Description
Finland and Sweden’s decisions to join NATO after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine brought about fundamental shifts of their historical non-aligned security policy, and their approach to nuclear weapons, disarmament, and nuclear deterrence. Drawing on post-structuralist theory about the co-constitution of identity and security policy, this paper compares debates about nuclear weapons in both countries with the aim to reveal how identity-based argumentation was fundamental for long-term policy shifts.
The analysis spans from the end of the Cold War, when both Finland and Sweden signed the Partnership for Peace Agreement with NATO, and joined the European Union, to the present. Comparing domestic debates about nuclear issues in both countries, the paper contributes new insights about how nuclear deterrence has been reconceptualized over time, and the role identity has played in relation to it.