Finland and Sweden's decision to join NATO reflects a shift from their traditional foreign policy roles to more integrated Western alliances, influenced by the weakening of the rules-based international order and heightened security threats. This shift poses a dilemma for small liberal states, as they must balance national autonomy, social identity, and external security challenges. The process of foreign policy role change is complex, involving domestic elite negotiations, public opinion, and institutional constraints. Role theory helps explain how small states navigate these challenges, adjusting their roles in response to changing international conditions. Finland's decision to join NATO was supported by both the public and political elite, leading to a strong role adaptation and enactment. In contrast, Sweden's decision was more contested, with public and elite divisions over the necessity of NATO membership and its implications for Sweden's international identity. The article presents a model of domestic role change, highlighting four action strategies based on vertical and horizontal contestation. Finland's case exemplifies a domestically driven consensual role change, while Sweden's case reflects a muddle-through strategy. The article underscores the importance of understanding the interplay between domestic and international factors in shaping the foreign policy roles of small liberal states.Finland and Sweden's decision to join NATO reflects a shift from their traditional foreign policy roles to more integrated Western alliances, influenced by the weakening of the rules-based international order and heightened security threats. This shift poses a dilemma for small liberal states, as they must balance national autonomy, social identity, and external security challenges. The process of foreign policy role change is complex, involving domestic elite negotiations, public opinion, and institutional constraints. Role theory helps explain how small states navigate these challenges, adjusting their roles in response to changing international conditions. Finland's decision to join NATO was supported by both the public and political elite, leading to a strong role adaptation and enactment. In contrast, Sweden's decision was more contested, with public and elite divisions over the necessity of NATO membership and its implications for Sweden's international identity. The article presents a model of domestic role change, highlighting four action strategies based on vertical and horizontal contestation. Finland's case exemplifies a domestically driven consensual role change, while Sweden's case reflects a muddle-through strategy. The article underscores the importance of understanding the interplay between domestic and international factors in shaping the foreign policy roles of small liberal states.