Finnish President Sauli Niinistö in his New Year’s address stated that Russia’s demands for security guarantees and NATO expansion contradict the established order of ensuring European security and affect the interests of the Finns. Finland retains the right at any time, without asking anyone for permission, to apply for membership in the North Atlantic Alliance, Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin said later.
But until recently, Finland was cited as an example for Ukraine as a country that for decades worked closely with the USSR and did not join NATO, while maintaining its independence. What has changed?
What are the Finns afraid of?
Back in early December, the same Finnish President Niinistö, against the backdrop of a rapidly radicalizing situation around Ukraine, argued about the need to take into account Russia’s interests. And many experts and politicians, including the wise chairman of the Munich International Security Conference, German diplomat Wolfgang Ischinger, advised Ukraine to follow the example of Finland, which is a member of the EU, but did not join NATO.
Ivan Preobrazhensky
Everything was changed by the Russian ultimatum to the collective West, which, in addition to demanding security guarantees, included a clause prohibiting NATO expansion in the future. In the Kremlin, having concentrated on the Ukrainian borders, according to foreign intelligence services, more than a hundred thousandth grouping of troops, and their thoughts, too, seem to be concentrated around Ukraine. In other words, aiming at negotiations with NATO and the United States, Putin’s diplomacy decided to ignore the European Union and countries that are not currently members of the North Atlantic Alliance, although they are in close proximity to Russia.
The Finns simply could not calmly watch what was happening. For them, the expansion of Russia’s “security zone” in the form suggested by the Kremlin means giving up their own security, returning to the semi-dependent position in which the country was under the USSR, when Moscow could prohibit Finland from accepting the Marshall Plan or later joining the European Economic Community. …
Soviet-Finnish War 2.0?
It should be noted that the Kremlin practically does not hide the fact that, in their opinion, Finland, in fact, has no right to make a decision on joining NATO. This allegedly directly follows from the peace treaty signed in Paris back in 1947, which sharply limited the military capabilities of the Finnish army.
True, it is not official representatives who are talking about this, but numerous propagandists who even now, at the very first mention of the possibility of joining NATO, were hysterical and started talking, no less, immediately about the threat to St. Petersburg and the return to the situation before called the “winter” Soviet-Finnish war.
Officially, the Kremlin has no objection to expanding Finland’s military capabilities, including even the recent purchase of modern American fighters. But under one strict condition – the preservation of the non-aligned status of the neighboring country.
For Finland itself, the right to join NATO is the strongest security argument. As long as this opportunity remains, the Finns are guaranteed respect from Russia. If suddenly, even in theory, it comes to a ban on the expansion of the alliance, Finland automatically finds itself face to face with the Kremlin, and this, as the past experience of “Finlandization” and the history of many other countries shows, means falling into dependence on Russia, entering into its zone of influence.
Ultimatum to ultimatum
It is no secret that more than 50% of Finns traditionally oppose their country’s joining NATO. But it is also known that in recent years, especially after the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the number of supporters of Finland’s entry into the alliance has been steadily growing.
And so Moscow itself, with its own inept foreign policy of ultimatum and blackmail, has given these supporters both among the Finns and within NATO itself a strong new argument. In the United States, there are also quite a few of those who believe that Moscow should now be intimidated by Finland’s joining NATO.
From this point of view, in recent years no one has done more to strengthen and expand the North Atlantic Alliance than Vladimir Putin. At first, in just a few months, the Russian president managed to convince the Ukrainians, who had previously been unwilling to join NATO in the majority. Now it so happened that fighting for the same Ukraine, he begins to persuade the Finns as well.
And here we must understand that there are practically no chances that Russia’s demand for non-expansion of the alliance will be accepted. This is Putin’s radical hike in the stakes ahead of the talks, in order to achieve something more moderate. Of course, if this is not at all a simple pretext for starting a war.
But the psychological effect in the form of a long-term change in the mood of the same Finns will remain for a long time. Fear is not quickly forgotten. Thus, having lost most of its allies and partners, the increasingly radicalized Kremlin is now forcing non-aligned countries to renounce their neutrality. Such a policy cannot be called forward-looking.
Author: Ivan Preobrazhensky, Ph.D. in Political Science, expert on Central and Eastern Europe, columnist for a number of media outlets. Written a weekly column on DW. Ivan Preobrazhensky on Facebook: Ivan Preobrazhensky
The commentary expresses the personal opinion of the author. It may not coincide with the opinion of the Russian editorial staff and Deutsche Welle in general.
See also:
.