If anything bad happens to Finland because of their delayed admission to NATO, I will not be on speaking terms with turks.
An attack on a single EU nation is to invite war with all EU nations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Security_and_Defence_Po...
This is far from settled. Legally, the EU's mutual defence pact [1] has a lot of outs. What counts as "armed aggression"? "Aid and assist[ance]"? "In [one's] power"?
Contrast that to NATO's Article V [2]. "Armed attack" is clearly defined in Article VI and includes no wiggle room on what counts or doesn't count as aggression. "Will assist" is unconditional. (There is the "as it deems necessary" bit.) Most pointedly, NATO trains and strategises together. European common defence is much less organized.
" [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/mutual-d...
[2] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.ht...
Also Finnish land sucks, they don’t get anything of value except for a buffer zone (which is what they claim they want but they have nukes so they don’t really need it)
The Finland-Sweden-UK mutual defense pact should be a firewall against that, even before considering the fuzzier interim individual commitments from other NATO members.