U.S. Department of State Should Prioritize External Strategic Planning Alignment with Government of Finland 

In the last few months, the Trump Administration has released three high-level strategic plans on national security and foreign policy. They include the National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy, and Agency Strategic Plan for the U.S. Department of State. Now that those documents have been disseminated to the public, the functional bureaus, regional bureaus, and U.S. diplomatic missions will need to finalize their own rounds of lower-level strategic planning. That includes the U.S. Mission to Finland.

As a matter of policy, the Chiefs of Mission are responsible for leading the core strategic planning process at a U.S. diplomatic mission. They also must personally articulate the overarching set of whole-of-government priorities for their given country. 

A few months ago, Howard Brodie was sworn-in as the U.S. Ambassador to Finland. That means that the U.S. Mission to Finland is being led by a Chief of Mission who has successfully completed a Senate confirmation process. He is therefore a relatively powerful Chief of Mission. 

Generally speaking, a U.S. ambassador has far more political capital than someone who is merely acting in that capacity. That is an asset for any U.S. diplomatic mission. And, it could prove to be especially useful to the U.S. Mission to Finland. That is because Finland presents a particularly challenging country context for U.S. diplomatic mission planning.

Reliable allies

First, the National Security Strategy makes clear that the wealth and prosperity of European allies is of strategic importance to the United States. Without strong economies, the Trump Administration warns that European countries will not be able to remain reliable allies. 

That national goal presents a major challenge for Finland. Over the last decade, the country has been severely impacted by the turbulence and uncertainty that has been created by Russian revisionism. This year, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicts that Finland will have the lowest Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth among the European allies who are members of the Arctic Council. That is an obvious cause of concern for the United States.

Second, the National Defense Strategy makes clear that burden sharing with U.S. allies and partners is a strategic imperative for the United States. The Trump Administration is seeking “focused engagement abroad with a clear eye toward advancing the concrete, practical interests of Americans.” Per the Agency Strategic Plan for the U.S. Department of State, that will require European countries to assume the “primary responsibility” for "conventional European defense.”

That national goal presents another major challenge for Finland. The country has traditionally spent well below 2% of GDP on military expenditure. That changed after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, Finland still lags behind the United States. In 2025, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) estimated that Finland would spend 2.77% of GDP on military expenditure. By comparison, the estimate for the United States was 3.22%.

Third, the Agency Strategic Plan for the U.S. Department of State makes clear that the pursuit of balanced and reciprocal trade with European countries is a top-level strategic priority for the United States. That includes the pursuit of increased U.S. energy and defense trade exports, increased market access for U.S. companies, and increased investment by European companies in the United States. 

At the same time, it declares that a reduction of the economic dependence of European countries on major power competitors is a parallel top-level strategic priority for the United States. That explicitly includes reducing energy dependence on Russia and Chinese technology use in critical infrastructure. As a complex, these strategic priorities present yet another major challenge for Finland. 

In 2024, the country had a massive deficit of $3.8 billion euros with China and a massive surplus of $3.2 billion euro with the United States. To compound matters, Finland has exports that have drawn the ire of the Trump Administration. As a consequence, some have been subject to Section 232 investigations on the effect of select imports on U.S. national security interests. Examples include steel, copper, pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, and forestry products.

No get-out-of-jail cards

These three challenges present a wicked problem set for the future bilateral relationship between Finland and the United States. It will not be easy for the U.S. Mission to Finland to achieve all of the desired outcomes being sought in the higher-level strategic plans. The Trump Administration expects every NATO ally to meet the commitment to 5% of GDP on defense expenditure. There will be no get-out-of-jail cards. 

The Trump Administration has put the NATO Allies on notice. If they aren’t able to meet their commitment, the United States will not only view them as a freerider. The Trump Administration has indicated that it will terminate “the benefits of friendship with the United States.” That threat carries heavy weight for Finland. A country that shares an eight hundred plus mile border with an Irredentist Russia does not want to risk forfeiting the security guarantee of the United States.

