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

Former President of Finland, Tarja Halonen, suggested that Ukraine should cede part of its territory

Finland's most left-wing president in history, Tarja Halonen, suggested that Ukraine should cede part of its territory to the control of international forces. These forces should not include soldiers from EU or NATO countries.

The question, of course, is what kind of forces would make up this contingent occupying part of Ukraine. Chinese, Indian, Iranian, or African troops? Or even Russian and Belarusian troops?

In Finland, Halonen is known as a president who pursued Russia's interests and, as part of that, did everything she could to weaken the country's defense forces and opposed Finland joining NATO. Fortunately, she failed, and Finland still has the capability to defend itself.

It is important for Ukraine and Ukrainian´s to know this so that President Zelenskyi and his administration understand to immediately reject any potential consultation from Tarja Halonen. She is not an advocate for peace or security, and - for example - during her presidency, she never expressed concern about Russia's actions in world politics but rather about those of the USA.

The difference between Halonen and the current President of Finland, Alexander Stubb, is vast. This was evident most recently at a peace conference held in Switzerland, where he stated: "I strongly urge China to influence Putin, in particular, to stop this war and withdraw".

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish weapons are being tested against the Russians in Ukraine
The procrastination of Western countries is paid for with the blood of soldiers
Why Finland will apply for a membership in NATO

Why Finland will apply for a membership in NATO

President of Finland, Sauli Niinistö, explained why he wanted Finland to join NATO. I think there is a lot of wisdom in his message, and therefore I decided to translate it here. 

"I said in my New Year’s speech that ´in a fast-paced world, it is even more valuable than previously to know when to hurry, when to be patient´. This spring in Finland we have succeeded in this in a great way. Together we have rushed and tempered. The Finnish democracy has shown its exceptional strength.

Ensuring Finland's security has always been the most important goal. That has taken determined and rapid movements, but also time and cold-headed considerations were needed.

Now is a time to make the decision. I shared my opinion today with the Prime Minister: Finland must apply NATO membership as soon as possible.

With NATO membership, Finland maximizes its own security. It does not take anything from anyone, and neither is it against anyone. As a member of the alliance, Finland will responsibly carry its share on the security of the entire community.

Even for a NATO member, the geography stays immutable. Russia is and will remain a border neighbor of Finland. Therefore we must be able to take care of practical issues with Russians also in the future. NATO country Norway has been able to do this.

As a member of NATO, Finland will not grow any bigger that its size is. Determination is not always intended to look imposing. Our constructive line is appreciated.

Our Nordic connection is becoming even closer with the NATO membership. Alongside with well-being, democracy and human rights, the Nordic model will in future be even more widely known for its way of security thinking. We will have a strong, stable and responsible North. It increases stability, not only in the Fennoscandian countries, but also throughout the Baltic region and in the entire Baltic Sea area.

We are now in a historical turning point. But NATO membership will not change everything. The security of Finland will continue to be the most important goal of our foreign and security policy also in the future."

I think the text was typical to President Niinistö, and in my understanding opens even to foreigners why he has an extremely high confidence among the citizens. It is also an excellent coincidence that he happened to have his high position right now, when Finland was taking the last step towards a full membership among the western community of nations. 

Had there been his predecessor Tarja Halonen, these historical developments would almost certainly not have been taken. Instead, we would - even after the tragedy in Ukraine - have exposed ourselves to the Russian aggressor. And possibly ended sooner or later into a situation similar to the one in year 1939.

Previous thought on the same topic:
COVID-19 against Finland´s NATO plans
Is President Putin on his way to repeat the destiny of Czar Nicholas II?
Finland and NATO - problems to be solved