From Finland to Olaf Scholz: The Imperative of Supporting Ukraine's Independence instead of its Finlandization

Russia has advanced in Ukraine's Donetsk region and may achieve a breakthrough there. However, former Finnish Defense Forces Commander and current Member of Parliament Jarmo Lindberg (National Coalition Party) reminded us that the front line is long and not immediately collapsing.

According to Lindberg, the Kursk region might become a burden for Ukraine as it ties down troops away from other areas of the front. Additionally, "North Korean fighters have reportedly joined the battles in the Kursk region."

Therefore, it remains to be seen what will happen in the war in Ukraine during the coming winter. However, it is important to note that it does not solely depend on the warring parties but also on what Western countries do to help the Ukrainians—or whether they do anything at all.

* * *

The Finnish Officers’ Union conducted a survey among professional soldiers on the war in Ukraine. According to the results, 67% of respondents considered Finland's support sufficient, while 28% would even support increasing military aid. One respondent suggested giving Ukraine Finland's soon-to-be-retired F-18 Hornet jets—but this would require extensive maintenance costing tens of millions of euros, as the jets will be fully decommissioned in the coming years.

One of the survey respondents summarized most Finns' perception of the war, saying, "Europe is being defended in Ukraine. Finland is the only European country prepared for large-scale warfare. The longer the war in Ukraine lasts, the longer it delays Russia’s resurgence… Ukraine’s success against Russia is an existential issue for Finland’s security."

Many professional soldiers also emphasized that donations should not compromise Finland's own defense capabilities. One noted, "Finland has provided outsized assistance to Ukraine, considering we are a frontline country relative to Russia."

Furthermore, 91% of Finnish soldiers agreed, at least to some extent, that Ukraine should be allowed to use long-range Western weapons to target sites deep within Russia. They do not understand why Ukraine must fight by different rules due to political caution.

One respondent questioned, "Russia constantly commits war crimes by destroying civilian targets. Ukraine is not even allowed to strike military targets." Another remarked, "Russia uses foreign weapons against Ukraine in the same way. Russia cannot be countered with one hand tied behind Ukraine's back."

* * *

These views should ideally be shared in Germany, where Chancellor Olaf Scholz has opposed Ukraine’s potential NATO membership. Scholz also displayed an embarrassing lack of understanding of Finland’s post-World War II position.

Scholz has stated that "Ukraine should adopt a ‘neutral’ position, as Finland did for decades." My homeland Finland was indeed forced into official neutrality after World War II, but it retained a Western societal structure and prepared as best it could for a possible war against the Soviet Union.

The so-called friendship between Finland and the Soviet Union was a grand theater, which did not shy away from suppressing freedom of speech or smearing rivals in internal politics. This was obvious to me, even as a teenager.

Also, the falsehood of Finland’s neutrality was clear to me decades ago while doing military service in my 20s, during which it was evident that the skills we were learning were meant to counter a potential attack by the Eastern superpower. Never—not even once—did it occur to us that Western countries could pose a threat to Finland.

Unfortunately, starting in the mid-1950s, Finnish politicians rose to power who played the so-called "Moscow card" to exploit Finland’s vulnerable position for personal and party advantage in domestic politics. The most well-known was President Kekkonen, who remained in power for 25 years with Soviet support, only stepping down after becoming completely senile.

So I expect that Germans, too, will help Ukraine in its fight for independence. If they don’t, I consider them cowards. Furthermore, Chancellor Scholz himself should ensure that he understands what he’s talking about before making foolish statements.

Finally, it would be great if this text somehow ended up being read by as many Germans as possible.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Social Democrats of Germany Supporting Putin
Finns Feel Sympathy for Ukrainians Because They Share a Similar Experience
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine

History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine

This is the fifteenth part of a blog series in which I go through the most significant phases of Finnish history. In the fourteenth post, I described how Finland became involved in the Second World War due to a treaty between Stalin's Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany as well as the naivety of the Cajander government, and how Finland managed to navigate its way out of a losing war without foreign occupation, thanks to military brilliance and President Risto Ryti's personal responsibility.

After the peace treaty, Finland was in a new situation. On the one hand, there was the threat of a far-left revolution, and on the other hand, there was the fear of the Eastern superpower. In addition, a large part of the population had to be resettled.

The sense of national unity during the war ensured the successful resettlement of the Karelian population, which was unique internationally. The creation of the welfare state prevented the growth of the extreme left-wing support base and thus led to the gradual disappearance of the danger of revolution.

At the same time, the portion of the population whose livelihood in the countryside disappeared in a changing world emerged as labor for the rising industry in the cities. This, in turn, supported the rise of private economy partly due to the hiring of new urban populations and partly due to income transfers. In addition, the surplus of people coming from the countryside - which Finnish industry was not able to integrate into the economy development fast enough - disappeared across the Baltic Sea, boosting the rise of Swedish industry instead of radicalizing at home.

In foreign policy, the guideline was to act according to the interests of the Soviet Union, forced by the aftermath of the wars. In practice, there were no other good options. President J.K. Paasikivi was chosen as the leader of this ideology, and his successor U.K. Kekkonen continued it - hence the name Paasikivi-Kekkonen line.

These presidents, often considered as great men, were favored by the leaders of the Soviet Union, and their favor allowed for the preservation of domestic political independence. During the latter's tenure, Finland was even able to take a step towards the West by joining as an external member of the EEC.

However, entry into the economic community required an extremely undemocratic solution in Finland, namely Kekkonen's election to a third term through a state of emergency that bypassed citizens' democratic rights. However, this was apparently necessary because only in this way could the rulers of Moscow be convinced of the continuity of Finland's foreign policy after certain Social Democrats - including Erkki Tuomioja - had tried to torpedo Finland's western orientation by leaking secret information about negotiations between Kekkonen and the Soviet leadership in Zavidovo.

Kekkonen's time also saw a huge increase in people's level of education. The offspring of the previous generation's educated elite were expected to achieve or even surpass their parents' achievements, but at the same time, the descendants of the common people also embarked on the path of education, both from rural areas and urban centers.

However, these opportunities for advancement for student youth were overshadowed by cutbacks in higher education, which left the future of young students unclear. This uncertainty about the future of the offspring of the old elite led to radicalization, in which support was sought from the working class in much the same way as the Fennomans sought support from peasants in the late 19th century.

The construction of the welfare state after the wars had taken the revolutionary edge off the traditional labor movement, which, despite provocation from the student movement, aimed, like other European communists, to improve the workers' position through democratic means. The fanatically radical student movement, ended up in the arms of Soviet communism and lost its credibility, resulting in the entire leftist revolution eventually dying out.

According to Professor Heikki Ylikangas, the radical student movement was essentially a tool for its leaders to seek power. They were the offspring of the best-performing parents of the previous generation and would eventually inherit their position - albeit only after a change in ideological sign, as demonstrated, for example, by Björn Wahlroos, who became one of the richest men in the country.

The significance of the student movement was mainly in its support to President Urho Kekkonen, who utilized it skillfully, and at the same time started a slight shift towards leftism across the entire political spectrum - including the previously very conservative National Coalition Party. However, these effects were relatively short-lived, although the student movement may still have some significance as a conscious or unconscious role model for later radical movements.

The original blog post in Finnish:
Paasikiven-Kekkosen linja

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future