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

Police Ban Public Fight Between Neo-Nazis and Street Gangs in Finland

Humanitarian immigration has led to the polarization of Western societies. This is also the case in Finland, which has, in many ways, followed in Sweden's footsteps, repeating the mistakes made there one after another.

In this context, an interesting piece of news emerged, reporting that Finnish neo-Nazis and street gang members were planning an event where they could fight each other. The matches would end with a knockout, surrender, or interruption. Participants could kick opponents who were down on the ground, and there would be no rest rounds. However, eye-gouging and causing damage to areas such as the groin would not be allowed.

The idea of the event was essentially a brutal bare-knuckle fight, and the organizer believed that bringing opposing groups together in the same event could reduce confrontation. Tickets for the fight had already been sold, and the organizer expressed a desire to turn such fights into international events.

However, the authorities intervened and banned the event, stating that, according to the police, "it did not appear to be a sports event… The compliance with rules and the health risks involved in the event could potentially constitute a criminal offense."

As a result, Finland will not follow Sweden's example in this case. In Sweden, such matches have reportedly already been held. However, I am not aware of any data on the extent of health consequences or the alleged reduction in conflict between neo-Nazis and street gangs. In any case, it’s a relief that Finland refrains from adopting every foolish idea the Swedish society might offer.

Germany Then and Now Resemble Each Other

In the early years of the Weimar Republic, during the 1920s and the early 1930s in Germany, power was held by the Social Democrats. Nevertheless, the far-left caused unrest and incited workers to go on strikes. Eventually, they even attempted a violent revolution, inspired by Vladimir Lenin.

As a result of all this, a backlash arose among the German populace, which was temporarily interrupted when moderate parties formed governments in the mid-1920s. However, the far-left increased its popularity towards the end of the decade, as the runaway inflation caused by war reparations made life increasingly difficult for the people.

For the same reasons and due to the unrest caused by the far-left, national socialism—or the Nazi Party—also gained traction, ultimately taking power in January 1933. This led the country, after various developments, into two interlinked catastrophes: the Second World War and the Holocaust.

* * *

This came to my mind when I read that in Germany, thousands of leftist protesters gathered on Saturday in front of the party congress of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. As a result, the start of the congress was delayed by two hours because the protesters blocked party members from entering the venue.

A large police presence was also on-site, dispersing a sit-in protest that had partially blocked an intersection. They also intervened to stop acts of violence, as some protesters launched fireworks at the police.

It would be worth asking these protesters whether they have any understanding of what happened in Germany between the world wars, and whether they realize that their current actions bear an unsettling resemblance to the behavior of the German left during the Weimar Republic era, which, as a backlash, resulted in the rise of the Nazi regime.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Strengthening Christmas Market Security: Lessons from Magdeburg
The Fall of Germany’s Government Could Open the EU’s Path to a Better Future
Will immigration give rise to a National Socialist party in Finland

The stabbing of the 12-year-old led to political revelry among the left in Finland

There were two stabbings in the same town in Finland on the same day. In one of the cases, a person of immigrant background fatally stabbed an adult man.

In the other case, a well-known, notoriously violent Nazi, who despite multiple violent crimes was - according to Finnish legal practice - allowed to walk free, stabbed a 12-year-old immigrant child from behind. As of this writing, the child is alive and the Nazi is in police custody.

In due course, the judiciary will determine how soon he will be free again to continue his dangerous behavior towards his fellow citizens.

* * *

Of the two stabbings I mentioned earlier, it is the latter case that has received significant attention, and the identity of the perpetrator has been unusually reported because 'it is a serious act of societal significance, and the suspect has previously been convicted of far-right activities.' From this, one could infer that the killing/murder I mentioned first was not considered serious or of societal significance by the journalists writing about it, despite the death of the victim.

In contrast, the second case truly is, as Finance Minister Riikka Purra (Finns Party) mistakenly suggested that the perpetrator was of immigrant background - which is not surprising considering the recent increase in violence against children and young people by individuals of immigrant background. Of course, once the real ethnicity of the murderer was revealed, she corrected her view.

This has not stopped the far, extreme, or moderate left from reveling in the fate of the stabbing victim. At least just elected member of the EU-parliament Li Andersson (Left Alliance), long-time EU MEP Ville Niinistö (Green League), party leader and member of the Finnish parliament Sofia Virta (Green League), and member of the Finnish parliament Timo Harakka (Social Democrats) have done so. However, they do not appear to have had anything to say about the dark-skinned person's act of killing an adult man.

* * *

In this situation, it is important to state - and I state it myself - that both acts were heinous and should not be defended in any way. However, this cannot mean that discussions about immigration - its benefits, everyday realities, or drawbacks - should not continue.

Instead, these cases underline the government's - and also the opposition's - right and duty to strive to maximize the benefits of immigration and minimize its associated drawbacks.

The latter concerns both the actions of immigrants themselves and those of the marginal groups among the native population who are motivated by them. This includes groups such as the Nordic Resistance Movement, which served as the reference group for the perpetrator of the recent child stabbing and which the USA has just classified as a terrorist organization.

In Finland, the Supreme Court ordered the Nordic Resistance Movement to be disbanded already in 2020.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Monenlaista väkivaltaa ja terrori-iskujen torjuntaa
Huumekaupan motivoimia jengisotia myös Suomeen?
Keskimääräisestä erottuva maahanmuuttaja on otettu kiinni