From: thietaniemi@cc.helsinki.fi
Subject: Re: Estonia, Russia and Finland 
Organization: University of Helsinki
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:39:13 GMT

In article <1993Jan10.204624.683@cs.chalmers.se>, tammet@cs.chalmers.se 
(Tanel Tammet) writes:
> In article <1993Jan9.163912.1@cc.helsinki.fi> thietaniemi@cc.helsinki.fi 
writes:

<much deleted>

>>To quote the old president Kekkonen in the end of seventies:
>>"Today the people of Finland can freely without outer intrusion develop
>>the social and economic system it has chosen. We are the smiths of
>>our own fortune." (= in German: Schmiede unseres Glueckes).
>>
>>I think we share this ultimate goal of foreign policy. It worked
>>in Finland.
> 
> The single message in the quote seems to be the claim that
> after WWII there was a real danger of USSR intervention into
> Finland and due to the Paasikivi-Kekkonen line of friendliness
> to USSR and avoidance of any political blocks and military cooperation
> with other countries, this danger never materialized.
> To me the main question here is whether this danger actually existed,
> and whether staying non-neutral or even not very USSR-friendly would
> have meant a USSR intervention? I doubt that. Unless there is some
> proof of real danger in the time, one could minimize and
> suppose that there was no such danger?


The story why Finland did not become a "people's democracy" like
Poland, Hungary and Chechoslovakia is a complicated and a disputed
one, which I have not time enough to analyze (I think we could discuss this
in the new newsgroup on Baltics in the very near future). I will just emphasize
that "the intervention" was not the main fear but the establishment of
the communist rule. There was no choice but signing the treaty on "Friendship
co-operation and mutual support" between Finland and Soviet Russia in 1948.



>>I do not agree that the collapse of Soviet Union has made the main
>>outlines of Finnish foreign policy obsolete. Some rearrangements have
>>been done, however:
>>
>>(1) There is no treaty of Friendship, mutual trust and co-operation
>>with the USSR any more. It is not needed.
>>(2) Finland has applied for EC membership which could not have been
>>possible during the Soviet era.
> 
> How can we know that (2) would not have been possible? Why? Because
> in Finland The President has supreme power over foreign politics?


Not because of that. The membership in European Community was considered
to be against the treaty on "friendship, co-operation and mutual support" 
(It would have denoted "a union with Germany" which was explicitely banned). 
The Finnish membership was not on political agenda before the collapse of 
the Soviet Union.


>>> EG, now it seems that Lithuania
>>> is going to orient to Russian market and supplies - due
>>> to the newly elected former-communist rule. 
>>
>>
>>Brazauskas is a patriotic social democrat. The orientation you
>>describe above is a healthy one. Unfortunately the Lithuanians
>>lack some preconditions that the Estonians have: The crown and
>>predictable legal surroundings created by the constitution
>>and privatization legislation (correct my details, I might
>>be overexaggerating the difference).
> 
> Well, recently I read a part of the speech given by the chief aid of  
> Brazauskas just before elections. He said openly that Lithuania
> should orient to the market and supplies of CIS, that orientation
> to "the west" has failed and so have the economical reforms towards
> market economy.


I have never heard Brazauskas blaming the market economy! But I confess
that my knowledge on Lithuanian affairs is limited indeed: I read
only Baltic Independend and Baltic Observer and subscribe to Baltlist.
On this futile basis I have no reason to quarrel about Lithuanian
inner politics.


>>> Now I am looking forward to the situation where those keys would
>>> NOT be any more in Moscow!
>>
>>
>>Imitate Finland. Our keys are not any more in Moscow. We brought them
>>back with patience. :-)
> 
> Are you certain the keys were not off-Moscow in 1946? In 1956?


After the war Finland had an "allied" controlling committee in Helsinki
(read: Zhdanov and his staff) that monitored the "political correctness" of
the Finns.

In 1956, the Soviet Union returned Finland the military base near Helsinki
namely, Porkkala (Opposite Paldiski/Baltischport near Tallinn).


with solidarity 
Tapani Hietaniemi, Universitas Helsingiensis
                   urbs fennorum

Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet