Vandals of Tampere’s Mannerheim Statue Reveal Their Ignorance

In Tampere, Finland, a statue of Marshal Carl Gustaf Mannerheim—who led the White forces in the Finnish Civil War of 1918 and served as Commander-in-Chief of the Finnish Army during World War II—was erected in 1956. The statue was created by Evert Porila before the Winter War and placed at a location from which Mannerheim himself observed the decisive battles of the Red uprising in 1918. The statue and its surroundings are impressive, and the historical insight behind its placement is excellent. I recommend visiting it to everyone traveling in Finland, as well as to our own citizens.

Iltalehti reported that this statue had—apparently two nights ago—been vandalized with red paint. Writings had been scrawled on the base and side of the statue, which shows poor judgment ability.

* * *

For these vandals, it would be instructive to watch the film “The Eternal Road” (Ikitie), available on the Finnish Broadcasting Company’s Areena service. The film, directed by Antti-Jussi Annala and based on a novel by Antti Tuuri, might help them understand the kind of fate from which the victory of Mannerheim’s White Army spared their grandparents and their ancestors. A “Red Finland” would most likely have been annexed to the Soviet Union, much like Ukraine, which went on to suffer the horrors of the Holodomor.

* * *

Still, every cloud has a silver lining. The Red uprising led to the development of a very strong executive branch within Finland’s democracy—something highly exceptional compared to other European states that gained independence after World War I.

Thanks to its strong executive power, Finland remained a democracy while many other post–World War I democracies—where parliamentary power was emphasized—drifted into right-wing dictatorships. Things were different here under the North Star: communists were banned, and the far-right Lapua Movement remained a historical curiosity.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Politics in Brigitte Bardot’s Obituary on Finland’s Public Broadcaster Yle
Demonstration Demonstrated the Selfishness of the Demonstrators
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war

The Outbreak of the Continuation War Between Finland and the Soviet Union

In recent days, Finland has been engaged in a discussion about the outbreak of the Continuation War between Finland and Russia as part of the Second World War. The debate began when Finland’s largest newspaper, Helsingin Sanomat (HS), published an article with a headline claiming that “Elina Valtonen forgot the Continuation War on television.”

It claimed that Finland had attacked the Soviet Union in 1941, at the beginning of the Continuation War. This stirred up a lot of debate—and perhaps even some lipstick-splashing—because it is an indisputable fact that the Soviet Union initiated the hostilities of the Continuation War.

* * *

The Finnish-language Wikipedia states the matter—immediately under the subheading “The war begins”—as follows:
“The Soviet Union’s attacks against Finland began on 22 June 1941 at 6:05 a.m., when the Soviet Union opened artillery fire from the Hanko base at Finnish targets in the archipelago and on the mainland, and launched air raids against Finnish ships at sea. On the same day, the Soviet Union carried out several artillery strikes on the eastern border.

According to the same source, ‘after this, on the same day Finland participated in the mining of the southern Gulf of Finland. Germany had launched Operation Barbarossa at 3:00 a.m., and German aircraft that had conducted mine-laying flights from East Prussia to the Leningrad region landed at the Utti airfield on their return journey to refuel. The Soviet Union continued its air and artillery strikes against Finnish military targets in Finland. Finland refrained from returning fire and attempted to assert its neutrality in the new war.’”

And again, quoting Wikipedia:
“On 25 June 1941, the Soviet Air Force bombed Helsinki, Turku, Heinola, and Porvoo as well as a dozen other localities with about 500 aircraft, of which 27 were shot down over Finnish territory. Based on these bombings and previous events, in a communication submitted to Parliament the government concluded that the country had entered a state of war. Parliament accepted this position. Later that same day, 25 June, Prime Minister Jukka Rangell stated on the radio that Finland was once again at war with the Soviet Union…. War was declared on 26 June 1941. The Finnish Army and German troops stationed in Finland began the land offensive.”

* * *

HS has later attempted to correct its mistake with an addition stating that “Finland declared a state of war only after the Soviet Union had bombed Finland, but Finland had already before this made extensive offensive preparations to join the war alongside Germany. Finland’s objective was to occupy large areas of the Soviet Union beyond those that had been lost in the Winter War.”

This correction is indeed in the right direction, but it is still misleading. It was the Soviet Union that unambiguously initiated the Continuation War. And, incidentally, it committed what would today be considered a serious crime against humanity, since terror bombings—even against countries allegedly preparing for war—aimed at civilian populations are indisputably such acts.

The Red Army Air Force bombings of 25 June were unquestionably exactly that—state terrorism. And it is equally indisputable that Finland began its own offensive operations only after those attacks.

For the first three days of the war, all Finnish military operations had been defensive. And that’s not all: as can be seen even from the Wikipedia excerpts I cited above, Finland had refrained even from some defensive actions.

* * *

It must of course be acknowledged that German soldiers had arrived in Finland. It is also well known that many of Finland’s political leaders at the time wished to avenge the defeat of the Winter War.

I personally find Heikki Ylikangas’s view quite plausible—that this idea had been adopted, as a result of Hermann Göring’s persuasion, already at the end of the Winter War.

However, this does not change the truth that Finland was not the aggressor in the Continuation War; it was Stalin’s Soviet Union. It is also a fact that since history is not an experimental science, we cannot turn back time and see whether Finland would have attacked the Soviet Union without the war initiated by Stalin.

Furthermore, one should understand about the nature of the Continuation War that although Finland’s offensive into the Soviet Union—beginning several days after the Red Army’s military actions—was undeniably a war of conquest, it was not an existential threat to the communist state. This is because Commander-in-Chief Carl Gustaf Mannerheim refused to launch an active offensive against Leningrad and did not order the continuation of the conquest beyond the three isthmuses stretching from the Gulf of Finland through Lakes Ladoga and Onega to Lake Seesjärvi. Yet conditions would have been favorable for such an advance at the time.

* * *

Based on all this, I must deeply wonder why HS, even while correcting its article, failed to present an accurate picture of the events of June 1941. Instead, it gave support to the false propaganda spread across social media in recent times by Putin’s Russia and its trolls (example), claiming that Finland was a Nazi state that attacked the innocent Soviet Union. The fact is that Finland never had a Nazi party in its Parliament; the only far-right party represented there, the Patriotic People’s Movement, was relatively small and not a Nazi party.

* * *

At the same time, it is necessary to correct the notion—indeed, an urban legend—that the Soviet Army was not prepared for Germany’s attack. In fact, its forces had been massively strengthened after the Winter War, so that in the summer of 1941 it was—at least on paper—much stronger than the German armed forces. And Hitler’s intelligence had failed to discover this fact.

I even consider it possible that this very fact—the presumed strength of the Soviet Army—explains the Red Army’s attack on Finland immediately after the start of Barbarossa. It is, after all, irrational that Stalin opened a new front—against a new enemy—after being forced into a defensive war against the Germans.

I justify this by arguing that Stalin may have imagined his unprecedentedly strong Red Army capable of stopping and destroying the attacking German forces, unlike the French the previous year. And as we know, that is ultimately what it did—although only after years, and with the support of massive American aid packages.

The Finnish Army, on the other hand, Stalin failed to defeat, and Helsinki remained unconquered. And therefore our history does not include a 50-year period of misery under communist dictatorship.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Did Finland Remain an Independent Democracy After World War II?
Bless Ukrainian Soldiers With the Spirit That Once Defined the Celebrated Finnish Veterans
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic

History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic

This is the fourteenth part of a blog post series where I go through the significant events in Finnish history. In the thirteenth post, I described how Finland managed to develop again through peaceful democratic means after the rise of the extreme right-wing following the civil war initiated by the old Social Democratic Party.

As my esteemed reader well remembers, this development was interrupted by World War II. For Finland, the most significant chain of events occurred already before the Winter War.

I'm referring to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact between Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union, in which Finland was defined as part of the Soviet Union's sphere of influence. As a result, the Kremlin offered our country a trade-off, in which we would give up areas on the Karelian Isthmus and Hanko, seen as important for the security of Leningrad, but would receive land in East Karelia in return.

Finland refused the trade mainly because the government believed that the Soviet Union was just bluffing. Not even the fact that Hitler's closest confidant - Marshal Hermann Göring - advised Finland to accept the offer, hinting that our country would get its losses back with interest during the coming major war. In the Baltic countries, Göring's similar speeches were believed and they agreed to Moscow's demands, which later, in a changed situation, led to the occupation of these countries.

As a result of Finland's stubbornness, Russia began to threaten our country through its media and moved its troops to the border. Since these methods did not make the Cajander government yield, Stalin also staged the shelling in Mainila and denounced the non-aggression treaty between the countries.

Even these measures did not change the Finnish government's position because it could not believe in an attack, at least not without an ultimatum or a threat to start a war. Moscow, on the other hand, could not give such a declaration because it would have been contrary to the propaganda image it created of the Soviet Union as a peace-loving state.

Therefore, the Soviet army eventually crossed the border, citing the shots fired at Mainila. This surprised the Finnish government, which believed in the impossibility of war, and it fell. After that, a new government tried to agree on a territorial exchange with Stalin. However, it was already too late, as Stalin was only discussing with the puppet government led by Otto Wille Kuusinen that he had established.

During the Winter War, the Finns remembered Göring's offer, which led to Finland's submission to the harsh peace terms of the Winter War, despite the still unbeaten army and military assistance offered - although not given - by England and France. However, the latter made Stalin begin negotiations with Finland.

