ERKKI BAHOVSKI ⟩ Masterclass on Finlandization in the Oval Office

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, US President Donald Trump and US Vice President J. D. Vance in the Oval Office of the White House on February 28, 2025. Photo: CNP/AdMedia/SIPA

• The same arguments that the US uses against Ukraine were also used by the USSR against Finland.
• Finlandization means schizophrenia or perfect mastery of George Orwell's newspeak.
• Instead of «Finlandization», it would be more correct to say «Vance-ization»*.

Ukraine has been faced with a choice: either to become Finlandized under pressure from the US or to allow itself to be occupied by Russia and risk the complete destruction of the country and people, Postimees opinion editor Erkki Bahovski writes.

Former US secretary of state and national security advisor Henry Kissinger wrote an article for the Washington Post in 2014 in which he proposed the Finlandization of Ukraine. Above all, it would have meant stopping Ukraine's NATO aspirations. However, before his death, at a time when a full-scale war had broken out in Ukraine, Kissinger managed to change his mind and say that Ukraine's neutrality no longer made any sense and the country could join NATO.

Now that the current US leaders have ruled out Ukraine joining NATO and have managed an incredible spectacle in the Oval Office, the concept of Finlandization should be dug out of the closet and dusted off. But first, the question of what Finlandization actually was needs to be answered.

The first implementation of the term Finlandization is usually attributed to the German right-wing politician Franz Josef Strauss, who used it in the German context when West German Chancellor Willy Brandt's Ostpolitik had begun and there was talk of a possible withdrawal of US troops from West Germany. In this context, Finlandization means «to conduct politics like Finland», that is, to depend on a large neighbor in one's foreign policy choices, while at the same time maintaining independence.

However, I dare say that Finlandization meant much more than a narrowing of foreign policy options. It all started on the eve of Finlandization, with the outbreak of the Winter War by the Soviet Union in 1939.

Regarding the Oval Office showdown between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, US President Donald Trump and his deputy J. D. Vance, former Finnish foreign minister Pekka Haavisto recalled (Iltasanomat, 1.03) that the same arguments that the US is using against Ukraine were also used by the Soviet Union against Finland: since there was allegedly no one to talk to from the Finnish government, Otto Ville Kuusinen, who suited the leaders of the Soviet Union, was placed at the head of the so-called Terijoki government. And now think of the US government's alleged attempts to replace Zelenskyy or at least undermine his legitimacy as the president of Ukraine.

The Soviet occupation meant Orwell’s newspeak for us too – that Estonia voluntarily joined the Soviet Union with broad popular support, etc.

However, the height of Finlandization also meant constant interference in Finland's internal affairs. In 1958, the so-called Night Frost Crisis broke out when Karl-August Fagerholm formed a government in Finland. However, the Soviet Union considered Fagerholm's government too pro-Western, recalled its ambassador, reduced exports to Finland, and put a pause on the Saimaa Canal lease. President Urho Kaleva Kekkonen, Finland's leading Finlandizer, eventually forced Fagerholm out of office. Relations with the Soviet Union were restored.

Finlandization did not only mean smooth diplomacy with the Soviet Union. Perhaps the most important thing about Finlandization was the fact that it meant schizophrenia, or the perfect mastery of George Orwell's newspeak. This was the case in both words and actions.

According to Finlandization, Finland was guilty of waging war with the Soviet Union, not wanting peace. This wording coincides almost exactly with the rhetoric of US leaders towards Ukraine: Zelenskyy is a warmonger and is dragging the world into World War III.

But it didn't stop there – after the Continuation War, Finland had to convict several of the country's top politicians of war crimes – for example, president Risto Ryti, Väinö Tanner, who had held several ministerial positions, etc. It wouldn't be surprising if a similar process were to be launched against Zelenskyy, Valerii Zaluzhnyi and several others at the request of the US.

Side note: The Soviet occupation meant Orwell’s newspeak for us too – that Estonia voluntarily joined the Soviet Union with broad popular support, etc. The difference from Finlandization is that there was almost no free choice with occupation.

