Everything can go very quickly now.

When the Swedish and Finnish prime ministers attend the closed meeting of the federal cabinet at Schloss Meseberg this Tuesday, they will not yet have any official decisions to announce from their countries.

But when Magdalena Andersson and Sanna Marin discuss the new security situation after the Russian invasion of Ukraine with Chancellor Olaf Scholz, an important catchphrase will of course be: NATO membership.

For weeks, a momentum has developed in Helsinki and Stockholm that was hardly thought possible for a long time.

Polls show growing support for NATO membership.

In the political debate, one stone falls after the other, like a perfect game of dominoes.

It doesn't seem to be long before the last stone falls, which should be the applications for membership in NATO.

Longer NATO border with Russia

But the Russian president knocked down the first stone himself, or rather shot it down: from the very first day of the war, Putin gave Sweden and Finland little choice.

One consequence of his attack on Ukraine is likely to be that two more countries will join NATO - and the length of the NATO countries' border with Russia will soon double.

For Sweden and Finns in particular, it was important for their self-image to be non-aligned militarily.

Since the end of the Napoleonic Wars, neutrality had shown Stockholm a way to reconcile its own claims with its own location and size - and to prevent wars on its own territory.

In the past decades, this position has helped to act as a major humanitarian power and to be able to help with conflicts all over the world.

Remembering the Winter War

In Finland, on the other hand, the memory of the Winter War a good 80 years ago is still alive.

Despite all the threats from the Soviet Union, few believed that the Red Army would actually attack.

The Finns then fought a seemingly overwhelming opponent and lost significant parts of their lands.

But they swore their independence.

In the decades that followed, Helsinki made a point of not alienating Moscow.

Neutrality was the path to security and peace, despite a 1,300-kilometer border with Russia.

But those times are over.

Because Sweden and Finland are no longer neutral, they belong to the European Union and have also come closer and closer to NATO.

It is clear which side they have chosen.

The Russian annexation of Crimea already alarmed Stockholm and Helsinki, there are partnership agreements with NATO, and joint exercises have repeatedly taken place.

All trust is destroyed

Nevertheless, accession seemed far away.

Instead, Stockholm and Helsinki tried to guarantee their overall security with a complicated calculation of cooperation and agreements with each other, with third countries and within the EU.

But this calculation no longer works.

With his attack on Ukraine, Putin undermined such considerations in the north.

All trust is destroyed.

For a long time, people avoided giving Moscow reasons for an escalation.

The war has shown that Putin doesn't need these occasions at all.

But how is a complicated security equation supposed to work when Putin is willing to use force as he sees fit?

When he sees enemies wherever he wants.

The answer for Sweden and Finland seems clear: only Article Five of NATO can guarantee military assistance in an emergency.

And thus more security.

But it's not that far yet.

Again and again, the new security bills are gone through in the north, after all, with membership comes obligations and new uncertainties - after all, Moscow repeatedly threatens to take this step.

While the political discussion in Finland is already clearly leading to an application, the Swedes are still lagging behind - especially Andersson's Social Democrats are still struggling.

It seems unlikely that Stockholm will be left out on its own.

It is clear that both countries meet NATO's requirements.

What is uncertain is what happens in the months between the application for membership and admission, in which Article 5 does not yet formally apply to the two.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz would therefore do well to promise both countries of Germany full support, whichever path they choose.

It can only be good for Germany that it will probably lead to NATO.

The security of the alliance, the security of Germany are also defended around the Baltic Sea.