What do you imply with "atleast its a nato country"? Its not like finland have ever been anti-west, if this was your point. Nato alone does not imply pro-west (the US/trump leadership being the prime example)

I think the context is clear from what was written:

> As the other global options for network hardware are Ericsson, Samsung and Huawei, Nokia is the closest to a “Made in USA” solution. Its HQ is in Finland but at least it’s a NATO country now.

i.e. with the current US administration, a "Made in USA" solution to critical infrasctructure would likely be seen as ideal; and viewed through this lens, when the other options come from Sweden, Finland, South Korea, and China, Finland is probably the best option.

I didn't read any implied criticism of Finland.

How is Sweden worse than Finland? Considering they both are neighbors and have been a neutral country? (technically Sweden has been for longer).

>How is Sweden worse than Finland?

As a Finn, rather than bore you with a 2846 bullet point list, I'd say that technologically not a lot, but we do have a lot more to lose, so it is easier to bargain with our industry compared to Sweden's. Our population is not always big enough to compete head-to-head with some sectors Sweden is also a part of.

During the Cold War, Finland was officially neutral, but for pragmatic reasons leaned heavily towards the Soviets in foreign policy. There's even a word for this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlandization

That's not the whole story. Excluding the pro-Soviet fringes, Finland always wanted to be free of Russia. When Soviet Union fell, Finland moved significantly to the west and also started inching towards NATO.

But only the real NATO membership significantly diminished the country risk that foreign investors correctly perceived in Finland.

It's of course obvious to everyone now that there has been no reason to trust Russia. US investors have been resourceful enough to realize that investing in Finland carried a significant country risk due to Russia, even in times of relative peace.

That risk is lesser now thanks to NATO.

It's not about being anti-west, it's about the likelyhood of being invaded.

[deleted]