by Sakari Linden
Russia has tightened its grip from its North Western region of Republic of Karelia in 2015. After being a remote area of negligible strategic importance, Karelia’s growth in importance has been noticed by geopolitical observers in both Russia and the West. Final conclusions drawn about the means to be conducted in the region determine Karelia’s status as either opportunity or threat for Russian Federation. Even more importantly, it reveals a great deal of the amount of self-confidence and strength of Russia. Does future Russia tend to rely more on hard discipline in avoiding all potentially risky influence from abroad? Or does it aim to benefit from soft power dimension provided by Karelia’s unique cultural features creating cross-border links between east and west?
Nikolai Patrushev, Head of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, aligned stance of his country to a social situation in the Republic of Karelia with a speech held on 19 March in Petrozavodsk. According to Patrushev, there had been “an activation of nationalist and revanchist social-political organizations in Finland” in recent months. Patrushev fears that the Finnish nationalist associations are acting under the guise of human rights organisations and begin to have “serious ideological influence” on the population of the region. He had noted already on 17 December 2014 that Karelia is Russia’s most important outpost in the Northwest.
Later, potentially as a further explanatory step to Patrushev’s statement, Russia’s Ministry of Interior Affairs started investigations about accusations claiming that a Petrozavodsk based NGO, Nuori Karjala (Young Karelia, Молодая Карелия), which aims to preserve and promote Karelian, Vepsian and Finnish indigenous cultures and languages in the region, has acted in a manner characteristic to a foreign agent. According to Russian law, a foreign agent is an organisation, which receive funding from abroad and act politically. Nuori Karjala is accused on the grounds that it organised a visit of the youth organisation of the Finns Party (Perussuomalaiset Nuoret) to the Republic of Karelia in cooperation with the regional parliament of Karelia. The Finns is a populist, Eurosceptic and Nato critical party, which currently makes part of the coalition government of Finland, in which they hold Foreign and Defence Minister positions. Moreover, Nuori Karjala is accused because it received a grant from the United Nations in 2013.
Nuori Karjala is Russia’s first NGO representing indigenous peoples that threatens to be added to a list as a foreign agent. This would result in the closure of the organisation, has stated Alexey Tsykarev, member of board in Nuori Karjala and vice-chair of the United Nations Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Notwithstanding all the details provided, development leading to this should be seen through the lens of remarkably risen geopolitical significance of Karelia.
Secretly in the spotlight
Karelia has been a battleground between the East and the West for centuries. Karelia became a disputed borderland after the Peace of Nöteborg in 1323, which divided Karelia between Sweden and Novgorod. Religiously Evangelical Lutheran West Karelia was annexed as a part of the Russian Empire in the 18th century. This part of Karelia, often called as “Old Finland”, became a part of the Autonomous Grand Duchy of Finland in 1812. Meanwhile, Orthodox East Karelia was all the time an integral part of Russia. Later, Soviet Union conquered Karelian Isthmus, historical fortress town of Vyborg and Ladoga Karelia from independent Finland during the Second World War.
Karelia became a bleeding wound for both parts during the Second World War. Almost 430 000 Karelian Finns, i.e. 12 per cent of the country’s total population, lost their homes due to area losses, which accounted for about one tenth of the country’s surface area. On the other side of the border, Finland occupied Eastern Karelia as part of the German offensive against the Soviet Union between 1941 and 1944. The occupation temporarily fulfilled an old dream about establishment of the Great Finland, a state uniting the areas populated by Baltic Finnic peoples, from Finland via Karelia and Ingermanland to Estonia. Russia’s suspicion in the Republic of Karelia stem from the fear that the old idea of the Great Finland could be used in the modern framework of colour revolutions in order to threaten territorial integrity of Russia.
The start of the new cold war suddenly signified Karelia’s rise to a new prominence. The most immediate reason for this was Stratfor’s Decade Forecast: 2015-2025, published in February 2015, which predicts that Russia will start to collapse during the time span of next ten years, and “in the northwest, the Karelian region will seek to rejoin Finland”.
Stratfor is not the first actor to give Karelia a major importance in the geopolitical game of modern times. The main ideologist of New Eurasianism, Alexander Dugin, proposed in his book The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia, published in 1997, that “the unstable state of Finland, which historically enters into the geopolitical space of Russia” would be “combined together with the Karelian Autonomous Republic of the Russian Federation into a single ethno-territorial formation with maximal cultural autonomy, but with strategic integration into the Eurasian bloc”. According to Dugin, “the northern regions of Finland should be excised and donated to Murmansk oblast”.
Lack of knowledge about present day realities of the Republic of Karelia can be found from both Stratfor and Dugin’s views. Although Finno-Ugric peoples have historically populated the region, there has been a dramatic fall in the amount of Karelian and Vepsian speakers. Karelians made up 37 per cent of the region’s population in 1926, whereas in 2010, according to the Census of Russia, their share was only 7,4 per cent. Karelian speaking population is nowadays heavily concentrated to the countryside and especially to the national districts of Olonets, Kalevala and Pryazha. In reality, they lack political significance, which could affect the region’s international status.
It is difficult to estimate whether Stratfor’s Decade Forecast was seriously made, given the absence of further arguments to the prediction about Karelia seeking to join Finland. Or was it just a provocation aiming to recreate tensions related to a national question of East Karelia, which flamed out a long time ago? Or was it made to encourage the support of NATO in Finland or to create wishful thinking among those Finns, who wish to regain the territories lost by Finland during the Second World War? The latter have for a very long time had only a trivial role in Finnish political life. It is also important to realize that there are at least three different notions of Karelia: Orthodox East Karelia that has never made part of Finland, the old Finnish territories annexed by the Soviet Union, and provinces of North and South Karelia, which currently are an integral part of Finland. Very few people in Finland consider changes of borders as a realistic or even wise option.
Rather an opportunity?
Alexander Dugin reflected more realism and understanding about the new realities of Russian Karelia in his words during his visit to Finland in May 2014. Instead of proposing any changes of borders, as in his book published in 1997, he raised the possibility that Russian Karelia, Karelian language and culture could be a bridge between Finland and Russia, and more broadly between the West and Eurasia.
Dugin said in his speech he gave in Helsinki that Finno-Ugric peoples are part of a common Eurasian heritage and identity together with Slavic, Turkish and Caucasian peoples. Consequently, connections of the Finns to Karelia, Udmurtia and other Finno-Ugric regions of Russia should be encouraged. Dugin’s statement is remarkable because it is the first expression of support from the part of a remarkable Russian commentator to the Finno-Ugric languages and cultures of Russia.
A deteriorated political situation of the world has cast a shadow even on the cooperation between Finland and Russia. Sometimes it feels like western and Russian orthodox civilizations do not understand each other’s thinking at all. Karelia could potentially be a bridge between Finland and Russia. Karelia, at the same time as a linguistically close and religiously differing territory to Finland, would have an opportunity to illustrate the other side of the border with another way of thinking. Karelia could lower the mental gap between Finland and Russia and create links between different cultural spheres.
The main merit of Alexander Dugin’s speech was to demonstrate that Karelia, where Baltic Finnic languages are spoken, are in both Russia and Finland’s interest. Currently, there is a clear contradiction in Dugin’s message compared to the latest news heard from the Republic of Karelia. It is unclear whether the rhetorics used by Nikolai Patrushev in March 2015 related to Karelia was meant to be a signal inside Karelia or towards Finland. What is clear is that it does not serve the best interest of Russia from the point of view of its soft power abroad. However, there is still hope that Karelian language and culture could be seen in a positive way even more broadly in Russia.
Implications for the new cold war
Finland is situated in a very strategically important position from the point of view of Russia. It shares a long border with Russia with a situation close to the crucial Murmansk naval base and Russia’s second most important city, Saint Petersburg. Moreover, domination of the south coast of Finland would provide the NATO with a potential to block the Gulf of Finland and maritime routes to Saint Petersburg. Therefore, Finland’s non-aligned position is of utmost importance to Russia.
