Speech by the Chair of the NATO Military Committee, Admiral Rob Bauer

“There was a majestic, rapturous, and even seductive something.

In this first outbreak for the people, from which one could escape only with difficulty.

That in spite of all my hatred and aversion for war, I should not like to have missed the memory of those first days.

As never before, thousands and hundreds of thousands felt what they should have felt in peacetime.

 

That they belonged together. A city of two million. A country of nearly fifty million, in that hour felt that they were participating in world history.

In a moment which would never occur.

That each one was called upon to cast his infinite decimal self into the glowing mass.

There to be purified of all selfishness.

All differences of class, rank and language were flooded over at that moment by the rushing feeling of fraternity.

Strangers spoke to one another in the street.

People who had avoided each other for years, shook hands.

Everywhere, one saw excited faces.”

These are the words by Austrian writer Stefan Zweig, about the outbreak of the First World War.

And for me, these words capture the true spirit of resilience.

The spirit… of sisu.

Where people from all walks of life stand side by side and fight for a common cause.

And demonstrate bravery far beyond even their own expectations.

Resilience lies at the heart of Suomi, beating a steady drumbeat day in, day out.

 

As we gather here today, it is within a reality that most experts, practitioners, politicians and members of the public would not have deemed plausible only three years ago.

In 2021, I had the honour of speaking at the National Defence Association in my capacity as Chief of Defence of the Netherlands.

I advocated the principle of ‘expect the unexpected’.

And I praised the Finnish concepts of comprehensive defence and of comprehensive security.

I believe the correct terms are:
... kokonaismaanpuolustus and
... kokonaisturvallisuus

Little did we know that 3 years later, we would be standing here today as Allies.

Expect the unexpected indeed…

But it is a natural fit. Right from the start.

As some have said, simply a case of ‘plugging in’.

Nevertheless, it still comes with its questions.

A lot of people in Finnish society (and even policy makers and politicians) ask themselves two questions:

1. What will change for Finland, now that we are an Ally?

2. How will NATO change in the coming years?

In my lecture today, I will attempt to answer both these questions.

What will change for Finland?

To an extent, a lot has changed already.

Immediately after joining NATO, Finland seized defence cooperation opportunities with other Allies.

For instance in the High North.

Alongside the United States and Canada, Finland has announced its intent to build new polar icebreakers through the Icebreaker Collaboration Effort agreement.

And together with Canada and other Nordic Allies, Finland plans to create a new Arctic Security Dialogue, to coordinate on defence, intelligence and cyber threats.

On the sidelines of a Meeting of NATO Ministers of Defence in Brussels, the NORTHLINK initiative was established.

Within this framework, Finland and 12 other Allies pledged an investment in space technology together to develop a secure, resilient and reliable multinational Arctic satellite communications capability.

Finland has always cooperated with others, but what has changed is the why.

As an Ally, Finland has realised that pursuing defence cooperation arrangements are no longer purely for national defence purposes.
They fall within a wider purpose of collective deterrence and defence.

Now, Finland can cooperate with the same actors completely aligned under the same roof.

The shift in Finland’s mindset from national to collective defence is tangible.

In February 2024, Finnish Minister of Defence Antti Häkkänen announced the first Finnish contribution to the NATO’s peacetime collective defence tasks:

Finnish F/A-18 fighters would participate in the air shielding mission in Romania;

And a Katanpää -class mine countermeasure vessel will be part of the Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group.

Shortly after this,

In June this year, Allied countries’ defence ministers gave their political backing to establishing a Multi-Corps Land Component Command (MCLCC) in Mikkeli.  

To echo the words of the Commander in Chief of the Finnish Armed Forces, General Janne Jaakkola:

“Placing the new Land Component Command in close proximity to the Finnish Army Command fosters cooperation between the national and other Allied forces, creating obvious synergy benefits”.

It is staggering to consider that after only one year of membership, Finland is in a position where it can host one of the alliance’s subordinate Land Commands.

Following this decision, Sweden expressed its readiness to take on the role as framework nation for a NATO multinational battlegroup in Finland.

These huge developments in Finland’s strategic approach to defence show Finland’s willingness to contribute to the collective defence of the alliance.

