Russia’s Aging MiG Fleet vs. Finland’s Modern Air Power

According to the Finnish Defence Forces Commander Janne Jaakkola, “three MiG aircraft would not stand a chance against F-35 fighters, JAS Gripens or FA-18s. In that sense, there was no military threat. A rapid kinetic response would have been a mistake.”

The statement referred to MiG-31 fighters that had entered Estonian airspace, and it is understandable insofar as this aircraft type is far from new: production began back in 1979, and the first planes were delivered to the Soviet military as early as 1982. In that respect, it is rather amusing that such aircraft are still part of Putin’s active air force inventory.

* * *

The most recent MiG fighter is known as the MiG-35, which, according to its manufacturer, belongs to the so-called fifth generation of fighters, featuring stealth characteristics designed to make radar detection more difficult. However, the aircraft deployed in the war in Ukraine have—at least according to Western sources—been said to be lacking compared to their American counterparts.

The Russians, however, claim that the MiGs flown in Ukraine are still undergoing testing, so that deficiencies can be identified and corrected before mass production begins. Until then, the bulk of the Mikoyan–Gurevich fighter fleet remains the outdated MiG-31s seen over Estonia—still the fastest fighter aircraft in the world.

* * *

The obsolescence of Russia’s aircraft is naturally good news for Finland, which will soon receive its first F-35 fighters. Even the current Finnish Air Force fleet—the F-18 Hornet—is, according to the Commander, superior to the MiGs in question. That said, the Hornet is roughly from the same era as the MiG-31, its maiden flight having taken place already in 1978.

On the other hand, the MiG-31 and F-18 Hornet have never faced each other in aerial combat, so Jaakkola’s statement about the latter’s superiority is not based on combat experience but most likely only on assessments derived from technical specifications. For that reason, it should be taken with a grain of salt—though I myself believe in the superiority of Western technology over Soviet-era production.

Nor, judging by history, is there reason to doubt that Finnish pilots would be more skilled than their Russian counterparts.

* * *

Finally, it should be noted that the most well-known Russian next-generation stealth fighter is the Sukhoi-57, which has been used—and also shot down—in the war in Ukraine. In 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that a total of 76 such aircraft would be procured for the country’s air force by 2028.

It would be interesting to know whether our Defence Forces’ Commander also regards the newer Sukhoi and MiG-35 fighters as clearly inferior to their Western counterparts—or whether he sees them as being capable of holding their own in combat against American and European aircraft.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Did Russia Realize the Risk Was Too Great?
Did a Finnish Fighter Jet Rush to Intercept a Russian Sukhoi Yesterday?
Finns - Among the World’s Best

Will Finland Withdraw from the Ottawa Treaty?

In 2012, Finland joined the Ottawa Treaty, effectively prohibiting itself from using anti-personnel mines in the event of a Russian attack. The treaty was championed at the time by socialist president Tarja Halonen, who justified the decision by citing accidents caused by landmines, particularly in developing countries.

However, the irresponsible use of mines has never applied to the Finnish military, which has always ensured that civilians are kept away from minefields.

Perhaps for this reason, the Finnish far-left jurist Martin Scheinin came up with the claim that mines could pose a danger to migrants brought into Finland as hybrid warfare tools by Russia. This comment has mostly sparked amusement, as by the same logic, Russian tanks transporting asylum seekers should also be allowed to cross the border without resistance.

The discussion about the security risks caused by the Ottawa Treaty began in Finland about a month ago, when the Commander of the Finnish Defence Forces, Janne Jaakkola, stated that Finland's security environment has changed since 2012. Many ordinary citizens had already been contemplating the same issue since the start of the war in Ukraine.

Thus, on Finland’s Independence Day, December 6, a campaign was launched to gather supporters for a citizens' initiative calling for Finland to withdraw from the Ottawa Treaty banning anti-personnel mines. The initiative quickly gathered the required 50,000 signatures and was submitted to the Parliament's office today.

It remains to be seen whether Parliament will approve the initiative or ignore the will of the Defence Forces Commander and the people, thereby discarding one of the most effective means of defending the country’s 1,300-kilometer border with Russia.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin's useful idiots in Finland
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
Finland after the Russian war in Ukraine

Finland Must Avoid Ukraine’s Fate

The Commander of the Finnish Defence Forces, General Janne Jaakkola, reminded us Finns that we must never find ourselves in the same situation as Ukraine is in right now. In other words, we should avoid having to repel a full-scale Russian attack as an underdog, where losses in personnel and equipment do not matter.

He also emphasized that the structures of Finnish society must be such that Russia cannot influence the country’s population or infrastructure, even in a wartime scenario. This view has certainly been noted by the current government, as well as by the opposition, and it will not go without impact.

Finland’s defense naturally relies on the strong will of its citizens to defend the country, on high-performance equipment, as well as on the bilateral defense agreement (DCA) signed with the United States and the security guarantees provided by NATO membership. In relation to the latter – according to the Commander of the Defence Forces – discussions are currently underway regarding the nationalities and composition of the forces to be stationed in Finland.

The general also stated that Russia does not pose an immediate military threat to Finland at the moment. However, he expressed concern that we do not have a clear understanding of Russia’s future intentions in Finland or elsewhere.

This is also understood by ordinary Finns, as NATO is, according to a recent survey, the fourth most trusted institution in Finland, following the Defence Forces, the police, and the education system. This reflects the fact that living next to an irresponsible great power helps Finns prioritize things – and security can only come first in this regard.

In relation to what I’ve written above, I’ve sometimes had to answer questions about why the Finnish will to defend is exceptionally high. I believe it largely stems from some form of national memory, where key factors include the seemingly endless suffering during Sweden’s great power era when Finns were sent to die across Europe at the whims of the king.

In this regard, I see the final stages of that era in the early 18th century as particularly significant, when – while Finnish soldiers were fighting elsewhere – the Russians occupied Finland twice (Great Wrath and Russo-Swedish war (1741-1743), looting, raping, killing, and taking women and children as slaves in large numbers. This is something that we absolutely do not want to see repeated ever again.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A Message From and To Vladimir Putin
Defending National Security: Finland's Response to Hybrid Warfare
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history