Does Finland have a realistic picture of its opportunities and challenges in the current chaotic situation? This week, our main ally got a new president who does not seem to value allies very much. Many of our European allies are experiencing domestic political turmoil. In Eastern Europe, the EU and its support for Ukraine are being questioned. In the Baltic Sea, tension is escalating.
The situational picture may require an update.
I have no doubt that it is going on in the cabinets of our highest decision-makers, but what about the general public? Ever since the beginning of the Ukraine invasion and the NATO decision, public opinion has been unequivocally determined, we have chosen sides. The reversal from the restraint in foreign and security policy issues in previous years is likely to be permanent.
At the same time, self-confidence has grown. We have been told how wise we have been to keep our military service and not disarm. The image of a determined Finland has spread around the world: We board suspicious ships and set an example to others. Anyone who follows the daily headlines of the major tabloids about Ukraine and Putin is easily struck by a mild war psychosis. Professional military personnel who have become politicians make thrilling statements.
The mental mobilization that has taken place has been valuable as an expression of a broad consensus and a signal to the outside world, not least to Russia. But does the mood allow for a chilly assessment of how changes in the environment affect us? Does a 'militarization' of the debate obscure the need for creative innovation?
If, contrary to expectations, President Trump forces an end to the war, and then probably at Ukraine's expense, it will send shock waves across Europe. It would free up Russian resources for the country's longest border with NATO, our eastern border. We are reminded again of the proximity to St. Petersburg and the futile task of building a short and expensive border wall.
It will soon become clear how much the Trump administration honors the United States' commitments in NATO. His proposal for a 5% military budget is completely unrealistic, which is why Prime Minister Orpo's (personal) reassessment of EU loans for defense procurement heralds a new line – is Minister Purra keeping up? The division in Europe is increasing and Musk seems to be tasked with fueling it. Can Germany pull itself together and Macron stop Le Pen?
Here at home, our Armed Forces have Christmas Eve with the large purchases, including from unstable Israel. Despite the prevailing certainty of faith, it has been cautiously asked how trained our reserves are for a drone and missile conflict. Our much-vaunted will to defend ourselves was dealt an unwelcome blow when the flight from the reserve took off after the intrusion of the untactical Minister Häkkänen. - I would think that our military leadership will also update its situational picture.
Presidents Niinistö and Stubb have both recommended a more subdued tone when we are hit by provocations or sudden changes of scene. We play into Putin's hands if he sees that we allow ourselves to be influenced. A cool, matter-of-fact, and quick action is better than weeks of agitated rhetoric. To be incited by the headlines of the tabloid press is not wise.
Are these and other skeptical questions a sign of pessimism? No, I still want to believe that at least European support for Ukraine will continue and that we can rely on NATO to stick together. However, this must not prevent Finland from putting its house in order and preparing for possible changes in the overall security environment.
Our Ukraine support does not resonate in the Global South, something that President Stubb has realized and wants to fix. Both he and Minister Valtonen understand the burden that Israel's Gaza destruction represents for the West. But how to unite Europe and create a counterweight to the unilateralism of the United States?
The uneasy race for Trump's favor is in full swing and the question arises about Finland's profile: Proactive or waiting? Perhaps an action-oriented policy is best, preferably in consultation with Sweden and Norway, while Denmark must act with Greenland in mind. It is important to design the profile and policy based on an updated analysis of existing options.
Pär Stenbäck
 |
Pär Stenbäck is a Minister (Hon.), a political scientist and a former foreign minister of Finland. He functioned as a monitor of cooperation on humanitarian issues between Israelian and Palestinian actors between 2007 and 2015, on behalf of the International Red Cross.