Nowadays Finland is the only EU member state with a long border with Russia that does not belong to the NATO. After having been a militarily non-aligned country for several decades, there has been an increasingly hectic debate about whether Finland should join the NATO. Notwithstanding strong efforts by the mainstream media and political elite to push the public opinion in favour of joining the transatlantic community, only 27 per cent of the Finns supported their country’s membership in the military alliance.
Finland was a crucial mediator between the west and east during the Cold war in the process, which culminated in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) held in 1975 in Helsinki, Finland. Although Finland has lost a great deal of its sovereignty of its foreign policy due to its EU membership, President Sauli Niinistö has taken a rather mediating role between the west and Russia during the Ukraine crisis, relying on its last remains of its old non-aligned tradition. This highlights the potential that Russia can either utilize or lose in Finland.
Currently, Finnish public is scrutinizing the influence of Russia to their wellbeing and especially all efforts across their eastern border to put pressure on their country are under scrutiny. Therefore, one can just imagine the effect of the opening of the Finnish-speaking Sputnik news agency, which immediately reported as its breaking news about Mr Patrushev’s warnings about the growing activity of Finnish nationalists and revanchists in Karelia.
Russia needs every bit of soft power in order to survive in the relentless informational warfare aiming to harm the Eurasian connection between Europe and Russia. As George Friedman, founder and chairman of Stratfor, has pointed out, the primordial interest of the United States is to stop a coalition between Germany and Russia (http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/03/16/4571). Consequently, Russia should not undermine the importance of Karelia as a potential source of its soft power. Karelian as a mutually intelligible language to Finnish, Karelia and Finland’s common Kalevala folklore heritage, which has inspired even J. R. R. Tolkien, as well as Karelia’s potential to function as a window to Russian and Eurasian mindscape for the Finns, are reasons why Russian authorities should think carefully if they are doing irreversible damage in the Russian-Karelian-Finnish cultural relations.
The beginning of the new cold war has raised tensions around the world. This has already reflected to the social situation in the Republic Karelia. Russian establishment’s future reactions to Stratfor‘s predictions related to Karelia will tell about the ability and preparedness of the country to endure amid new geopolitical game. Russia’s support to Karelian language and encouragement of creating contacts between locals and foreigners in the Republic of Karelia would be a signal to the world about a self-confident and strong country.
Sakari Linden is a geopolitical writer, who has participated actively in the cultural cooperation to preserve and promote Karelian language and culture. He holds Master’s degrees in Political Science and International Law.
The lower thread appears to be closed,but here is something relevant.
————————-
Conversations: Nikolai Starikov
http://www.vineyardsaker.co.nz/category/conversations-from-the-ether/page/4/
At the 32-20 mark he relates how the bill to Nationalize the Russian Central Bank was defeated:
“KPRF faction voted in it’s entirety ..YES ,LDPR faction voted in it’s entirety ..YES,the ‘Fair Russia’ faction failed to push any button at all,that is I reiterate…they did not vote yes,no or abstain they simply did not vote.”
“As for the ‘United Russia faction’ there was an even more interesting situation Evgeny Fedorov and his colleagues who introduced this legislation are part of United Russia faction,If I’m not mistaken 5 voted ‘Yes’,2 voted ‘No’ and 240 did not participate in voting”
He goes on to question why 280 did not vote,after all if they felt it was bad for the country they could vote NO.
But they simply made themselves scarce,too scared too vote he suggests.
Conversations: Nikolai Starikov
http://www.vineyardsaker.co.nz/category/conversations-from-the-ether/page/4/
At the 53 rd minute mark in answer to a second CBR question
“As for Vladimir Putin,in the first year of his Presidency in 2000, he introduced a similar bill to the State Duma about the nationalization, of the Central Bank, then all the factions voted against it”
“So this is a very serious matter”
Can you provide a link to the text of that bill? I wonder what it was about to begin with.
From what I know, the russian central bank is already state-owned. I’ve yet to see anything to indicate the opposite.
There is nothing under that link but a video of some public appearance, no document or references to anything I could read or research.
@ T2015 on June 09, 2015 · at 3:30 pm UTC
It was a Q & A in Vladivostok with political science students
It is all subtitled in english.
And no! the Russian Central Bank is not state owned.
Watch,read and learn!
Again: can you provide any PROOF or any LINKS, TEXTS, anything of substance to back up your claims?
Let’s keep it civil, thanks
Provide a link that the CB is state owned.
………………………………………………………..
With the hints above you can easily google the speech in Vladivostok.
See below, black-on-white directly from the source.
Your turn.
Also he mentions no “nationalization” at all, he only talks about “ending the independence”, which is something entirely different. He obviously also doesn’t grasp the huge difference between the two concepts. Either that, or he is just another snake oil seller.
The author of ‘Nationlizing the Ruble’ understands very well ,it is you who are trolling this topic.
The US controlled IMF controls all member banks,that is it’s ‘independence’ from the RF.
Edited for politeness reasons.
Then we can talk.
T2015. If you disagree with another person here, explain what you disagree with and post or link your source material where you got your information from. Writing insults and demanding they do all the work to refute what you have not factually supported yourself is not a very good way to carry on a conversation.
I have posted the excerpt from the russian constitution where the central bank is defined in another thread (If you were Lavrov or Putin…) yesterday. The anon guy above has so far failed to post anything of substance, not a single piece of text from any laws, not a single material proof, nothing. Only a video of some guy claiming some ridiculous stuff.
Here you go, the russian central bank law in english:
http://www.bu.edu/bucflp/files/2012/01/Federal-Law-No.-86-FZ-of-2002-on-the-Central-Bank-of-the-Russian-Federation.pdf
And back to the guy above – read it and show me where there is a single word about anything “private” in there. It’s exactly the opposite.
More: http://www.cbr.ru/eng/today/?Prtid=bankstatus
“The Bank of Russia is a legal entity. Its authorised capital and other property are federal property. Nevertheless, the Bank of Russia has both proprietary and financial independence. It exercises its powers to own, use and manage its property, including international reserves, in compliance with the purposes and according to the procedure established by the Federal Law ‘On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)’. (ed. – pdf linked above) Bank of Russia property may not be seized or encumbered without its consent, unless the federal law stipulates otherwise. The financial independence of the Bank of Russia implies that it covers its expenses from its own incomes. The Bank of Russia may defend its interests in court, including international courts, the courts of foreign states and courts of arbitration.
The state is not liable for the Bank of Russia obligations, just as the Bank of Russia is not liable for the state obligations, unless they have assumed such obligations or unless federal laws stipulate otherwise. The Bank of Russia is not liable for the obligations of credit institutions and non-credit financial institutions, while the credit institutions and non-credit financial institutions are not liable for the obligations of the Bank of Russia, except the cases in which the Bank of Russia or credit institutions and non-credit financial institutions assume such obligations.
The Bank of Russia is accountable to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the State Duma), which appoints and dismisses the Bank of Russia Governor (on the proposal of the President of the Russian Federation) and members of the Bank of Russia Board of Directors (on the proposal of the Bank of Russia Governor, agreed with the President of the Russian Federation), sends and recalls its representatives in the National Financial Board within its quota and considers the guidelines for the single state monetary policy and Bank of Russia annual report and takes decisions on them. On the proposal of the National Financial Board, the State Duma may take the decision to get the Audit Chamber of the Russian Federation to audit the financial and economic activities of the Bank of Russia and its divisions and establishments. In addition, the State Duma holds parliamentary hearings on the Bank of Russia activities with the participation of its representatives and hears the reports by the Bank of Russia Governor about the Bank of Russia activities in the course of presenting the annual report and guidelines for the single state monetary policy.”
To T2015…yes that commenter who is commenting constantly now, that changes the name every time but is becoming recognizable is really irritating to me too. Its a smart*ss…. if nothing worse.
Ann, no. It’s T2015 who is wrong. I have worked as a legal assistant, and it can require looking at more than a few clauses and sections of law to understand the true underlying meaning.
If you will cast your memory back, you will recall that every economist who has written here or appeared in video has complained that the govt does NOT control the central bank. Glazyev said so, Starikov said so & one other whose name escapes me.
The central bank of Rus and especially the central banks of countries categorized by IMF as “developing” are controlled by the IMF, not the host country.
In order to create domestic currency they must acquire dollars. The significance of this is overwhelming.
Please look at my other posts on this page. Better yet, go to the FREE online Starikov book.
Show me an example from the official proceedings of any european banking system(actually illegal cartels all of them) where its real nature is explained. And where its connection to the IMF and BIS is explicitly exposed. I’d be surprised if that isnt well hidden.
I say illegal because generally they claim to lend money but they actually lend their own debths.
Above you quote that the board considers and takes decisions about single state monetary policy. Nothing in that formulation indicates that they are free to print roubles independent of their inflow of dollars as obtained from exports.
Please, 2015. The answers to all your questions are in Starikov’s FREE online book
http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/06/wagenknecht-community-of-values-data.html
You don’t have to read the whole book; some chapters deal w WWII history (interesting, reads like a novel, but you can skip this part).
Other chapters deal w the IMF/Federal Reserve system. He backs it up by quoting sections of the Russian constitution. Also the Articles of Agreement of the IMF.
The exact way that the system eradicates financial/monetary sovereignty of nations is so counter-intuitive that you cannot believe it unless you are actually looking at the excerpts from the documents.
For example, constitution says that the Russian govt can dismiss the head of the RCB (Rus Central Bank). Sounds fine, but when you look up the section dealing w dismissal you find dismissal is possible only upon such narrow grounds that it’s useless.
The means by which domestic currency can be created is wholly determined by the IMF– and is the secret to how the internatl banking cabal has managed to inhibit the development of so many nations.
I don’t know how I posted the wrong link. Here’s Starikov’s book
http://lit.md/files/nstarikov/rouble_nationalization-the_way_to_russia%27s_freedom.pdf
T2015
1. The assets of the RCB are not owned, cannot be spent by the govt.
That’s why Rus is dependent on borrowing money from the West, cuz they can’t borrow from their own bank reserves nor create their own credit. Nor can they print their own currency except as it is directly tied to the dollar. Nor can they pay a debt from the reserves.
#1 is true for all countries who are categorized by IMF as “developing”
2. Head of the RCB is really employed by IMF, has immunity.
3. There is a special court & body of law for the IMF and enforcement of its edicts.
IMF loan-making is only one of its powers & not the most important one. I am here discussing not its loan-making w ruinous conditionalities, but its garden-variety powers. But it’s useless. Read the book.
Perhaps this is too cynical, but it certainly appears that the West has used the carrot of friends in the EU for a long time as a trick on Russia. When the Baltic states become ridiculously Russophobic, Russia decides to ignore it as they want to keep their channels with Europe. This, of course, encourages more rotten behavior in Poland or the Ukraine. The list goes on an on, and the problem is that the West won’t become friends with Russia. They do want Lisbon to Vladivostok, but first they have to smash Russia. Russia is in the way of an EU Empire.
So my concern with this appeal to soft power is that Russia doesn’t have much, and it could be yet another trap. Russia tried ignoring Western NGOs in the Ukraine, as an example.
I don’t think Russia has ignored the problems so that the west will be friends….its just not very moral to behave differently for Russia. Its like this :: the saying “Don’t throw pearls before swine”…
Well, there’s another saying…. “Don’t get off your horse to fight them either”….
Russians are on their horse and its a swift one….why get off to fight the swine ?
Interesting concept, that acting against a Finn NGO may alienate native Finn support for Russia. Especially when the organization seems to align with anti-NATO and Eurosceptic politics. The author seems like a pretty straight shooter, concerned for the survival of Karelian culture. I would love to hear the Russian side of this analysis.
All the NGOs seem to start with such laudable missions, acting softly upon genuine, human concerns. Then at some point they turn into a weapon. An observer such as myself is still working on understanding how all this works, how the line is crossed. And the West seems to be completely expert in this crossing of what must be a pretty nuanced line.
As for Stratfor, I frown every time I see their name in an article suggesting that they may have some clout in the US, like Rand for example. My assessment of them is that they are very lightweight, frequently wrong, and that their principal mission is sycophancy. My impression is they suck up to prevailing wish-list fantasies of various segments of the ruling class, perhaps more Pentagon than neo-con, I can’t say. And sometimes they take a controversial view just to seem cutting-edge. But in the context of this article, their claim that Karelia would leave Russia to join Finland is pure provocation based on the wish that Russia will collapse.
My view of Stratfor entirely.
I share your view of Stratfor. Mere commentators – of thsounding cymbals type.
George Friedman, another Jewish swindler masquerading as “political scientist” and “Chief Intelligence Officer” of his own “Intelligence” private company!
Grieved:
You are too generous.
If the US had a university system that produced linguistically, historically and culturally literate graduates, these charlatans – I include Brzezinski, Soros, the buffoon-like Kagans etc in the mix – would be marginal figures mouldering in long-forgotten corners of academia.
As it is, the WASPs are suckers for Old Europe ‘experts’ to ‘advise’ them no foreign ”policy’.
Maybe it’s post-colonial insecurity?
Or American ‘exceptionalism’ which leads them to believe they require no more knowledge than Geopolitics for Dummies?
One may add the war criminal Kissinger , in his self proclaimed Metternich delusion.
“Exceptionalism” ,as proclaimed by the plutocrat’s rep baboon, is a neurotic projection of
the Khazarian converts presently predating within “western” colonial colonising countries ,
as being deluded to be the chosen ones. A neofascist zionist racism.
Hence the unaccountability, the getting away with murder, the perverse brutality,
the desire to immolate, to incinerate, to faschistically declare the victim as the
guilty culprit, to sociopathically accuse the other of exactly the deeds the psychos
have committed and do themselves… Luv yer neighbour !
Grieved, you said, “All the NGOs seem to start with such laudable missions, acting softly upon genuine, human concerns.”
Yes, they use language in a deceitful way. It is possible to take a person step-by-step away from their original intentions and beliefs, and NGOs are trained for this: for the use of language as a weapon.
Dear The Saker,
An interesting piece though I feel the author Mr Linden seems to rely on the Starfor report (which is known to be CIA) quite heavily – which raises questions in itself.
I think Russia is already a strong and self-confident country which protects and encourgaes all the diversity it has on its very large land mass – so I am sure the Russians know a subversive foreign agency when they see one and will only add this agency to its list if it fully understands the background and implications.
It has been obvious for sometime that NATO & its political stooges in Finland have been trying to take away the non-aligned status so they can be right up to Russia’s borders.
Rgds,
Veritas
Thank you Sakari Linden..!
Sakari…the sweet linden…great name your parents gave you..! This is a little off piste but if you ever get the chance download a copy of Amanita Muscaria: Herb of Immortality. It’s free. If you gloss over a bit of Californiation there is real food for thought in this book especially given the viking blood linking the Rus and the Ugaric/northern men….a crescent extending from Anatolia, Troy.
Well I doubt if Karelia becomes a known hot spot. My guess is that even the Finnish leadership knows it would look too ridiculous, domestically, to use Karelia to fan the flames of Russophobia much. If they thought they could use it effectively, I think they would have. Their ideological allegiances lie strongly with the US/UK plutocratic crazies, and I doubt they’re capable of thinking politically and strategically very much, so ideology rules.
As for the Finnish president, he’s played the “esteemed, intelligent gentleman” part for a long time. The only reason it has any traction is because the media go along with it, never challenge him and let the rest of the crew look either a bit worse or slightly more presumptuous. It’s purely for show. I recall his expressions listening to Lavrov in Germany, pulling the same faces as every other clown.
Just recently Finns, in a protest vote, voted in the Center party and the Finns party. To my mind, the center party got the moderate protest voters for whom the Finns and their blundering were too much. In any case, from the get to the Center leader Sipilä announed a continuation of a European foreign policy and financial policy, referencing the “situation” in Ukraine and the sanctions against Russia. The leader of the Finns party made it known publically that he considered himself for the post of Finance minister. After long “talks”, the previous Prime minister from the right-wing pro-NATO Coalition party (same as the President’s party) was given the position of Finance minister. Accepting the nomination, he did not gloat or laugh, acted most solemnly. Basically he continues as the most important minister, as the Prime minister made it clear he’d be in it for domestic consumption and spoil sharing only. The Coalition also got the Interior ministry, which I suppose is the second in importance at a time of crisis and when it’s been announced there is no independent foreign or defence policy. The Finns party got the Foreign ministry as well as the Defence ministry, a clear slap in the face imo. Basically the protest vote was quite publically announced void, not that people paid attention because evil Putin and other Russophobic fantasies.
