We bring to your attention the key messages of public discussion “Evolution of Finland’s security thinking vis-a-vis Russia” that was held at the New Europe Center on April 1, 2024. Katri Pynnöniemi, Mannerheim Chair of Russian Security Studies Aleksanteri Institute, University of Helsinki and National Defence University, told about Finland`s security and foreign policy via-s-vis Russia. The event was kindly moderated by Kateryna Zarembo, Associated Senior Fellow, New Europe Center.

Here are some key theses:

ON FINLAND’S AGENCY IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

• Finland is bigger than its size in a diplomatic way. It represents itself as a small but useful country that can in a way mingle in the Eastern and the Western diplomatic force, so giving these good services to other countries.
• There grows this idea in the Finnish foreign policy that maybe we have an agency. Maybe we kind of were the ones who were able to very brilliantly negotiate. And so, there came this idea of active neutrality policy.

ON FINNISH FOREIGN POLICY VIS-À-VIS RUSSIA

• Finnish foreign policy is really a paradox. There is this certain sense of silence and then action that we often are not being very vocal about.
• In 2007 Finnish Minister was giving a speech in Washington and said that Finland had three challenges, and those were Russia, Russia and Russia. That started a big scandal. In 2024 it is spoken aloud that actually throughout 25 years Finland has mostly been focusing on analyzing Russia and what it means for Finnish security. So, there’s something that’s not so outspoken is the sense of threat from Russia. And for a long time it’s been the topic we could not address publicly.
• In the last ten years it’s been about the active partnership with Russia. So trying to have dialogue with Russia and draw Russia into different institutions, would kind of make the threat less probable. And here comes the blind spot in a way that the way Russia’s internal system changed it became more and more immune to any of these partnerships.

ON PREDICTABLE RUSSIA

• I have a feeling that in general people were surprised of the large-scale invasion and at least politicians were sort of representing it as a big surprise. The idea that there is this unpredictable Russia was more influential in the minds of the decision makers than the idea that it’s not that unpredictable, and that there are these certain interests that we can always see from Russia.
• There is a strong link between Russian foreign policy and its domestic policy. With that kind of a system, and how long it is in place, you can’t expect that Russian foreign and security policy orientation would change. So with the Kremlin power, with Putin, you would get a similar kind of military operations in the future.

ON FINLAND’S NATO MEMBERSHIP

• Since 1995 Finland has been part of the EU and that has been also kind of security political importance for Finland, even if we were militarily non-aligned. That was sort of important to keep it that way for Finland. But then on the other hand, we can see this NATO membership as not a big break, but rather a long, long kind of quiet road to the full membership in Western institutions.
• From my perspective and with my knowledge, I would say that we don’t have such a thinking that there would be any silver bullet involved with the NATO membership, but it is rather the case that we have a bit better chances to avoid Russia attacking.

ON THE OPPORTUNITY UKRAINE GAVE TO FINLAND

• What is missed to be said and hasn’t been said aloud, is that opportunity for the change in the Finnish military sphere was opened because of Ukraine’s resistance. You were kind of giving us time to make this change.

The recording of the event is below: