In an NZZ interview, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen warns that Russia’s aggression is directed against all of Europe. Forcing Ukraine to accept a convenient peace would be dangerous for the whole world, she says.
Elina Valtonen has been Finland’s foreign minister since June 2023.
Alina Smutko / Reuters
Optimieren Sie Ihre Browsereinstellungen
NZZ.ch benötigt JavaScript für wichtige Funktionen. Ihr Browser oder Adblocker verhindert dies momentan.
Bitte passen Sie die Einstellungen an.
Finland shares a 1,430-kilometer border with Russia that constitutes part of the external frontier of the Schengen Area. The two countries also have an eventful history. Finland fought the Soviet Union in the Winter War of 1939/1940, and again in the Continuation War between 1941 and 1944. At the end of World War II, the country ultimately preserved its sovereignty through a peace treaty with Soviet leader Josef Stalin, which included territorial cessions and severe restrictions on Finland’s foreign-policy sovereignty. In return, it was able to integrate economically into Western Europe.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Finns decided to join the EU. After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Finland decided to abandon its neutrality altogether and join NATO.
In our interview with Finnish Minister for Foreign Affairs Elina Valtonen, she tells us why the Finns are convinced that Europe must now offer resolute and united resistance to Russian President Vladimir Putin and support Ukraine. She also outlines her ideas on how the EU should develop further.
Foreign Minister Valtonen, you grew up in Germany as a child. The attitude of many Germans toward Russia is very different from that of the Finns. Why do you think that is?
By and large, we think very similarly. We value democracy, free elections, a transparent market economy, human rights and the rule of law. And that is precisely what is at stake as a result of Russia’s aggression.
While the Finns were quick to urge caution, many Germans tried to make friends with Russia.
That was in part the Finnish attitude as well. That is what we all wanted in Europe. But at the same time, we in Finland have always invested in our military. We knew that the future can never be predicted, and that we had to be able to defend ourselves.
Finland used to be considered by many to be the country that best understood Russia.
We have had our own experiences in that regard. We have had to defend ourselves against Russian aggression several times in our history. Fortunately, unlike our Baltic friends, we were never part of the Soviet Union. We were able to live in a free-market economy and democracy. They were not. Estonia was once a richer country than Finland. Then, hundreds of thousands of people were transported to the Baltic States during the Soviet era. Freedom, democracy and prosperity, all the values I mentioned at the beginning, cannot be taken for granted. We know how valuable they are. It is no coincidence that Finland has been named the happiest country in the world several times.
Is that why you have a different attitude toward Russia?
And toward peace. For us, it means that we have been able to develop freely. It was different behind the Iron Curtain. Peace and freedom cannot be taken for granted, they must be defended. Germany naturally has a special historical responsibility. I think Germany’s process of coming to terms with its history is great. We discussed this every year at school.
Last Tuesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy gave a speech on Europe at the World Economic Forum. He reproached the Europeans, noting that the world is focused on the U.S., while Europe plays a secondary role. Should the change of power in the United States serve as a wake-up call for the EU?
I thought it was a really great speech on Europe. Of course, we have to toughen ourselves up.
What is currently lacking?
First, we need to become more competitive. We need to strengthen the single market, otherwise we will lose the brightest and best minds. We Finns have never had oil and gas. We know that education is the most important raw material. This has allowed us to become so technologically advanced. Incidentally, I am also a computer scientist. Second, we have to be able to defend ourselves. Trump is right, we have to do more. Europe must arm itself so that we have a credible deterrent, and can avoid war instead of having to wage it. And third, we should focus on free trade and not engage in a trade war with our friends on the other side of the Atlantic. We are saying the same thing to them.
In the EU, there is a bloc centered on Hungary that tends toward a seesaw policy with Russia. Is Europe eroding instead of growing stronger?
In democracies, people have different opinions and must be able to criticize existing conditions. Politicians must not only tolerate this, they should also learn from the criticism. In many cases, this is also very justified. In Europe, for example, we absolutely need to reduce bureaucracy. We can no longer afford it. But such changes must be initiated via our democratic institutions, and care must be taken to ensure this.
Geopolitically, Europe also plays a subordinate role because its decision-making processes are so cumbersome. Should the unanimity principle be further softened?
In foreign and security policy, it has become clear that it is very difficult to react quickly and agilely to events in the world if we first have to achieve unanimity. Finland is open to making the EU more functional by no longer assuming complete consensus between all states on all issues. This is all the more important because the EU wants to admit more members, including Ukraine, and thus continues to expand. Perhaps even your country will join us one day.
Would you like Switzerland to join the EU?
Of course, the Swiss have to decide for themselves. But as a Finn I think it would be great.
