Small State Conventional Long-Range Strike Arsenals and Strategic Stability in Europe

How does the acquisition of conventional long-range strike weapons (LRS) shape small state warfighting and deterrence strategies, and what implications does this hold for strategic stability? While LRS offer small states new capabilities to threaten high-value targets at operational and strategic depth, including nuclear assets, key dimensions of their role in contemporary small-state warfighting and deterrence strategies remain underexplored. In this article, I develop a theoretical framework that categorizes four mission sets of LRS based on whether strike assets are employed independently or as part of joint operations, and whether they are aimed at shaping perceptions and outcomes in the conventional or nuclear domain. Applying this framework to the cases of Finland, Norway, and Sweden, I find that while these states have invested in advanced conventional missile arsenals, their capacity to exploit the full spectrum of mission sets theoretically enabled by their LRS remains constrained. Nevertheless, the functional overlaps introduced by these weapon systems generate an intense threat perception. As such, even limited LRS in the hands of small states can affect strategic stability, though less through realized capability than through perceived intent and potential.