Chalk this one up to the geopolitical application of the aphorism “better late than never.”

This Wednesday, both Finland and Sweden formally submitted their applications for NATO membership. It marks a rather stunning shift for the two Scandinavian nation’s which have long harbored a policy of official neutrality. Even throughout the Cold War, Finland, especially, resisted joining NATO, maintaining a firm grip on the policies of détente, though not without reason.

Depending on which historian you ask, Finland has fought, and lost, either 32 or 42 wars against Russia. “Lost” may be rather relative, and dependent on the matrix used to determine the outcome (the country still exists as an independent sovereign nation, after all) but in any case the Finns have always done well against their much larger bad neighbor, and any adverse outcome is not due to any shortcoming of Finnish martial ability. It is said that “every Finn can take on ten Russians. But what do you do when the eleventh comes along?” After enough 11th-Russians came along in 1944, Finland found itself forced to accept terms that included crippling monetary payments to Moscow and a forced neutrality. That these were far better terms than the Soviets forced on most Eastern European countries they battered is testament to the tenacity of the Finns.

In any case, the precarious position of Finland, a nation of just over 5 million sharing a border with the Russian behemoth compelled a strategy of neutrality – whatever needed to be done to keep the giant to its east and south at bay. So what has changed now? The shadow imposed by the Soviets evaporated after the collapse of Communism in the early 1990s. But now, the revanchism being exhibited by the Russians has renewed the old threat. The Finns have no desire to go back to the state of perpetual insecurity they had forced on them during the Cold War, and the realize, hopefully not too late, that Russia’s resurrected expansionist designs could place them in the next set of crosshairs. And this time, the Finns also know that they do not have to go it alone.

Finland’s, and Sweden’s, entrance into NATO should be welcomed by the alliance. Both countries membership brings important strategic advantages to NATO. The most obvious is the securing of NATO’s northern flank, long a recognized weakness. It also greatly bolsters the defense of the Baltic nations – Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia – which are connected to the rest of NATO Europe via Poland, by only a narrow strip of land at the Polish-Lithuanian border known as the Suwalki gap, which separates the odd little Russian enclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea from Russian-friendly Belarus. It doesn’t tax reason to assume that Russia’s next military incursion, should it wish to continue its misadventures, would be to close this gap, using the same justifications as it did for its earlier annexations in Georgia and Crimea, thus cutting off the Baltics from western support. Finland provides a crucial counter-balance to this very real threat. A NATO-allied Scandinavia also strengthens the West’s naval position in the Baltic Sea, which is currently Russia’s go-to route to the Atlantic.

Finland and Sweden’s contribution to the military might of the alliance may be small compared to that of the U.S., Britain and some others, but will not be insignificant. Finland’s population, for instance, at roughly 5.5 million people is small, but well educated (it currently ranks as the eighth most educated country in the world), an often overlooked and underestimated factor in military success. Their regular armed forces are small, but professional and well-equipped – they will possess 64 5th-Generation F-35 fighters by 2030 – and the country can call up more than a quarter-million reservists. And they each know their terrain, and their climate, and will fight.

There is another geo-strategic benefit to Sweden and Finland joining the good guys officially; Russia’s belligerence has forced something of a re-polarizing of the world. The more countries that see the threat for what it is and ally themselves with the democratic West, the more isolated Russia becomes.

Lord Percy of Newcastle said a century ago that the genius of socialism was to render property forever insecure. Russia, by its hostility to established world order, has similarly rendered the security of its neighbors, and the West, insecure. NATO is, as it was 40 years ago, the best bulwark against that insecurity. Turkey is, for reasons not altogether honorable, balking at Sweden and Finland’s admittance to the alliance. The rest of NATO, under U.S. leadership, must not let them stall the gears. The Finns are a proud people, who are not willing to lose the 43rd war. We may soon be in need of proud people, and should be honored to call them friends.

Kelly Sloan is a political and public affairs consultant and a recovering journalist based in Denver.