Dear Sakari Linden.
Concerning the new law regarding foreign NGOs :
http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001201505230001?index=1&rangeSize=1
It’s just Russia is catching up with the US Foreign Agents Registration Act, albeit 80 years later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act
All Nuori Karjala (Young Karelia, Молодая Карелия) should do it’s to stop accepting money coming from the foreign sources, stop accepting and using political material generated by the foreign governments, and stop using services of agents of foreign governments.
Could you name at least one Finnish NGO that received money from the government of Russia and employs political specialists who work for the Government of Russia?
When Russia had offered to host a Finno-Ugric movement headquarters for one year on a rotation principle, they refused.
“Hungarians blocked transfer of Finno-Ugric movement headquarters from Finland to Russia
Members of the International Consultative Committee of the Finno-Ugric Peoples (ICCFUP) from Hungary have refused to agree for transfer of Finno-Ugric movement headquarters from Finland to Russia. Media-centre FINUGOR reports by the information of Alexey Tsykarev.”
https://mariuveren.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/hungarians-blocked/
They didn’t want to be in Russia in 2011. Why do these NGOs want to be in Russia now, albeit via local chapters?
Finland and the EU had done its fair share on blocking the Russian initiative on cooperation.
In May Finland summoned 9 million members of the National Guard for training with NATO.
On your LinkedIn profile you say that you “have been an active NGO actor in Russia, especially in Republic of Karelia.” and that your “major areas of expertise are Russia-Europe relations, European politics, Finno-Ugric peoples, national minorities and secessionism in international law,”
and that you’re an “Assistant to Member of Parliament of Finland.”
https://fi.linkedin.com/pub/linden-sakari/18/953/187
Could you, please, elaborate on your research in regard to ” national minorities and secessionism in international law.” Do you have any published work that you could share with us?
What member of Parliament of Finland do you work for?
Warm regards…
Dear Scott,
Thank you for our message.
I do not intend to criticise Russian legislation. It belongs to their own sovereignty. I also know that a similar law exists e.g. in Hungary. What I wanted to write is that there is another perspective to the Karelia question, other than the one emphasizing the risks. That view was already supported by Alexander I of Russia, who wanted to combine West Karelia, the Old Finland, with West Finland (New Finland).
“All Nuori Karjala (Young Karelia, Молодая Карелия) should do it’s to stop accepting money coming from the foreign sources, stop accepting and using political material generated by the foreign governments, and stop using services of agents of foreign governments.”
Firstly, Nuori Karjala has received a grant from the United Nations, an international organization where Russia belongs, and which Russia finances too. Secondly, Nuori Karjala has not done any political. This is the question all about.
Otherwise, you have a point in some of your remarks related to Finno-Ugric cooperation. I stress that I do not intend to blame any part. I want to raise thinking whether Finno-Ugric cooperation could be seen in some other way. I don’t want to defend any action from the part of the Western countries either. Actually, I am very critical towards them, which you would notice if you had a look at what I have written about geopolitics.
Finno-Ugric cooperation has been my hobby since 2011. I have never hidden anything in my background in NGO activities. I also posted the same Linkedin page to the Saker when I offered this article. I openly indicated about my NGO activities because it is relevant for this article. Where I work is not relevant to be indicated it because I write in my free time and the ideas I express in my article do not necessarily correspond to those of my employer.
I have written an article about Catalonia’s independence process. A long version of it was published in the journal Kanava in August 2014. A short version can be read here:
https://www.suomenuutiset.fi/katalonian-itsenaisyyshuuma-koettelee-espanjan-yhtenaisyytta/
I have written also e.g. about:
– The foreign policy thinking behind Front National of France
http://www.ulkopolitiikka.fi/artikkeli/1327/kadonnutta_suuruutta_palauttamassa/
– Geopolitics of Russia from the point of view of Finland (as part of a book)
http://www.suomenperusta.fi/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Venäjä-uhka-vai-mahdollisuus-pdf.pdf
Dear Sakari Linden
“Von Finnland bis zum Schwarzen Meer”
A Finland Senator’s aid demands from the Russian government to backtrack its decision in his leisure time. You, man, got some chutzpa.
Keep talking. The more you talk, the more you’re telling us what you are all about.
Ideas that you’re propagating about the Great Karelia or “Great Suomia to Ural” or “Great Finland’ extending all the way to the Ural” are fascist revisionists ideas of the WWII period, when fascist Finland attacked the Soviet Union alongside with fascist Germany and other allies in 1941.
Finnish air forces as well Finnish tank troops used Swastika 1918-1944. Why since 1918? Because in that time (During Finnish Civil War) Swedish Count Von Rosen donated to Finnish legal government (White troops) a plane where Von Rosen have painted a symbol of his family, Blue Swastika. After The Civil War Finland´s Army used that blue swastika as symbol of Finnish Air Forces. Also Tank troops adopted that new symbol. Tank troops Swastika´s color is black.
During World War II, the Axis came to include Slovakia (November 1940), Hungary (November 1940), Romania (November 1940), and Bulgaria (March 1941). Finland fought with Germany against the Soviet Union but did not sign the Tripartite Pact and was not technically part of the Axis alliance. Yugoslavia joined the Axis alliance on March 25, 1941, but withdrew two days later after an anti-German coup.
That’s what NATO is assembling now. And with “un-allied” Finland and your over 1 000, 000 men army. Isn’t it clear that you are about to invade Russia just like you did back in 1941?
Finland was a part of Russian Empire for over 200 years and prosper. Bolsheviks acknowledged independence of Finland, then in both countries were civil wars (in Russia “red” wins, in Finland – “whites”) and during 1921-1922 large force of Finnish “volunteers” invaded Karelia, but were beaten back. In later 20-30s was even more border clashes but in smaller scale.
Finland wanted from Hitler all Karelia till White Sea coast. Looks like you represent those Finnish nationalists, who still dream about “Great Suomi” from Baltic till Ural Mountains.
Finland was true an ally of Nazi Germany.
Finland occupied large territories of the Soviet Union including Karelia, and Leningrad province, and Kolsky peninsula. Finland’s army bombed Leningrad and participated in the siege of Leningrad.
Russian people, who survived the European invasion still remember horrors of being occupied by Finland.
Russian people have already experienced “tolerance and civility” of people of Finland during the occupation of Soviet Kaleria. You people created 6 death camps in just one Petrozavodsk area to imprison local Russian people during your ethnic cleansing of Karelia. The Death camp #6 was located in Perevalochnaya stock exchange. Finns the Occupiers hold in the death camp about 7000 Russian people. The photo of Russian children behind the barbwire was taken by the Soviet troops when they liberated Petrozavodsk on June 28, 1944.
This picture was presented during the Nuremberg process.
The second on the left little girl – Klavdia Nuppieva – published her memoirs years later.
http://varjag-2007.livejournal.com/3707251.html
To see pictures and text, Please scroll down to:
Советские дети-узники 6-го финского концлагеря в Петрозаводске. Во время оккупации Советской Карелии финнами в Петрозаводске было создано шесть концлагерей для содержания местных русскоязычных жителей. Лагерь №6 размещался в районе Перевалочной биржи, в нем держали 7000 человек. Фотография сделана после освобождения Петрозаводска советскими войсками 28 июня 1944 года.
Russian people’s problem is that they are too nice. They don’t want to embarrass anyone. I have no qualms about telling you that your ideas are the expansionist fascists ideas. When somebody calls for anything Great: Great Ukraine, Great Poland from Sea to Sea, Great Karelia, Great Britain, Great Finland, Great Germany… It’s all fascism.
“… there are multiple sources quoted in the section above that explicitly claim that the reasons why Finland created the Karelia concentration camps, one of them pictured, was that Finland was going to use local ethnically-wrong civilians for forced labor and resettle them, cleansing the occupied region of “non-relative peoples”. Ethnic non-relative peoples were in their absolute majority ethnic Russians (9 of each 10 “non-relatives”). Sources are above and in the article section for each claim. I cannot guarantee that all people pictured are ethnic Russians. What I can source is that they all got to the concentration camp because they were thought to be ethnic Russians by Finns.”
Here is interesting discussion on the matters of Finland’s Russophobia. With the different points of view presented.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anti-Russian_sentiment/Archive_6
After reading your article and doing some research… It’s obvious that Russian government made a well informed, reasonable, and right decision in regard to this Young Karelia NGO.
As for your other questions about the Modern Russia, this might answer some of them;
Ahead of his visit to Italy, Vladimir Putin gave an interview to the newspaper Il Corriere della Sera.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/49629
Out of curiosity, why you, people, want to become great from invading the territories of Russia? Why wouldn’t you go West and invade Germany, Norway, or France and Britain?… I am sure they wouldn’t mind.
According to Finnish wikipedia page of the Siege of Leningrad, Finnish Airforce did not participate to the bombing of Leningrad. Also despite multiple requests from German leadership, Finnish forces did not advance to close proximity of Leningrad, but instead stayed at the outskirts and by Soviet defence line between the sea and lake Ladoga.
Reasoning for concentration camps seems to be to reduce the possibility of resistance querilla warfare agains finnish supply lines and for the possibility to exchange soviet “prisoners” to ethnic-finnish prisoners at the other side. Hence the grouping of masses. I’m not trying to defend those camps, but just want to differentiate them from the german extermination camps.
As for the topic: Whole thing is ridiculous. After 20 years there will be no one left who speaks any Karelian dialect anymore. Only people in Russia nowadays who still have some form of knowledge of any of fiinno-ugric languages are old people from the countryside and also they are not able to maintain that ability anymore. People age and die, young people speak only russian in order to be able find proper jobs / education. The children speak only russian to their parents.
Anyone even dreaming of Karealian ‘finnishness’ has not been there during the past 20-30 years. The last finno-ugrics will die in the coming years and new ones do not exists. “The Great FInland” lives only in the memories of some retired old finns who might have had some relatives or lost love from 80 years ago there.
Karelia will not be of geo-political issue in this cold war.
Actually now am really willingly determined to be “around” for at least another 20 years(!) and will/can/do understand, speak, read, write Karjalan murretta and same in English language as well…can also translate – in case there is interest – regarding real importance for all of us to preserve this and all “old” languages…We all came from these very same indigenous people&languages somewhere along the line! :)
As was hope of Karjala generations 10,000 years before me, have no desire for coldness of war…And not ready to disappear quite yet…!
My question: why so fearful if there are only so few of us? :))…..
Errr…Finland calling in 9million national guardsmen? We dont even have that many INHABITANTS D:
Oh well must have been a “typo” of fearmongering type.
I myself have been in the FAF, and i can tell you that for all the talk from the crazies and evil puppeteers, Finland has always relied on a pure defensive doctrine. Even the most hard-core militant understands that it would be a clusterf**k, madness and effectively assisted suicide of all that our fore-fathers fought and paid so dearly for, and that we love; to indulge in any real new Great Games. We are known to be tough fighters, but see where that got us in the Continuation War with the Soviet union…overstretched, morale low because of being outside of our borders, and yet mindful of never actually dealing a death-blow to Leningrad, by cutting off the Murmansk rail-line. The military is fully aware of this, and they don’t indulge in fanciful thinking when it comes to our big neighbour, in case we are attacked, we will make it expensive and bloody, but we will never attack ourselves. I think Russia understands this too, and thus allows for some political grandstanding that is necessary for a nation to vent out its frustrations, and realizes what is hype and what is real.
Just my two cents
@ Mac Chiavelli,
Q; Just my two cents.
R; How about Finland’s real secret weapon [those 9 gazillion mosquitoes]?
Right!!!!!! Funny!
He’s working as an assistant for Simon Elo, a young member of parliament from the Finns Party.
For Veratas, as a Finn too I would like to point out something of your point?
I think this stratfor is there as Mr. Patrushevs declaration came out as seeming to be answer to that. Main is, here in Finland nobody knows which are the NGO’s what Patrushev is referring about, this is small country where everybody knows everybody, but nobody has heard of those. For ‘return-occupied-Karelia’ style NGO’s there is only one, which action is similar to what it has been for last 20 years, but its support base is growing less by time as evacuates from area itself are dying because of age, and issue is very non-relevant for younger generations. Yeltsin at some point was planning to sell area back to Finland, but did not happen (which may be remembered by some securocrats). Nowadays it is outdated issue.
When Putin was in state visit, demonstration about returning Stalin occupied Karelia only drew one demonstrator from mental side of mankind; http://kavkazblogi.blogspot.fi/2009/05/kansanmurhaajaa-kestittiin-suomen.html afterwards performance artist who so far has shown that this ‘occupied areas back’ issue nearby Putin state visit location only gets a single demonstrator well known for his special performance art ( and whom afterwards was been put to 2 and half year prison vacation due of his mental actions such as countless filth blogs targeted to numerous politicians and private persons).
Main thing is that Patrushev’s declaration as first news in Finnish language sputnik news got a lot of attention when it opened, as there was a media-hysteria of course advertising this channel, like main newspaper giving out big article about it as example of informational warfare. Lot of attention was there. So many people out of curioisity saw it and everybody then got idea that highest security agencies in Russia are totally ill-informed about matters here which can only be only logical conclusion out of those statements. Also this type of publicity creates exact image CIA wants to paint about Russia here; a post-soviet securocracy where agent army is paranoidically chasing non-existant enemies and ruling by scaring people by talking nonsense about nonexisting threats. A lot of people have this memory fresh from Soviet era and it is very easy to bring it back. Why does high guy like mr. Patrushev announce that yes this western corporate media (which local mainstream Finnish media follows) promoted image of Russia is exactly true? This was result here about his statement, and in long string of similar events along years. Makes no sense. Only logical conclusion could be that his statements are some sort of answer to Stratfor article (which is unrealistic too, as article points out) and there is some fuzz about it in high securocracy. There have been numerous cases reminding of this so far, and yes all that is in the end preventing this “economical community from Lisbon to Vladivostok” style vision of Putin, when Putins friends simultaneysly do all they can to paint image that if you enter Russia, you are labelled as agent so dont even think about it (this accidently is the image of common people here, and unfortunately enforced now once again). This is most true of Finland, that had powerful economic connection delivering higher technology to Soviet union during cold war era (Mir mini-submarine for example) via booming trade, which especially St. Petersburg originated Russian politics have been tried to resume back. But notorious lack of Russian soft power is main tool of preventing much of that to happen, and article was just excellently hitting the spot on focusing in this thing.
Anyway, when reading this I feel now very tempted to start writing my own Finland region Sitreps for this blog on the same line, but with vastly more wider content, something like style of recent ‘conical hat’ post of Vietnam. Would mr. Saker be interested? This country is largely unnoticed and silent but a key geopolitical area concerning with Russia, but very little written and known about in global geopolitical internet community. Some more attention would be deserved to this corner of world with a strategical location and special political history.
Thank you for your input.
Veritas
You wrote:
“Yeltsin at some point was planning to sell area back to Finland, but did not happen (which may be remembered by some securocrats). Nowadays it is outdated issue.”
I remember. Helsinki denied it at first, but I think it is true. The main reason being the costs, I assume. Perhaps also the security situation. If you have more on this, please tell us.
One of my neighbours was a refugee from Karelia. She and her husband went there after the fall of the USSR. The visit was a mistake, they said. It would have been better to rely on memories, since the past did not exist anymore. Russian Karelia needs costly new infrastructure, they said.
Finnish Karelia is a beautiful place. It is the land of bears. When I visited Russian Karelia, a woman started talking Finnish with me. With the few Finnish words I know, I told her I am a Swedishspeaker from Sweden, not Finland (the country is partly bilingual). She enjoyed hearing a Swede speak some simple Finnish.
