To Deter Russia, Accelerate and Expand Finland’s Military Modernization (From RealClearDefense)

The full text of this article is available below and in RealClearDefense at the link here.

Of the many unintended consequences of Russia’s second invasion of Ukraine, Finland’s pivot from non-alignment to NATO membership is among the most significant. In terms of geographic position and strategic security priorities, it is a nearly perfect NATO ally. But the protracted timeline for its fighter aircraft fleet upgrade and the antiquated state of its army vehicles are potential weaknesses. Finland has terrific momentum but needs to accelerate and consider expanding its military modernization efforts.

Helsinki’s NATO membership opens a new and thorny front for Russia. Finland takes its security seriously. It has eliminated reliance on Russian energy, spends 2.8% of its gross domestic product on defense, and requires mandatory military service. While many of its military vehicles are antiquated, its tank force comprises upgraded German-made Leopard 2s, and it has roughly as many main battle tanks in total inventory as Germany, the UK, France, or Italy. It is also acquiring a fleet of F-35s, the most advanced fighter jet on the market (and on the planet), which will be a phenomenal addition to NATO’s regional deterrence.  

Finnish geography makes Finland a highly useful base for NATO weaponry. Its 800-mile border with Russia, combined with a large, relatively modern tank force and universal conscription, presents a significant on-the-ground challenge. At its closest point, Finland is only 500 miles from Moscow. That proximity puts the Russian capital under direct threat from modern aircraft, as the Ukrainians have proven with long-range drones. 

The 250-mile southern coast of Finland dominates the northeastern corner of the Baltic Sea, known as the Gulf of Finland. Russian ships must pass along the entire coastline as they navigate to and from Saint Petersburg, Russia’s gateway to global trade via the Baltic Sea. Aircraft based anywhere in southern Finland can patrol the entire Gulf, positioning Finland to prevent Russia from trading or projecting naval power through the Baltic. It can also cover the flanks of the small but critical states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. But Finland’s strategic geography is only as useful as its equipment and operators.

Fifth-generation aircraft, such as the F-35, have the capabilities needed to engage Russian forces. That is why 14 NATO members are buying and operating this aircraft. Enhanced situational awareness for pilots and the ability to remain undetected on radar are essential for combating modern Russian air defenses.  

Unfortunately, due to large multinational F-35 orders and training pipeline backlogs, Finland’s F-35 fleet isn’t expected to be fully operational until 2030.  Delivery and training delays are challenging, but they can be addressed through reasonable trade-offs. Because Lockheed Martin produces about 200 F-35s each year, reallocating roughly 5% of its deliveries over the next two years would be sufficient to accelerate the timeline. Finland’s strategic significance merits this. As of mid-2025, 3,000 pilots and over 18,000 maintainers from the U.S. and partner nations have graduated from F-35 training, primarily at U.S.-based centers. Training more Finnish personnel in the U.S. would require a minor reallocation of resources to meet the accelerated timeline.

Finland has a long tradition of flying its F/A-18C Hornets from highways. Dispersed highway operations are regularly practiced by Finland’s air forces, which significantly complicate Russian targeting by increasing the number of operational Finnish airstrips.   In the event of escalation or conflict, multiple NATO allies could surge into these austere airfields, right on Russia’s doorstep.  Finland could also overbuild its logistics and maintenance networks and host allied F-35 training to develop the precision-landing skills required for these tactics. 

On the ground, the Leopard 2 tank dates back to the Cold War, but timely Finnish upgrades to its 200-tank force have ensured its utility in modern combat. Below the main battle tank category, however, the land force is less impressive. Many of the army’s infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers were made in countries that no longer exist. Retaining large numbers of Soviet vehicles may have been a sound strategy before the era of long-range, smart, precision-guided weapons. However, the war in Ukraine demonstrates that Soviet-era equipment is highly vulnerable, even if not intended principally for frontline combat. Finland could replace its antiquated armor fleet with Strykers or Bradley fighting vehicles. 

Russian military actions demonstrate that multi-domain deterrence is needed now, not in the next decade. The F-35 upgrade timeline should be cut in half, and obsolete army vehicles should be replaced quickly. Finland made the right choice by selecting the Joint Strike Fighter and should treat its rollout as a national priority. The U.S. should respond with commensurate urgency, prioritizing Finnish orders and training for both aircraft and army equipment. One operational F-35 or infantry fighting vehicle in Finland is worth 10 in North America.

Merrick “Mac” Carey is Chief Executive Officer and founder of the Lexington Institute, a public policy think tank based in Arlington, Virginia.