Social versus military spending

The problem is that the Government of Finland does not simply need to meet the expectations of the Trump Administration. It simultaneously needs to meet the expectations of a Finnish population that has grown accustomed to some of the highest levels of social spending in the world. This has put Finland at the top of many rankings of countries around the world. It is one of the safest. It is one of the most health conscious. Simply put, it is one of the best. 

The Finnish people don’t want to lose that hard-earned status. So, the Government of Finland will need to find a way to meet the Janus-headed challenge of increasing defense expenditure while maintaining social welfare spending. For that to happen, Finland needs to find a way to dramatically kickstart economic growth.

The good news is that the Trump Administration has made a public commitment to working with European countries to reverse their downward trajectory in share of global GDP. The Agency Strategic Plan for the U.S. Department of State articulates that the United States has a vested interest in wealthy and prosperous European Allies. Specifically, it directs the U.S. Department of State to promote new collaborations between American and European companies that are intended to promote wealth and prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic. 

Arctic Security Cutters agreement

The multi-billion dollar commercial agreement that was struck to build Arctic Security Cutters serves as a recent case in point. Of course, there is a caveat. The Agency Strategic Plan for the U.S. Department of State simultaneously directs the U.S. Department of State to oppose transatlantic commercial partnerships that result in the further “deindustrialization of the United States.” 

Given this country context, the U.S. Mission to Finland will not find it easy to articulate a set of whole-of-government priorities that maximize the potential of the U.S.-Finland bilateral partnership. The U.S. Mission to Finland will have to identify a well-formed set of strategic goals and objectives that support a complex set of seemingly disjointed linkages in order to achieve the desired outcomes radiating out of the White House. 

Some of those linkages obviously will need to include recent higher-level presidential directives that are intended to rebalance the economic relationship between European countries and the United States. Examples include the America First Trade Policy Memorandum, America First Investment Policy Memorandum, Reciprocal Trade and Tariffs Memorandum, Defending American Companies and Innovators From Overseas Extortion and Unfair Fines and Penalties Memorandum, and Executive Order on Modifying the Scope of Reciprocal Tariffs and Establishing Procedures for Implementing Trade and Security Arrangements Memorandum. 

Others will need to include higher-level Section 232-related presidential directives that are intended to mitigate the effect of select imports on U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. Examples include the Proclamation on Adjusting Imports of Timber, Lumber, and their Derivative Products into the United States, Proclamation on Adjusting Imports of Processed Critical Minerals and Their Derivative Products into the United States, Proclamation on Adjusting Imports of Aluminum and Steel Into the United States, and Executive Order on Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients Memorandum.

National interests

The problem for the U.S. Mission to Finland is that the strategic goals and objectives in the Integrated Country Strategy for Finland will need to do more than simply support the higher-level presidential directives related to rebalancing the economic and security partnership with European countries. 

They will also need to support the national interests of the Finnish people. Otherwise, they are unlikely to gain the transatlantic traction that will be needed to realize those desired outcomes.

For that reason, the Trump Administration should take a very different approach when developing the core strategic plan of the U.S. Mission to Finland than prior administrations. Rather than simply focusing on vertical alignment with higher-level presidential directives and strategic plans, the U.S. Mission to Finland should widen the contextual lens in search of ways to promote horizontal strategic planning alignment with other U.S. Missions and diagonal strategic planning alignment with the Government of Finland too.

If the Trump Administration adopted that alternative approach, it would not only encourage the U.S. Mission to Finland to promote strategic planning alignment with the Integrated Country Strategies for U.S. Missions to China, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Russia, Norway, and Sweden. 

It would encourage the U.S. Mission to Finland to search for strategic planning alignment with the national reports, policies, strategies, strategic plans, and public opinion surveys of Finland, including the Government Programme of Prime Minister Petteri Orpo, Security Strategy for Society, Government of Finland Defence Report, Team Finland Network Strategy, Finland Digital Compass Report, Finnish Tourism Strategy and Measures, and Finns’ Opinions on Foreign and Security Policy, National Defence and Security.