Btw, it was not uncommon for refugees to be trilingual. Some continued speaking Russian at home when they came to Finland. Many learn Russian in Finnish Karelia. Trade is important over the border. Karelia is already a sort of bridge. I hope it will be a place of healing. A place where cultures meet and understand each other.
Please write a sitrep on Karelia. Linden, thanks for the article.
Keelia: So embarrassed…so where is Kerelia on a map?
map from Wikipedia
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/Finnish_areas_ceded_in_1944.png
thanks
Scott,
“In May Finland summoned 9 million members of the National Guard for training with NATO. ”
This is not quite the truth, as entire population of country is about half of that number.
But here is a very big army, and there is rehearsals made being traditional alternative for NATO. NATO of course would love to have for its purposes, as well as strategic area, which ambassador Douglas E. Lute even dared to say openly in some seminar here last autumn. There is for example a need such as securing Baltic states which barely have any army at all despite being in NATO. And there are elements in military wanting badly NATO-full-membership, to get fancy new guns and illusion of security and they do all they can for small step integration. Also many prominent members of goverment want Atlantistic integration in all means of possible to escape as far as possibly this political phenomena of cold war era: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlandization
Naturally, local corporate media headlines are also running Russia demonisation non-stop, as aiming to NATO-full integration which would be a great geopolitical game-changer in this region.
Only thing blocking the way is that about only a quarter of population supports that, and suprisingly this number has not changed much during Ukraine crisis media hysteria era.
For this reason it is very crucial issue how Russia paints itself whether hostile or friendly, because every possible bit of supposed hostility is tried naturaly to utilized to maximum by media and certain politics to pursue their goal on full NATO-integration which is long prepared thing to happen very quickly if only common peoples opinion about it could be changed by some means. So in this respect Russias own media-activity towards here is rather big issue and very monitored by atlantistic mainstream media. Because it is all connected with big geostrategical picture.
Yes, Finland summons only about 1 million reservists
http://europe.newsweek.com/finish-military-preparing-900000-reservists-crisis-situation-326712
What do you mean when you talk about “Russias own media-activity”?
Russia has two very distinct medias: one ran by pro-Washington neo-con liberals and it’s actively anti-Russian. The other media is mainstream and some of it is patriotic.
It’s important to understand this division when referring to the “Russian media”
About Finland becoming a NATO member.
From corresponding with some political activists in Finland I understand that there are two reasons why people of Finland don’t want into NATO.
1. It’s expensive. A large percentage of the budget will be going towards the military expenditures. With the anti-Russia sanctions in place now, holes in Finland’s budget prohibit the country from such extravaganza.
2. Being a part of NATO and having NATO troops on its territory, Finland immediately will be putting itself on Russia’s “thanks, but no thanks” strike back map. Right now, Finland is completely out of this, unlike, say, Poland and Germany.
Does Finland want to be a fly over state, when the US Hegemon loses its marbles?
Does Finland want to be pushed into an oven by Baba Yaga NATO?
I believe we will have answers soon.
Regards
P.S. These Western constant threats towards Russia and Russian people, do what we tell you, or else… You can drop these. It doesn’t matter what Russia does or says, the West doesn’t want to hear from Russia. The West follows its own construct of reality. The West trying to shape that reality into its ideological constructs.
Russia just has to do what’s the best for her people.
Very interesting comments Scott !! Really beefed up the whole thread !! Amazing.
I assume 95% of people dont even know where this is (other then somewhere along Russian-Finnish border).
But here is a map:
http://www.conflicts.rem33.com%252Fimages%252FFinland%252Fwat_is_karjala.htm%3B925%3B1412
Why is this even posted here? It contains nothing but wishful thinking on the part of the Finns and nothing more. “If Finland would join the NATO, we could shut the Finnish gulf and block the St. Petersburg.” Join in the NATO, nobody is holding you back. You lost part of Karelia because you were Hitler’s errand boys in WW2 – because you lost a war, and just like Germans have lost east Prussia to Poland and Russia, or Japan some island which had belong to them until they lost the war. Whenever you lose a war, you pay a price, and that price is always in terms of lost land, reparations, or both, Finns. Why is that simple and ancient fact, logic and tenet so difficult for you to understand? It’s so simple that one could hardly even manage to imagine something simpler.
If you want to speak Finnish in Russia – be it in Karelia or anywhere else – you are always free to do so. The same applies to your Finnish folklore – you are free to practice any type of your national culture’s celebration anywhere in Russia. But if you fantasize about destabilization of Russia, making problems for Russia or having some dreams about taking Russian land — you will be crushed. It’s that simple.
Zeta
Very sound logic, and spoken like a true Russian. No bullshit.
However to communicate in English it’s best to effect a Hobbesian style. Leaving your opponent a ‘way out’ so to speak. Don’t make enemies were they don’t exist. Use soft power. Finn is small russia big, NATO big Russia small, big be super nice to little to win, you get my drift?
Nobody loves war, voyna niet choroso (did I write that ok?)
All the best
And Russia has enough firepower to evaporate every member of that terorrist organization called NATO. But the Finns must have heard of Volga Finns.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_Finns
They must know Volga Finns have been Russians for over a thousand years now. They share the blood with Russian people, so they ought to be aware of that fact. It is up to them to decide what relationship with Russia they want to have. Russia has always wanted brotherly relationship with Finland.
Zeta, you forget that the Sovjetunion attacked Finland. Mannerheim, who had no love for German troops after his experiences in WW1, he was a tzarist officer and hated the German treatment of civilians in that war, worked with the Germans to free his country in ww2 and then he chased them out. Politics. After the two wars, Moscow _insisted_ on Mannerheim being in charge. He spoke Russian and was a man Moscow understood.
There is a very new nationalistic party in Finland, “true Finns” is a possible translation. They dislike Swedes more than Russians, as I understand it. Some of them want Eastern Karelia and Petsamo back. Some, living in the 19th century, talk of “greater Finland”, a vast territory. Do not assume this party speaks for all Finns. I find Finnish people balanced, wise and pragmatic. The country is a role model for all the Nordic countries in this difficult time. We need good relations with Russia.
Finns are always welcomed, and Russians do not see them as Westerners. Also, as I stated a little earlier, no small part of today Russians are of Finnish origins. Possibly even Saker himself is of Finnish or part of Finnish origins (I thik I remeber him saying he was from somewhere north of Moscow). Finns are brotherly nation to Russians. And those who want being part of a greater land for Finnish people are always welcomed as being part of Russians – they can become Russians.
I think Saker said his family had a part Turkic bloodline.But on the other hand, two other famous Russians had/have a Finnic background,Yuri Andropov,and Vladimir Putin.
“I find Finnish people balanced, wise and pragmatic. The country is a role model for all the Nordic countries in this difficult time. We need good relations with Russia.”
That makes no sense, because in the last couple of years the media here have whipped up quite a frenzy against Putin the Dictator and Russians as a whole. Few people will tell you we need good relations with Russia. How’s that for a model, for wisdom and balance?
The political difficulty comes from the insanity of not recognizing and actively refusing exactly what Zeta is speaking of. For example, it’s almost unheard of for anyone here to propose Finns sided with Hitler.t The sentiment is not that we lost a war but righteously won against an enemy that vastly outnumbered us, and most importantly, that there was nothing that could’ve been done polititcally to avoid the war with Russia. Maybe it was so, but at least it would’ve been possible not to side with Hitler… no? Given that we’re in a similar situation today and nobody seems to even recognize that we’re taking the side of US expansionists is frightening.
I have a bit differing view of finnish sentiment. I think people all together know quite well we fought with Hitler. Especially people in the north where germans burnt our villages after the surrender (we promised russians to drive off all nazis and hence fought the germans at the War of Lapland). I don’t know if you are from the south or even Sweden, but everyone and I mean even my 15 yo. sister , knows about WWII and joint fight with Hitler.
Also for the war not being a defeat is false. In general people think it was a defeat, but a glorious one. I have not heard anyone claiming it being a victory, not even the most nazi-minded skinheads. It has always been a defeat and remains so. More likely it is seen as a Pyrrhic Victory for the Soviet Union and hence finns have “warm and glorified” feelings towards it. Attitude is more like “Come again, we know you’ll win in the end, but, oh boy will you pay”.
