“Finnishing”, remember neutrality in the face of the crisis in Ukraine

Today, many figures in the world of politics and the media are criticized for misusing self-censorship so as not to upset the Kremlin.

After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Finland abandoned its neutrality to clearly adhere to the Western camp, joined the European Union in 1995 and later became a partner, if not a member, of NATO.

“We were a small country between the anvil and the hammer,” confirms Professor Tivo Tevinen of the University of Helsinki.

“Many people accept that Finnish art is part of our history,” he says. “But invoking the term with either reference to Finland or Ukraine is a crime” for many, says the expert.

“new cases”

The idea that a “Finnish” Ukraine could resolve tensions with Russia and even resolve the conflict that has persisted since the 2014 annexation of Crimea is eliciting strong reactions from the eastern side of the Baltic Sea.

For former Estonian President Tomas Hendrik Ilves, “Finland was not considered a democracy” during the Finnish era.

“It was not good to see that,” he added. He referred in particular to the case of Urho Kekkonen, the powerful president for 26 years whose term was extended by a simple parliamentary decision.

“Old words for new cases work poorly,” Stabb said on Twitter.

A rapprochement between Russia and France to resolve the crisis in Ukraine

The former head of Finnish diplomacy, who was involved in mediating a ceasefire between Russia and Georgia in 2008, strongly rejects the idea that Finnish can represent a way out of the embargo on the Ukrainian issue.

See also  Blatter and Platini, before being tried in Switzerland for fraud

“No superpower, Russia or any other country, should decide what line Ukraine will take in matters relating to its security,” he added.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.