Could the war in Ukraine have been avoided if Putin’s demands had been met more fully?
The best way to combat disinformation is through education. As far as Russia is concerned, we simply have to do a better job of explaining to people what it is all about.
What is it about?
Ukraine was neutral. It had no forces that wanted to march into Russia. Russia crossed the border. The narrative that NATO has constrained Russia and poses a threat is also false. First of all, NATO is a defense alliance. Finland has never threatened Russia, not before and not after joining NATO. We simply want Russia to stay on its side of the border, and to respect international law. Second, NATO is not expanding by force, as Russia is now doing. NATO is getting bigger because men and women are deciding of their own free will to join the defense alliance. That was the case in Finland and Sweden. We did not join because we want to threaten Russia. We invite Russia to return to a position of respecting the international treaties that Russia itself signed in the past.
The new American president seems to think in terms of spheres of influence. He has expressed an interest in the Panama Canal and Greenland. In which sphere of influence do you see Ukraine?
I do not accept the concept of spheres of influence. I have no doubt that despite these statements by the new president, America understands that international law must apply. There are no spheres of influence in international law.
How should Europe prepare for more American pressure on Greenland?
International law clearly states that Greenland is part of Denmark. Denmark and Greenland must decide for themselves. We are also trying to make it clear to the U.S. that if it does not abide by international law, it would send a blatant signal to countries with which America does not get on so well.
Policymakers in northern and northeastern Europe – in Poland, Scandinavia, the Baltic States and the U.K. – are openly discussing the prospect of a coalition of the willing, which would defend Ukraine against Russia without the U.S. if necessary. How realistic is that?
Europe as a whole must become stronger militarily. That was the American message even before Trump. That is also the Finnish message to its European partners. We have long been spending 2% of our gross domestic product on defense. We also have compulsory military service, which we do not include in this calculation. We are not afraid for ourselves. But when it comes to values, we really are all in the same boat. We must all defend Ukraine together.
Programmer, investment banker and politician
pfi. The 43-year-old Finnish foreign minister doesn’t have much time, but she has a clear message. When we meet her for an interview at the World Economic Forum gathering in Davos, she starts talking quickly in fluent German. Elina Valtonen was born in Helsinki. She then lived with her family in Bonn until she was 13 years old. After returning to Finland, she attended the German School in Helsinki. In the Finnish capital, she studied computer science at the Helsinki University of Technology and economics at the Helsinki School of Economics. She graduated with master’s degrees from both institutions. Valtonen worked in investment banking for 10 years before taking over as head of the free-market liberal think tank Libera in 2013/14, where she subsequently chaired the board until 2021. In 2014, Valtonen became a member of parliament for the conservative Finnish Rally Party, of which she was elected deputy leader in 2020. She has served as foreign minister in Prime Minister Petteri Orpo’s cabinet since June 2023.
Russia’s hybrid attacks in the Baltic Sea have increased in frequency. On Christmas Day, the Finnish authorities searched a Russian freighter. Do you expect a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia?
Together with our partners, we have compiled lists showing that actually all European countries are being affected by Russian aggression. This includes disinformation, cyberattacks, sabotage, poisonings – you name it.
So is Zelenskyy is right when he says it is not just about Ukraine?
It is not just about Ukraine! This is another reason why we must work to ensure that Ukraine achieves a just peace.
After the Winter War, Finland had to cede around 7% of its territory to Russia and accept the loss of foreign policy sovereignty, but was able to integrate economically into the West. Would a «Finlandization» of this kind be a solution for Ukraine?
You can’t compare the World War II era with today. That was a time before the U.N. Charter. Such a solution would mean that we would be back in 1940, a time without international law. It would have massive consequences for the whole world if we were to simply look for a quick and easy solution now. Do we really want to give an autocrat what he wants? In the end, it’s about the people. The people of Ukraine want a European future.
Latest articles
Global reporting. Swiss-quality journalism.
In today’s increasingly polarized media market, the Switzerland-based NZZ offers a critical and fact-based outside view. We are not in the breaking-news business. We offer thoughtful, well-researched stories and analyses that go behind the headlines to explain relevant events in the U.S., in Europe and worldwide. To produce this work, the NZZ maintains an industry-leading network of expert reporters around the globe who work closely with our main newsroom in Zurich.
Sign up for our free newsletter or follow us on Twitter, Facebook or WhatsApp.
Source link : http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=FexRss&aid=&tid=67a689eff14a4dbf8683552c3eebe72b&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nzz.ch%2Fenglish%2Ffinlands-foreign-minister-ukraine-is-the-eus-fight-too-ld.1867850&c=1051859024068343947&mkt=de-de
Author :
Publish date : 2025-01-28 03:10:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