Yes I’m from the south.
I’m glad that’s the case for you, but my experience has been starkly different. Not a Pyrrhic victory for the Soviet Union, but a defensive victory (torjuntavoitto) for Finland. The War of Lapland in my experience is mostly glossed over or treated as a story to itself, dissociated from our allegiances and leanings, or perhaps treated as a German betrayal of not too much consequence or baggage.
Incidentally, just today in a discussion an oldtimer and a veteral expressed I would say not admiration, certainly not overt “Nazi sympathizing”, but explicit gratitude to the Germans for having helped us reach a defensive victory at Vuosalmi, where without the Germans’ help he believed the Soviets would’ve struck through and gone all the way to Gulf of Bothnia. So in this case, to his mind ultimately the Germans helped us reach a defensive victory. I’m not trying to argue against your experience, I’m just a lot more pessimistic in the sense that for the most part, I feel there isn’t even the language to talk about what transpired, in the sense that the Russian perspective could be if not validated, then at least considered. Not always, but most of the time. Truly principled pacifistic people, in the sense of not wanting to get into any new wars as a state, seem hard to find.
I wrote: “The country is a role model for all the Nordic countries in this difficult time. We need good relations with Russia.”
I am not up to date on the media situation in Finland, but I remember the wise foreign policy of Kekkonen, Koivisto and other politicians. Finland was ready to talk to and trade with everybody during the Cold War and other Nordic countries should learn from that in these dangerous times. Finland was one of few countries that paid back its share of the Marchall(sp?) aid and got absolutely excellent relations with the US, too. I think Kekkonen spoke Russian, but I am not sure. Relations with Sweden were important. Kekkonen regularly went to Moscow and often visited Sweden. Officially to fish, but I am sure he had many talks with Swedish politicians. I remember how honoured Kekkonen was by Finns I met in my youth. I often visited Finland.
I am saying Finland set an example in difficult times. Times have changed, but our time is also dangerous. Perhaps the media situation in Finland is as bad as in Sweden – where it is really bad.
As for the war in Lapland, somebody told me the following when I was young. There were so many dead bodies that the Swedish army secretly intervened and entered Finnish Lapland. The bodies were assembled and burned to prevent disease. The soldiers were forbidden to say anything, but of course some did. They had bad memories. You see, dead bodies expand when they are heated. They can start moving and making noises, as if they were alive.
No actually because sides changed…and this squeezed tiny little nation(s) in between big power countries and war…
i mean really??? You think that 4 million Finns – this total includes men women&children[babies born] – really could have overrun Russian lands??? Russia with population over 100 million??..You seem to give us Karjalainens a lot of credit!…i know we have determination&perseverance in our history of survival – in our language “sisu” – but we also have connection to Russia and culture over many centuries…
i know from my family that there was never a desire for war…people were neighbors…just wanted to live at home…
My father was youngest of 10 – two babies died in infancy – they just were thankful for their tiny homestead..that’s it..nothing more than share life with like minded neighbors…
My father and mother have always spoken highly to me about the beauty of Russian people&culture – music, art…
As someone posted comment earlier we have more similarities than differences…
There was a time after all when our borders did not really exist..
i realize it seems more complicated these days but i do hope for us all that we may find a way to simplify differences to secure for us our similar good…
Am not really that old, but i really don’t want to fight with anyone..i will fight for good of anyone/everyone but don’t just want to fight…
Have lived all over the world in my life and have mainly found good people everywhere..
Have made several comments here but this really is the only one comment i want to leave…
Thank you
More about nothing except the Empire trolling for trouble. As the author says,the Karelian population in that area is 7.4%.The non-Karelian mostly Russian population is 92.6%. The Empire will always try to stir trouble with foreign agents using 5th column elements among Russia’s many minorities.Exposing them and stopping them will be a full time job for the security services for a long time.I would submit that the best move would be to forbid any organization with foreign ties to operate in the RF. And instead all-Russian minority organizations be formed to look after the cultural needs of minority communities in the RF.If there are valid problems that need fixing they can fix them.If the problem is foreign governments just trying to start trouble that will put a stop to that.
As to Russia’s relations with Finland and other non-NATO member states.It would be best to show those states that they benefit economically from good relations with the RF.And suffer economically,from bad relations.Giving preferential trade rights and energy discounts to those states would be a good start.While slapping penalties,and cutting trade with those working against Russia should be done at once.Why is Russia buying one single product from.And selling one single product to,the Baltic States, Poland and Ukraine.Those states are death enemies of Russia at present.Why is Russia helping their economies,while they stick a knife in Russia’s back.I could possibly see with Ukraine “a brother people” why Russia might find that difficult to do.But with the others,its pure foolishness not to cut them off.Once they begin to really suffer they will think twice on their Russophobia.If not,oh well,let them continue to suffer then.An object lesson needs to be applied in those states.
Thank you Tazhit. This hotspot was certainly unknown to me. It’s a pity there is not more confidence between the Finns & the Russians so that the Karelians could benefit from it. Thank you for the thorough coverage.
T2015,
You quote this from the Russian constitution, but you don’t understand its meaning:
“The Bank of Russia is a legal entity. Its authorised capital and other property are federal property. ”
Authorized capital does NOT refer to its reserves. This is only a pittance compared to the reserves. “Other property” refers to the building and the furniture, NOT the reserves.
It’s not possible to fully comprehend Russia’s constitution re the Central Bank w/o reading one section against another. This is typical of law. Starikov has done this for you in his book and refers you to the parts that define each term.
T2015, You quoted from the Rus constitution:
“the Bank of Russia has both proprietary and financial independence. It exercises its powers to own, use and manage its property, including international reserves”
There it is! The CBR OWNS and manages the reserves.
It does this “in accordance w bla-blah” Now you have to look THAT up.
It’s not so simple as you think. It is wrong and misleading of you to say that no evidence or text has been provided you demonstrating lack of govt control of the CBR. I have been supplying the link to Starikov’s entire book on this thread and on a previous one.
Very interesting article. Thank You, Sakari, for this.
It is rather weird how some siloviks can see an organization (Nuori Karjala/Молодая Карелия) as a “foreign agent” when it got only a single, not permanent, fund, from UN (Not from any CIA/Atlanticist organization).
What comes to the first Finnish Sputnik headline about “revanshist activity” of some Finnish organizations in Russian Karelia, it only sounds to me that some people in the ‘siloviki’ circles have done wrong conclusions and are overreacting in their message. They seem to think there are some growing revanshism and activity of far-right interests concerning Karelia, and act according to this belief.
Another issue is Russian siloviki’s attitude towards the Finns party. I guess it was the 2013 official visit of The Finns Youth organization delegation to Karelian Parliament, that probably caused the alarm of the siloviki. It is unclear why some men behind Patrushev (as i suppose?) see the Youth division of the only influential anti-Euro and eurosceptic party in Finland as a threat to Russia, when Russia actively seeks cooperation with such partien in EU (e.g. Front National). Or, perhaps, it’s due the mistrust on the party leadership and their political stand towards NATO?
It is a sad story the Young Karelia has to quit just because of misconceptions and overreacting.
Peter Iiskola writes about this article long commentary and clarification, check it!:
https://www.facebook.com/peter.iiskola/posts/776745775771527
“Karelia – The unknown Northern hotspot of the new Cold War? Or is Karelia a chance for fruitful cooperation between Finland and Russia? Karelia is the land of the Karelian peoples and is an area in Northern Europe of long historical significance for Finland, Russia, and Sweden. Most of Karelia belongs to Russia. Before I below quote the article of my good Finnish learned young friend Sakari Linden, I will say a few words.
The events taken place in the epoch of Peter the Great (1672-1725) directly influenced Karelia and determined its further history until now. In the first place Peter I was interested in Karelia in connection with the Northern Russian-Swedish war (1700 – 1725), the goal of which was to gain exits to the Baltic Sea and this goal he also achieved. Peter the Great founded in 1703 the current capital of Karelia or Petrozavodsk, although archeological discoveries in the urban area indicate the presence of a settlement as far back as seven thousand years ago.
