Citizens’ attitudes towards the United States are significantly critical, while Finland’s official line emphasises close bilateral relations and multifaceted cooperation. New divisions are emerging in foreign and security policy, which is becoming one of the key issues in the 2027 parliamentary elections.
These results were published in a new research report, “
The international security environment is undergoing an exceptionally intense and multi-layered transformation. The rules-based international system has lost much of its steering power, while a new order has yet to emerge. Global politics is now characterised by an in-between state where major powers are increasingly openly pursuing complex geo-economic interests.
Finnish foreign and security policy attitudes appear both stable and dynamically shaped by changes in the international system. A majority (71%) perceive that the rules-based order has in practice already been replaced by great-power sphere-of-influence politics. At the same time, Europe is seen as having the task of defending a system based on common agreements while challenging great-power hegemony (74%). Building cooperation with Brazil, India and other mid-sized actors is widely accepted as a viable strategy (71%). Support for Ukraine also remains strong (81%), although the prolongation of the war and the division of attention between multiple simultaneous crises are reflected in a slight dip in solidarity.
For Finns, NATO is a guarantor of security, not a question of values or identity
Finns still see NATO membership as justified, but support (73%) has fallen by ten percentage points over the past two years. The decline appears to reflect growing uncertainty stemming from changes in US positioning and internal tensions within the alliance. Trust in NATO’s core function, namely collective defence and deterrence, remains strong, and Finns continue to be firmly committed to the principle of reciprocity within the alliance. For instance, a majority (57%) would be willing to send Finnish reservists to support a NATO country under attack. NATO is perceived primarily as a guarantor of security, not a value community among liberal democracies or an identity project.
Nuclear weapons are viewed more acceptingly, but within strict limits
Participation in NATO nuclear exercises (54%) and the transit of nuclear weapons (46%) are supported more strongly than before. Strengthening a European nuclear deterrent also gains vast majority support (59%). However, stationing nuclear weapons on Finnish soil still receives little support (22%), and three-quarters want Finland to adopt, like the other Nordic countries, a political stance that nuclear weapons will not be placed in Finland in peacetime. Initiatives to develop a Nordic nuclear weapon are also viewed with caution (33%). Strong support for parliamentary preparation of nuclear weapons legislation (77%) underscores the importance of procedural legitimacy: nuclear issues are expected to be handled through broad preparation and consensus-oriented debate.
Citizens’ and decision-makers’ views diverge on Finland–US relations
Only about one-tenth of Finns think that the US, under the current administration, would still be willing to defend its NATO allies. Its commitment to the defence cooperation agreement between Finland and the US is also perceived as weak (24%). Trust towards the US is particularly low among women. While Finland’s official line emphasises the closeness and diversity of bilateral relations, a majority of citizens would like to reduce dependence on the US in weapons technology (87%), digital infrastructure (79%), and more broadly in consumer choices (91%).
An increased European responsibility in security is broadly accepted, but the current limitations of Europe’s capabilities are also recognised. At the same time, a clear distinction is made between the roles of Europe and NATO. NATO is seen as the primary provider of military deterrence and hard security, while the EU’s foreign policy role is understood to be far more diverse, covering broadly defined security, crisis management and political coordination.
Foreign and security policy gaining importance for voters
Tax increases are perceived by voters as slightly more acceptable than cuts to public services as a way to finance growing defence expenditures under fiscal constraints. Neither option is clearly acceptable, though neither is rejected outright. Only supporters of the Left Alliance are almost completely opposed to cuts in services. The perceived acceptability of funding instruments does not vary according to the fiscal policy positions traditionally associated with political parties.
Citizens closely follow global politics, whose unexpected developments cause various security concerns and needs. Finland’s and Europe’s leaders are expected to take an active role in building collective security and to respond to pressures from the US both about internal tensions within NATO and more broadly about pressures on the rules-based international system. This requires difficult choices and broad democratic deliberation. Foreign and security policy is thus likely to become one of the key themes in the 2027 parliamentary elections and may divide both parties and voters more than before.
“In Finland, the re-politicisation of security issues is particularly visible as a growing tension between supporters of the National Coalition Party and the Finns Party, who are very favourable towards defence needs, and supporters of the Left Alliance, who are more critical. This has revitalised the Finnish foreign and security policy debate, which still remains, compared to many other countries, highly consensus-oriented,” says Hanna Wass, Associate Professor of Political Science and project leader.
The report “Dynamic Support for Security and Defence Policy (NATOpoll)” is based on survey data designed within the NATOpoll project and collected by Taloustutkimus between 31 March 31 and 14 April 2026. A total of 3,141 Finns aged 15–93 responded. Of these, 840 participated in all previous survey rounds (29% of first-round respondents, 41% of second-round, 51% of third-round, and 75% of fourth-round respondents). There were 2,301 entirely new respondents. The original respondents were weighted by age, gender and place of residence to match first-round respondents. The full dataset is weighted according to population weights based on the most recent demographic data. The margin of error is approximately ±1.8 percentage points for the full dataset and ±3.4 percentage points for the original respondents.
The report provides information and recommendations that can help strengthen Finland’s preparedness and societal security in the future.
The project, funded by the Kone Foundation, involves researchers from the University of Helsinki, Tampere University, the University of Turku, Åbo Akademi University, and the Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
Further information:
Hanna Wass, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Helsinki, +358 50 448 4399
Tuomas Forsberg, Professor, Tampere University, +358 50 569 1752
Elisa Leonoff, Researcher, University of Helsinki, +358 40 128 2577
Johanna Vuorelma, University Lecturer, Tampere University, +358 45 357 8335