They strengthen both Finland and NATO as a whole.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The difference between NATO and national is fading more and more to the background.

More and more, we realise we need to fully integrate our planning and our actions.

Over the last years, NATO Allies have made immense strides in integrating NATO and national defence plans.

Last month, we saw another significant milestone, when the Chiefs of Defence of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden signed the Nordic Defence Concept.

This harmonising of Allied defence plans in the Nordic region allows a seamless transition to NATO’s regional plans.

It means that Finland’s borders are even more protected as they are covered by NATO’s regional plans.

Above all, it demonstrates Finland’s bilateral and multilateral cooperation is stronger than ever before when taking place within a NATO framework.

As Finland navigates these uncharted territories in the early days of membership, I believe it is possible to shift from a mindset of national to collective defence, whilst continuing to tend to territorial defence.
Integrating with NATO’s 360-degree approach whilst maintaining a honed focus on national defence.

We see this manifested through Finland’s investment in its military capabilities and societal resilience.

Resilience as a state of mind, woven into the national conscious.

And demonstrating how Finland intends to fulfil its Article 3 and Article 5 obligations.

Ladies and Gentlemen,


….

In preparing this speech, I was drawn to the ‘The Diplomacy of the Winter War’ by Max Jakobson.

A timely anecdote lies within this account of the darkness Finland endured in 1939-1940.

At this critical juncture, Marshal Mannerheim sounded the alarm to the neglected state of affairs Finland’s defence lay in.

He argued that Finland was not prepared enough for war.

He foresaw the consequences of fighting the enemy with limited resources and a neglected national defence.

This story holds a twist: when Mannerheim threatened to the President that he would resign from the military council, he was shortly after appointed Commander-in-Chief of Finland’s Defence Forces.

He stayed and lead Finland to victory.

Mannerheim had the tenacity to thrust his head above the parapet and sound the cry for Finland’s neglected defence.

Ultimately, he knew that failing to prepare, was a preparation to fail.

In many ways, Finland is now a shining beacon of resilience.

An example to other Allies, when it comes to having clarity of purpose and taking ownership of its responsibilities.

 

But, be careful for a possible pitfall.

Because you are an example for many Allies when it comes to delivering on Article 3, one might think that Finland does not have to continue to invest in its own Armed Forces in order to close the gaps, as identified in the NATO Defence and Planning Process.

This would not only be detrimental to NATO, but also to Finland.

Let us make sure General Jaakkola will not have to sound the alarm as Marshal Mannerheim had to do.

And that brings me to my second question: how will NATO change in the coming years?

As Finland adapts to its new posture, NATO will also continue to adapt.

As the world faces the highest number of conflicts since the Second World War, Allies are working to increase their overall readiness to expect the unexpected.

Over the past year, we have made huge strides in making NATO’s new defence plans fully executable.

NATO now has 500,000 troops on high readiness.

We established the Allied Reaction Force.

We are adapting our Command and Control structure.

And Allies are rapidly developing and expanding their capabilities.

Training and exercises play a key role in that.


In the coming years, we will see more collective defence exercises like Steadfast Defender.


And they will – unfortunately – not be based on a fictitious scenario…

 

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The tectonic plates of power are shifting.

The best response to these rising levels of conflicts and growing global insecurity, is to stand together firmer than ever.

And that includes our global partners.

In the coming years, we will see increased cooperation for instance with NATO’s four Indo-Pacific Partners South Korea, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand.

They are participating more and more in NATO and Allied exercises.

And we are actively improving our interoperability.

This is not about NATO becoming a global Alliance.

This is about the fact that security is global.

There is no such thing as regional security.

We see this in the Arctic as well, where we are witnessing increased cooperation between Russia and China. Militarily, and otherwise.

In September, China joined Russia in the “Ocean 24” exercise.

And at the start of this month, China’s Coast Guard vessels entered the Arctic Ocean for the first time, patrolling the waters jointly with Russian ships.

When we consider this activity on the doorstep to our Alliance, NATO’s choice to foster cooperation with partners around the globe can be considered as international resilience.

Exchange of information with partners on our and their security concerns and approaches help us to align in global issues.

