So the reason that so many Eastern European states are NATO members is that that is what their bourgeois governments decided. Ordinary people were too busy trying to make a living with their crappy jobs to care about what the NATO is or isn’t.
While Moscow undoubtedly loathed Helsinki, the Soviets had better things to worry about than taking over all of Finland:
The Finns indicated that they would be willing to concede some, but by no means all the land
demanded. They were also willing to consider the lease of some, but not all the islands in the Gulf
of Finland. They were adamant that a Soviet military base on at Hanko within 50 miles of their
capital was simply unacceptable. Stalin expressed his frustration with the process, proceeded to
stab at the map around Hanko, and said, “do you need this island, do you need that one?”¹⁶
Additionally, “Stalin was unrealistically influenced by the headline-grabbing antics²¹,” of the Finnish right wing splinter groups. It seems clear that in later negotiations, Stalin “really did believe that the interior of Finland seethed with class antagonism and fascist plotters and that all Finnish society was undercut by smoldering grudges left over from the civil war days.”²²
The Third option open to the Soviets was to invade Finland. They chose to exercise this option
on November 30, 1939. Realistically, they were left with no reason to suppose that further
negotiations would lead to any greater success. Similarly, they have been given no signs that the
Finns had ultimately peaceful motives behind their wish for neutrality. The Soviets could not
understand the Finns’ inability to perceive the Soviets’ fear of invasion.
[…]
Ultimately, […] it was imperative for the Soviets to have the Islands, and the buffer zones at any cost. If they could not get them through negotiations, they had no choice but to do so militarily.
‘Those who are not a member of a government (or military commanders), can not participate in NATO decision making — even if they accept their involuntary membership through their nation. In sociological terms, the NATO, as a military and diplomatic organisation, draws its staff from the upper-class and ‘officer caste’ of each member country. Although there is no formal exclusion, in practice persons from low-status social groups can not take part in NATO decision-making. That includes some ethnic minorities — a NATO Secretary-General from the Roma minority is unthinkable.’
So the reason that so many Eastern European states are NATO members is that that is what their bourgeois governments decided. Ordinary people were too busy trying to make a living with their crappy jobs to care about what the NATO is or isn’t.
While Moscow undoubtedly loathed Helsinki, the Soviets had better things to worry about than taking over all of Finland:
(Source.)
(Source.)
My question is, why did the Finnish ruling class sanction antisemitism in its media, deport over 2,800 POWs (including Jewish ones) to the Third Reich, and let thousands of Soviet POWs perish in Finnish concentration camps? Were those necessary for safeguarding Finnish sovereignty, too?