Finland Survived
the Cold War
- and joined the European Union
Seppo Hentilä
Professor of Political History
University of Helsinki
Lecture on 8 December 2006
European Commission Joint Research Center
Institute for Transuranium Elements
Karlsruhe, Germany
Map of Finland
In the North of
Europe, between
Russia and Sweden
Surface Area:
330 000 Sqkm
Common Border
with Russia:
1200 km
Historical starting point in 1944
In the Second World War Finland was fighting
together with Germany against the USSR
Separate peace with the USSR on September 19, 1944
Finland lost the war but was not occupied by the
Soviet troops
When the Cold War broke out in the second half of
the 1940’s Finland found herself stranded in the noman's-land between the two power blocs
Finland’s democracy and the
Western judicial and social system
all survived, the market economy
became a flourishing success, and
by the 1960’s Finland developed
into a welfare state with a standard
of living among the highest in the
world
How did this kind of “success
story” become possible?
The years of danger 1944-1948
The terms of the interim peace agreed in
Moscow on September 19, 1944 were hard to
Finland
The province of Karelia in the South-East was
lost, ceded to the USSR, and the Karelian
refugees, ten per cent of the Finnish
population, had to be resettled further west;
Reparations had to be paid;
And the highest wartime political leadership
had to be put on trial
Although the War had been hard, the Finnish society
had nevertheless emerged strong and united
The government and the administration were in
good shape, while in workplaces up and down the
country the Social Democrats met the pressure from
the Communist Party
There was fear in 1948 of Soviet intervention, but
despite requests by the leaders of the SKP the
Finnish Communists received no concrete support
from their comrades in the Kremlin
According to President Paasikivi it was
Finland's responsibility to attempt to
build such trust in her relations with the
Soviet Union that the latter would feel no
need to attack our country
Concessions had to be made, but there
was no compromise over the Nordic
judicial and social system of Finland
This was the absolute limit of
concessions in President Paasikivi's
thinking. Finland would do best if she
could as far as possible keep outside
conflicts between the superpowers
Finland left between the blocs
In February 1948 J. V. Stalin proposed to Finland
the same sort of friendship, cooperation and
mutual assistance treaty as the Soviet Union had
just concluded with Hungary and Romania
The Communists had just seized power in Prague
Was Finland to go the way of Czechoslovakia?
The Swedish press was already writing that
Finland's absorption into the Communist bloc was
complete in all but name
Paasikivi informed Stalin that Finland would agree to
negotiations if the text of the treaty could be
discussed without preconditions
Stalin consented to Finland's wishes with surprising
ease, and the final content of the mutual assistance
treaty was largely dictated by Paasikivi
The Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual
Assistance Between the Republic of Finland and the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was signed in
Moscow on April 6, 1948
FCMA-treaty
The Finnish-Soviet treaty differed decisively from
those between the USSR and her satellites: Finland
was entitled to remain outside disputes between the
superpowers and was not forced into military pact
with the USSR
The military articles obligated Finland to defend her
own territory “if Germany or some other country allied
to Germany were to attempt to invade the Soviet Union
through Finland”
Under Article 2 Finland undertook to negotiate for
Soviet assistance in the event of being unable to resist
the invader unassisted; this so-called 'consultation
article' was from the Finnish point of view the most
dangerous part of the treaty
The Finnish Communists had high hopes of the
mutual assistance treaty, as in the event of a crisis it
could offer the USSR the opportunity to occupy
Finland
The Communists' disappointment was all the more
bitter at their defeat in the parliamentary elections of
July 1948 and their consequent removal from the
Finnish Government (remained in opposition until
1966)
The Soviet Union protested, but its attitude towards
Finland remained unchanged
There is no doubt that the Soviet Union would have
had the capacity to force Finland to join the other
'people's democracies' if she had so wished
Finland belonged militarily to the Soviet sphere of
influence, and the Western Powers would have had
no practical means to prevent Finland's seizure,
just as they had been unable to help
Czechoslovakia
For some reason, which will probably remain an
eternal mystery, Stalin chose not to use force
Stalin would certainly have
weighed up the possible
costs of using force
The determined Finnish
defence in the Winter War of
1939-40 and again in the
massive Soviet offensive of
summer 1944 were
undoubtedly still fresh in
Stalin’s memory
The military articles of the FCMA treaty meant
that Finland was held more firmly within the
Soviet sphere of influence than any other
Western country
For this reason Finland's case could be taken as
an example of how a great power could interfere
in the internal affairs of a smaller neighbour,
rendering the latter's independence at once
remote-controlled and incomplete
Finnlandisierung –
Finlandization
Leonid Brezhnev:
”Welcome Comrade
Kekkonen,
Who would ever even
think that you could be
Finlandized!”
Taken literally, this meant becoming like Finland
It was seen as the fate awaiting other Western
countries if they gave too much ground to
Communism
As a term, Finlandization became indelibly
engraved on Finland's image abroad, and it also
left its mark on historiography
Was Finland actually Finlandized, and, if so, what
did this mean in practice? It was generally
thought in the West that the Soviet Union
interfered in Finland's internal affairs and forced
the Finns to do as it wanted
Finland nevertheless survived
Kekkonen sometimes used to say: ”When you bow
to the East you bare your bottom to the West, and
vice versa," and it was through such an approach
that Finland managed to secure her vital economic
interests in the West
From the point of view of Finland's survival, the
agreement on associate membership of EFTA in 1961
and the free trade agreement with the EEC in 1973
were perhaps more important than is generally
realised
Finland's relative economic growth from the 1960’s
to the early 1990’s was more rapid than that of any
other OECD country
Finland after the Cold War
The break-up of the Soviet bloc in the early 1990’s
coincided with deepening integration in the West
Without the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end
of the Cold War, Finland would not have been able to
join the new, political phase in European integration
When the members of the EC signed the Maastricht
Treaty in 1991, establishing the European Union,
not many people in Finland dreamed that they might
participate in such political integration in the near
future
Not three months had elapsed from the break-up of
the USSR in March 1992, when the Finnish
government applied to the membership of the EC
Austria and Sweden had also recently applied to
join, and Norway renewed its earlier application
soon afterwards
The question of joining the EU was deeply
controversial
In October 1994, the matter was submitted to a
consultative referendum
Security policy and agriculture emerged as the
central issues in the public debate
The supporters of membership saw a unique
opportunity to join the West, to which Finland had
in fact belonged for centuries, the EU membership
would confirm Finland’s Western identity
Political integration was also seen as a source of
security, particularly against the background of
chaotic conditions in Russia
Opponents of EU membership claimed that the EU
would deprive Finland of its sovereignty, opening
of borders would bring refugees, crime and
foreign influence
The farmers feared for their profession: given the harsh
climatic conditions, Finnish agriculture could never
compete in an open market, they maintained
The supporters of EU membership won the referendum,
but the margin was narrow at just under six percentage
points (56.9 - 43.1)
The nation was divided: support for the membership
was strongest in southern Finland and among welleducated city-dwellers and young people
By contrast, the less-educated, the older generation and
the inhabitants of eastern and northern Finland were
mainly opposed to membership
Finland became a member of the EU on January 1,
1995; it was a transition from a country in the
Eastern sphere of influence into an outpost of the
West with incredible speed
Thank You for
your attention!