HELSINKI, March 8 (Xinhua) -- Finland's plan to lift its long-standing legal ban on nuclear weapons has triggered an unusually broad debate, with opposition parties, experts and peace advocates questioning not only how the decision was made, but also whether it could distance Finland from the Nordic security tradition and ultimately make the country less secure.
The Finnish government announced on Thursday that it will seek to amend the Nuclear Energy Act and the Criminal Code to remove the blanket ban, in place since the 1980s, on the import of nuclear devices and their transport, supply and possession in Finland. The Ministry of Defense said the move is intended to align Finnish legislation with NATO's deterrence and defense posture. Domestic and international media have widely interpreted it as a relaxation of restrictions on nuclear weapons.
Under the proposed changes, such activities would be permitted in the context of Finland's homeland defense, NATO's collective defense or other defense cooperation.
The proposal has quickly sparked controversy on several fronts, beginning with questions over procedure and political legitimacy. The plan was announced without prior consultation with opposition parties, drawing criticism across the political spectrum. The main opposition Social Democratic Party, the Greens and the Left Alliance have all voiced opposition.
Defense Minister Antti Hakkanen said limited public communication was necessary because of the sensitivity of the issue, while President Alexander Stubb defended the move as being in Finland's interest to ensure there are "no law-based obstacles hampering the defense and deterrence by NATO."
Critics, however, say the government has broken with Finland's long-standing practice of broad consultation on major security policy decisions, noting that opposition leaders were informed only one day in advance.
Tytti Tuppurainen, chair of the Social Democratic parliamentary group, said no such legislative change had been identified when Finland sought NATO membership, and argued that this was "not the kind of NATO profile Finland was aiming at" when it joined the alliance on the basis of broad political consensus.
National broadcaster Yle also noted that Finland was able to join NATO while the ban remained in force, raising broader questions over why the legal change is now considered necessary.
Another controversy is whether the move would bring Finland closer to, or further away from, the rest of the Nordic region. Stubb has argued that the change would align Finland's nuclear policy with those of other Nordic countries, but critics reject that view. Antti Lindtman, leader of the Social Democrats, said it would instead distance Finland from the nuclear policies traditionally followed by its Nordic neighbours.
Speaking to Yle, Tytti Erasto, a senior researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, said that while Finland is the only Nordic country with a full legal ban, other Nordic states -- especially Norway and Denmark -- have maintained strong political positions against nuclear weapons since the Cold War, while Iceland declared itself a nuclear-free zone in 2016.
Matti Pesu, a senior research fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, said that if the legal ban were removed, Finland's nuclear policy would, in practice, depend mainly on political statements and case-by-case decisions rather than binding legislation.
The third, and perhaps most sensitive, question is whether the move would actually strengthen Finland's security, as the government argues, or instead increase risks and tensions. Peace advocates say the decision could deepen public anxiety rather than enhance security.
Laura Lodenius, executive director of the Peace Union of Finland, said the change would not make Finland safer and warned that a country that once supported nuclear disarmament would now be sending the opposite political signal by reinforcing the role of nuclear deterrence. She also expressed concern that if the ban is lifted, decisions involving the movement of such weapons could be handled under extreme secrecy, leaving Finns unable to know with certainty whether nuclear weapons are present in the country.
The debate has also extended beyond Finland's borders. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that if Finland were to deploy nuclear weapons on its territory, it would become a threat to Russia and Moscow would respond accordingly, adding that abandoning the ban would leave Finland more vulnerable and increase tensions in Europe.
According to the Ministry of Defense, the draft amendments have entered public consultation, with comments due by April 2, as the government seeks to enact the changes as soon as possible. It also said Finland does not seek to host nuclear weapons and that NATO is not planning such a move. Finland joined NATO in 2023 as the alliance's 31st member state. ■