During Stalinism, rebelling against the occupiers could mean death or a prison camp, and after Stalin's death it was usually either a prison camp or compulsory psychiatric treatment. Finlandization offered more choices – while one can understand Kekkonen’s behavior to an extent, because you had to somehow dance with the devil's grandmother, there were many choices going forward from there. Bending over towards the Soviet Union and acquiring a so-called kotiryssä** was still largely a matter of choice.

Now Ukraine is between these choices: either to become Finlandized under pressure from the US or to allow itself to be occupied by Russia and risk the complete destruction of the country and people.

Ukraine is not the only one facing the threat of Finlandization. So is Europe, including Estonia.

When it comes to newspeak, it was important to understand that at the same time, Finnish leaders knew exactly who and what they were dealing with. In 1985, the Soviet Union tried to ban the publication of the diary of former Finnish president Juho Kusti Paasikivi, because the president, who had otherwise laid the foundation for the Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine, did not have a good opinion of the Soviet Union in his entries.

But schizophrenia or newspeak did not only radiate inward in Finland, it also played its part in international relations. This concerns Finland’s neutrality – Finland tried to show the outside world that it was a neutral country. Despite the fact that the Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance (YYA Treaty) had been signed in 1948. One of its provisions also provided for potential military consultations between the Soviet Union and Finland, which of course violated the principles of neutrality.

Finlandization corroded Finnish society – a schizophrenic newspeak practiced for decades created generations who knew about the friendship of the Soviet Union, but knew very little about Estonia. To this day, many Finns do not know what Estonians had to endure during the Soviet occupation. It is debatable whether Finland would eventually have slipped spiritually into the Soviet sphere of influence, or whether there were certain limits to Finlandization.

There are several reasons why Finlandization did not succeed to the full extent. One of them is certainly the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But there is also something else – the Soviet Union did not want to completely put the pedal to the metal in relation to Finland, because the Soviet leadership understood that if Finland was occupied, Sweden would immediately join NATO. It would not be surprising if Soviet intelligence knew about Sweden's secret plans to quickly join NATO.

But the basis of all this thinking was still the existence of the US as a great counterweight. Currently, in the case of Ukraine, this possibility is absent, because Russia and the US are essentially on the same side (or the US does not want to choose a side at all, but in any case, there is no such counterweight to the Soviet Union/Russia as during the Cold War).

Perhaps the most important reason why Finlandization was not completed was the existence of a free press and civil society. Yes, there were some pro-Soviet journalists, but there were others as well.

For example, a major scandal was caused by a 1958 cartoon by Helsingin Sanomat cartoonist Kari Suomalainen, which was based on Ilya Repin's famous painting «Barge Haulers on the Volga», except that instead of barge haulers, eastern European countries were depicted. Kekkonen apologized for the picture, but Suomalainen continued to work. True, Suomalainen's cartoon was on display at an exhibition in London, but it was not published in Finland until 1985. However, it was published by several foreign newspapers.

In this light, it is a little painful to read the claim that the Danish daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten's cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad are the first scandal of their kind.

Or if someone wants to doubt whether the Finnish press was actually free, it's worth comparing the television of Finland and the Estonian SSR. I have this experience and the difference in favor of Finnish television is enormous.

Ukraine is not the only one facing the threat of Finlandization. So is Europe, including Estonia. If European leaders use cautious language when talking about Donald Trump, there is a possibility that such language will trickle down to the European public. If the same newspeak we saw in the Oval Office emerges about Ukraine not wanting peace and Zelenskyy dragging the world into World War III.

The only antidote to this trend is a free press, which has the responsibility to call a spade a spade. At the same time, traditional journalism is under attack from social media platforms, trolls and alternative media that have created their own world.

Also, Finlandization as a concept seems unfair, considering the current Finnish leaders who have called things by their right names. Therefore, we should proceed from a subject-based, not an object-based, view – whether the name of such a policy should rather be Trump-ization or Vance-ization.

*Author’s play on the Estonian word väntsutamine, which means manhandling and is suggested in this context due to it sounding similar to the name of US Vice President J. D. Vance.

**A kotiryssä was a Soviet or Russian contact person of a Finnish politician, bureaucrat, businessman or other important person.