At this point, the Finnish leadership had assessed that Germany would win the upcoming great war, at least against Russia, and that Finland would get its losses back with interest. This view was based mainly on the fact that Russia had also suffered a defeat during the First World War against Germany, which later lost the war.

Thus, our country was drawn into the Continuation War, in which the objectives were set clearly beyond the borders of 1939. Finland became dependent on Germany for both energy and food self-sufficiency. As a side note, it should be mentioned that the extradition of some Jews to the Nazis was done because Germany required it as a condition for grain deliveries.

In Finland, it was understood no later than 1942 that Germany would not win the war. This led to peace enquiries, during which Stalin was proposed to withdraw to the borders prior to the Winter War, which, of course, did not suit to the Generalissimo, who demanded the peace borders of the Winter War. This was not accepted, so Stalin agreed on future borders with other allies at the Tehran Conference in 1943, receiving in return permission to retain the Baltic states - that had previously "voluntarily" joined the Soviet Union - as his own after the war.

Thus, Finland's fate was left to weapons, and the solution proved to be the breaking of the front in the battles of June 9-10. After that, President Risto Ryti made his famous personal agreement with Hitler to receive military support, and the Commander-in-Chief transferred troops from Olonets Karelia, where the Soviet war machine was once again stopped - primarily due to the technically superior artillery fire of the Finns.

After this, a peace process was initiated as the Soviet Union needed its soldiers in the race to Berlin. Finland got its post-Winter War borders with Petsamo reduced and exchange of Hanko peninsula to the Porkkala peninsula closer to Helsinki. Additionally, Finland committed to clearing Lapland of German troops and paying heavy war reparations.

The war marked the end of the era of the first republic, often referred to as White Finland. During this time, the society that was extremely divided after the Civil War had gradually and especially during the Winter War, grown into a unified state, where the old aristocracy had been ousted and the working class had taken its place.

It was a world of peasants, businessmen, higher civil servants, and the intelligentsia, where even working-class families had dreams of social advancement by sending their children to study and thus pursue success in society. In other words, this was the foundation for poor Finland's development into one of the world's best places to live.

The original blog post in Finnish:
Suomen ensimmäisen tasavallan loppu

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

History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war

This is the twelfth part of a blog series where I go through the significant events of Finnish history. In the eleventh entry, I described how Finland became a democracy, ensuring equal political participation for all citizens, as a result of the oppressive measures taken by Russia in the country. 

As such, Finland gained independence in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution. However, led by the Social Democratic Party, then including also communists, the Finnish Civil War began. According to Professor Ylikangas, the war resulted in the deaths of as many as 36 640 people - more than in the similarly-lengthy Winter War, and in proportion to the population, more than in the three-year Continuation War.

As we know, the war was ultimately won by the Whites, led by Mannerheim, although they initially struggled to recruit even in South Ostrobothnia, where the war was being fought against fellow countrymen. This situation changed when Mannerheim managed to disarm 7 500 Russian soldiers with a small group of men in Ostrobothnia. Thereafter, recruitment was marketed with the need to remove the Russians from the country, which solved previous problems. 

The parties of the war were initially quite equal in terms of their skills, but the outcome was decided by the Jäger troops - Finnish young men who were trained and arrived from Germany - and ultimately by the German military unit that arrived in the country. In reality, the latter alone would have been sufficient to achieve the same outcome even if there had been no Jäger troops.

In the white Finland that emerged as the first outcome of the war, power was taken over by the educated classes, civil servants, owners of estates and factories, as well as farmers. On the other hand, the defeated industrial and agricultural workers and the landless inhabitants of sparsely populated areas were marginalized despite their right to vote.

The second significant outcome of the war was the emergence of a strong far-left party (The Finnish Communist Party) in our country. Its success was fueled by the white media, which highlighted the red terror, but remained silent about all the memories of the white post-war atrocities.

Finland was driven into a civil war primarily due to the power vacuum created by the fall of the Russian Tsar. The well-known social injustices - popularized by Väinö Linna and still cherished by the Left today - were more of a driving force for the war rather than the cause.

Two militant organizations, the Red and White Guards, emerged to fill the power vacuum, and their confrontation was ensured when the Senate, dominated by the political right, declared the Civil Guards as the government's armed forces. The Red Guard leadership could not accept this, and they set out on their ill-fated military campaign.

After the war, there was a multi-stage political struggle over the country's political system and the government structure that reflected it. The result was a democratic structure with a very strong executive power, which was entirely different from the other European states that became independent after the World War I.

Thanks to its strong executive power, Finland remained a democracy while other post-World War I democracies drifted towards right-wing dictatorships. This was despite the fact that communists in Finland were forced underground and the far-right sought to take power through extra-legal means.

The original blog post in Finnish:
Verinen sisällissota

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