Originally Posted by
Beamr
Russia has very few contact points to the sea in the west: St Petersburg and Kaliningrad. In the name of protecting these ports, cities and seaways they have a few issues: all the sea routes are basically in control of other countries and providing Baltic NATO countries support. So it's not about resources, it's about geography and who rules what. Take over Åland and Sweden (esp. Gotland) and you'll end up ruling the Baltic Sea without messing with NATO. At the same time you'll be cutting out service routes (air and sea) to Baltic NATO countries, have the opportunity to pressurize Norway (NATO country) and isolate Finland (not a NATO member but better equipped than Sweden).
Why would they wish to rule the Baltic ? There is a choke point bridge that pretty much blocks the Baltic if it became necessary.
Bearing in mind that the Transit route across Northern Russia is now open and growing massively then needing a route into the Baltic seems a moot point. Exactly what comes into Baltic ports than can not go into Northern ports or be transitted by rail from Asia ?
The rush to invest massively in the military seems to be pursuing someone's agenda that will make a lot of money for suppliers but nobody else.