I must also mention the Soviet leader Yuri Andropov, who in practice became a Karelian. He was born in southern Russia and had a Don Cossack father and his mother was the adopted daughter of a Moscow watchmaker, Karl Franzovich Fleckenstein, who was originally from Finland. Yuri Andropov made his initial Soviet career in Karelia was a Soviet politician and the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 12 November 1982 until his death fifteen months later. But long before that, only few remember that Yuri Andropov was First Secretary of the Central Committee of Komsomol in the Soviet Karelo-Finnish Republic from 1940 to 1944. During World War II, Andropov took part in partisan guerrilla activities in Finland. From 1944 onwards, he left Komsomol for Communist Party work. Between 1946 and 1951, he studied in the University of Petrozavodsk in the Karelian capital and made later career to the very top of Soviet Union, where he was preceded by Leonid Brezhnev and succeeded by Konstantin Chernenko.
Finally, it is to be remembered that Otto Kuusinen (1881-1964) was born in Finland and Chairman of Finland’s Social Democratic Party 1913-17, but he became Karelian. From 1940 to 1957 Otto Kuusinen was the Karelian-Finnish SSR Supreme Soviet Presidium Chairman. He was one of the founders of the republic defense during the Great Patriotic War and restoration of its national economy in the post-war period. Further he was the outstanding figure in the CPSU and the Soviet State and one of the leaders of Comintern. He preserved his career in the top – as one of the few – throughout the period of Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev.
Already in about 1000 years old ancient chronicles the Karelians sided with the Novgorodians against the Swedes, which for almost a millennium thereafter tried to push eastwards until they were finally stopped 200 years ago in the Napoleonic wars, when Finland became an autonomous grand duchy of Russia in 1809. The Russian czars also removed their administrative borders of Karelia in Finnish favor, so subsequently Finland got hold of more Karelian land areas at its independence 1917 in the turmoil of the Bolshevik revolution. However, the bulk of Karelia has been and still is in the so called Novgorodian and/or Russian sphere of interest.
My good young colleague and friend Safari Linden, who is a Finnish geopolitical writer and great friend of Karelia, tries to summarize in the article below the past, present and future of Karelia – but this starting only from the year 1323 onwards. Before that there is much to write about Karelia, where there have been settlements for 7000 years or more, but another time.
The Swedes conducted wars against Novgorodians in 12th and 13th century. Novgorodians and their Karelian allies launched pirate raids against mainland Sweden during the 12th century and allegedly destroyed in 1187 the most important Swedish city Sigtuna, which was founded in 960. After a long pause in open hostilities, Swedes undertook an attack against Novgorod in 1240. The only source of information on the attack is a Novgorodian chronicle. Soon after their fleet entered the mouth of the Neva River, the Swedes were roundly defeated in the Battle of the Neva by a young prince, Alexander of Novgorod, who would later be called “Alexander Nevsky” to memorialize this victory. (The main church and monastery in Saint Petersburg has the remains of Alexander Nevsky and it is called the Saint Alexander Nevsky Lavra or Saint Alexander Nevsky Monastery. It was founded by Peter I or Peter the Great of Russia in 1710. This Lavra remained the main seat of the Orthodox Church in Russia from Peter the Great for 200 years until 1917.) From then on, after they lost in the battle of Neva, Sweden moved its interest to Finland. Its troops did not return to Neva before the end of the 13th century, when it had gained solid control of Finland. Earlier, Swedes had also tried to establish a bridgehead in Estonia, in vain.
The Peace in Nöteborg (or Shlisselburg) in 1323 was made in a castle at the shores of Lake Ladoga, which is the largest lake in Europe and connected with the Neva river. The Peace in Nöteborg 1323 and the Peace in Novgorod 1326 – both were made between Novgorod and Ingeborg of Norway and Sweden – ended the Swedish–Novgorodian Wars of 12th and 13th centuries. The wars were conducted between the Republic of Novgorod and the medieval Sweden over control of the Gulf of Finland, an area vital to the Hanseatic League and part of the Varangian-Byzantine trade route. The Swedish attacks against Orthodox Russians had religious overtones, but before the 14th century there is no knowledge of official Crusade bulls issued by the Pope, but the action was taken whether the bulls existed or not. Sweden was under the Pope until ”
–
Peter Iiskola
Judge Trained on The Bench (Finland) – LL.M. International Law and Relations (Helsinki University), in state service book as a judge in the Ministry of Justice.
1981-82 Prime Minister Mauno Koivisto’s Personal Assistant at Government.
1985-1988 Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
1986-1987 Military Service, Suomenlinna coast artillery regiment and Guards Battalion, the Information Department of MHQ. Guards Battalion diploma.
1995-96 Vasa Court of Appeal’s Judge Trainee and Acting District Court Judge in Jacobabad or Pietarsari, Ostrobothnia.
1996-1997 the Arbitration Tribunal between Iran and USA in The Hague.
1997-2000 Council of Europe Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
2000-01 Council of Europe Representative in the Russian Presidential Administration for Human Rights in the Kremlin and in Chechnya.
2001-02 Chief of Human Rights Office in UN Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
2005-06 Project Coordinator in Afghanistan UN Office for Drugs and Crime UNODC a Fast Track Counter Narcotics Justice Project.
Very interesting and instructive. Thank you very much for the comment. Peter Iiskola appears to be a very interesting person for this blog ( interviews, guest articles, comments…)
You welcome these people to Sakers blog? I know these blind
ignorants. Believe me, they have no clue about what they are writing.
They are not necessarily bad, just very useful tools for the bads.
With these kind of zombies the damage always happens. I think
that Government of Russia knows what they are doing.
And…I´m karelian.
Well, Finn Anonymous, I have no idea who Peter Iiskola is, only for his curriculum, designed in conflict zones, I thought it might be interesting, but no idea where he stands. His comment seemed to me informative and his tone was polite. Remember that here we welcome different views, only it is required to be expressed in a polite way.
Forgive my ignorance on political life in Karelia, which is absolute.
Thanks for the post. I am not an historian, but as I understand it, Alexander Nevsky and Swedish Birger Jarl understood each other well. At that time it was about power politics, not religion, and they agreed on a new border at the Neva river.
If Novgorod destroyed Sigtuna, that is strange. Half the inhabitants were Orthodox Christians and the ruin of their great church is still standing.
The serious problems started under Swedish king Magnus Eriksson in the 14th century. Against his will, the catholics had him start a religious war against Novgorod. Sweden-Finland lost and the king was replaced. According to the Russian Orthodox Church, he converted and died in the Vaalamo monastery. He is officially a saint. After that the wars just went on century after century.
Swedish king Charles Xll never started a war, he was attacked from all sides, but he did not have the wisdom to accept Russias peace proposal after the battle at Narva. As a result he lost at Poltava and Sweden-Finland lost its big power status for ever.
When Sweden-Finland was against him, Napoleon had the Tzar attack. I see this as a Nordic solution that eventually gave Finland independence. Providence.
Karelia was under Novgorod, that is true, and so was probably Uleåborg. In a letter to Swedish king Gustaf Wasa, Tzar Ivan claimed parts of Sweden proper also had been. I dont know, but it is possible the Royal House of Novgorod did have substantial influence on the Scandinavian peninsula. Perhaps through relatives.
I see more similarities than differences between the Nordic countries, Russia included. Like the UK, we never were part of the continent, but, unlike the UK, we had close bonds despite the many wars – or perhaps because of them. My Swedish grandfathers winterhat would be instantly recognized in Russia and he went to the “torg” to buy provisions. A friend in Finnish Karelia fluently speaks Swedish, Russian and Finnish. Her sons girlfriend comes from St. Petersburg. Karelia has already become a sort of bridge. Languages, trade, history, climate, all that has the potential to unite.
Right!!!!!! Funny!
Sent very nice comment re-connect Karjala&Venäjä people and this was not posted..no one in this entire world/planet wishes for coldness of war..world has seen and is seeing too much war…please please let us join to understand each other…