It helps us protect the international rules-based order and defend our own territory.

This leads me onto my next point.

One which will be deeply familiar with each and every one of you in this room.

And that is in the coming years, all NATO Allies need to apply a whole-of-society approach to security.

The responsibility for freedom does not rest on the shoulders of those in uniform alone.

Strong deterrence requires strong societal resilience.

It requires active participation from all governmental institutions, from all parts of the private sector, and all citizens.

This is not a new idea.

It is enshrined in Article 3 of the Washington Treaty.

And reconfirmed as recently as the Washington Summit last July.

Allies have agreed to integrate civilian planning to support national and collective defence planning into their efforts to strengthen resilience.

This is a highly necessary decision.

The new DDA family of plans was a ground-breaking achievement for the integration of national and NATO Defence plans.

But now we need to make sure national civilian plans are integrated as well.

Because the strength of our armed forces relies heavily on the resilience of our societies.

And it doesn’t stop with planning.

Civilian and military plans regularly need to be put to the test, in order to make sure they actually work.
We quite literally need to exercise our solidarity. 

To a certain extent, NATO already tests the ability of member states to maintain critical infrastructure (such as energy grids, communications, transport, and health systems) during crises.

 

Exercise drills of the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre often focus on civil emergencies like pandemics or environmental disasters, ensuring that national and allied civil sectors can maintain function or recover quickly.

And during Steadfast Defender for instance, NATO practices how civilian authorities, such as local governments and national emergency services, collaborate with the military to manage crises.

But in order to become truly resilient, we need to do whole-of-society Article 5 exercises that train both civilian and military resilience.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I know that you realise the decisions you make as a leader in your sector can have strategic consequences for the security of your nation.

You understand the necessity for being prepared for a war-time scenario.

Across the Alliance, this must become a reality.

In a lot of Allied nations, we sit with the scary paradox that in order to prevent war, we need resilience from the private sector.

But in order to enforce any real change when it comes to for instance increasing our defence production… we first need to be at war.
When I speak on this topic in other Allied nations, I am sometimes labelled as a warmonger.

But I believe that in this room, you understand my stance.

You understand the value and necessity of preparedness.

Imagine if Finland’s approach was replicated across the entire Alliance.

Imagine if the CEO’s of the world’s top banks, technological companies, pharmaceutical, energy and business had the awareness of the connection of their line of work to national security.

If they understood their role in protecting their country.

Can you imagine how differently Allied societies would function?

And this is not a far-fetched ideal.

Finland is the tangible proof of the success of this approach.

Finland’s comprehensive defence strategy embodies the Finnish ‘Sisu’.

It demonstrates an extraordinary resilience and determination in the face of adversity.

And for each person in this room, your participation in this prestigious course shows that you are the embodiment of the Finnish spirit of resilience.

This is deeply inspiring to me.

As NATO integrates civilian and military resilience, we should follow Finland’s example.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The title of my previous lecture to the National Defence Association as the Chief of Defence of the Netherlands was, ‘If you want peace, prepare for war.’

This adage dates back hundreds of years.

And it still rings true today.

Today, I speak to you for the final time in my capacity as Chair of the NATO Military Committee.

I wish to impart this message to you.

Strengthening our collective deterrence and defence is the best way to protect what we hold dear.

In a world of me, NATO fights for the we.

Just as the people in Finland fight for the “we” in their society.

All Allies must choose the common good over individual pursuits.

As Stefan Zweig described, we need to feel during peacetime what we are bound to feel during war.

We need to feel that we belong together.

We need to realize that collective deterrence and collective defence are truly tasks for the collective.

Finland’s movement into NATO is a transition, not a transformation.

It is an opportunity to inspire Allies, whilst embracing a posture of international resilience.

I urge you all to hold the spirit of Sisu as a firebrand leading the way as you carve out this new path.

Knowing that there are friends on either side.

And that you need never again navigate the darkness alone.

Finland has 31 Allies, 31 friends, who will protect them, no matter what; but 31 Allies can also count on Finland for their protection if they need help.

Together, we follow the same compass.

And together, we expect the unexpected.

Thank you. Kitos.

I look forward to hearing your questions.