreciate his pro-Putton propaganda. But what really it's, you know, and this is also with Evans case as well, it shows you how Putin is weaponizing information, that, you know, we have so much disinformation, targeted information, shifting information on what's going on in Ukraine. And, you know, the Russian government has a very powerful apparatus to both undermine what we would considered to be the truth and to push what seemed from the outside to be blatant falsehoods

through individuals such as this war propagandist. But it is effective. And, you know, I think the United States really doesn't have any sort of coordinated information operations that are anywhere near as effective. And it's something we have to start thinking about as we think about things like energy security is a major national security risk. You know, information security is also a major national security risk that these kinds of incidents hopefully will be clarifying. As the war continues in Ukraine, what are you watching closely? What are you keeping your eye on right now? I'm really watching how bogged down the Russians seem to be in the east that they have not made the kinds of gains they expected to make.

You know, the reporting out of the Wall Street Journal that Evan was doing, talking about the real weakness in the Russian economy, that things had sort of improved over, you know, over the early weeks of the war, and then, you know, now are taking another downward trend. You know, the production cuts out of OPEC plus overnight, you know, how is that going to impact Putin? Is he actually going to abide by them and reduce his energy exports? And, you know, it makes you wonder, do we have a real moment of opportunity here that if the Biden administration was willing to actually level the truly crippling sanctions that would, you know, damage the Russian economy so severely? You know, is this a moment we could tip things in our favor and the favor of Ukraine and our allies?

But I'm just not seeing any signs of that out of Washington. And what might be holding Washington back from doing that, from really putting the pressure on Russia through sanctions in a way that they would feel it deeply? Well, they mean their concern all along has been domestic energy prices, which they see as a political issue. And I think it was very telling that they responded to the OPEP plus production cuts is saying they're not following barrels, they're following prices. That's all they care about is, you know, are they taking on political risk through potentially raising? domestic energy prices. Now, one response to that might be, gee, we really want to incentivize robust domestic U.S. energy production, which will provide much more product on market and keep prices under control, which was President Trump's approach, and that involves adjusting your

regulatory posture to encourage both exploration and infrastructure investment. And it, you know, made the United States the world's largest oil producer. I mean, we are an energy superpower, whether we like it or not. The Biden administration does not seem to like that, and so that is not their approach. Instead, they're trying to tinker with things like massive releases from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, you know, pleading with the Saudis, which proved ineffective, to try to keep prices under control while they impose a much more radical kind of antifossil fuel climate agenda on our country. So I think they are terrified that if they really do take Russia offline, they face spiking energy prices at home and they don't have any other way to remedy that.

So I think that's really what's been driving them. And given that strategy, who ultimately would you say are the winners and losers? Well, you know, in many ways, the winners should be the Ukrainians. They've fought very briefly for their country. They haven't asked for soldiers. They've asked for military help. I think that's what the United States should focus on is lethal military aid. You know, I do think the kind of social engineering that President Biden and Secretary

Yellen have mentioned in terms of Ukraine of, you know, providing, you know, a safety net, putting things in the pockets of Ukrainians, you know, that's. you know, that's really the job of Brussels of the European Union, if that's all going to happen. You know, and I think the United States is unfortunately, so the administration is so consumed by Ukraine, I worry that they're not really focusing fully on the China threat. So, you know, as, but as we look at those twin problems, Russia and China, they are increasingly becoming a single problem. So I might see that as the biggest new challenge that's coming out of this conflict for us, even if we can resolve Ukraine in a favorable stance, we still are going to have to deal with

the fact that Russia is becoming a kind of junior partner to China, as is Iran. And right now, the leadership of those three countries doesn't give me a lot of hope that they have America's best interests in heart. Victoria, we so appreciate your time today. For all of our listeners who want to follow your work, you can follow Victoria Coates on Twitter at Victoria Coates, and you can also follow all of her work on the Heritage Foundation website. It's just heritage.org.

Victoria, thank you for your time today. Of course, thank you, Virginia. And that's going to do it for today's episode. Thanks so much for joining us here on the Daily Signal podcast. If you have not had the chance, take a moment to check. out our evening show right here in his podcast feed, where we bring you the top news of the day. Also, take a moment to subscribe to The Daily Signal, wherever you like to listen to podcasts. It really helps us to continue spreading the word to more listeners, and we also just love hearing

your feedback. Thanks again for joining us today, and we'll see you right back here at 5 p.m. for our top news edition. The Daily Signal podcast is brought to by more than half a million members of the Heritage Foundation. Executive producers are Rob Luey and Kate Trinko. producers are Virginia Allen and Samantha Asheras. Sound designed by Lauren Evans, Mark Geinney, and John Pop. To learn more, please visit DailySignal.com.