Russian attack | Stubb sidestepped the listener’s question with a Karelia analogy, and according to the researcher, it says a lot about the situation in Ukraine

President From Alexander Stubb was asked by Yle During the question hour of the President of the Republic difficult question.

“Do you think it’s possible that Ukraine will win over Russia and the Russians will have to give back all the territories – including Crimea?” asked a listener from Kuusankoski Ilkka Sarpola.

The president divided his answer into four points.

“To achieve peace, Ukraine and the president Zelenskyi specifically need four things, the first of which is areas. It’s like the Karelia issue of Zelenskyi and the Ukrainians,” Stubb began.

“The second is security guarantees, either bilaterally in the beginning from the United States and Britain, or in the long run from NATO,” he continued.

In addition, Stubb mentioned the sentencing of Russian war criminals and the reconstruction of Ukraine.

Stubb opened in his answer about his understanding of the basic pillars of a lasting peace in Ukraine.

However, he did not make an assessment of the listener’s question, that is, which regions of Ukraine able to to get back.

Director of the Estonian ICDS research center, i.e. the Estonian Foreign Policy Institute Kristi Raik understand why Stubb left that assessment out.

“Western leaders are careful not to discuss the subject,” he says.

Ukraine’s goal is to regain control of all territories illegally occupied by Russia.

“When you look at the situation militarily, there is no such situation in sight that Ukraine would be able to take everything back in the near future. It’s a politically sensitive topic and I understand that Western leaders don’t want to take a stand on it.”

Stubb presented His Karelia similes are condensed and part of a longer list, so it’s hard to say what exactly he meant by it.

HS asked the presidential office for clarification on Monday. At least there has been no answer yet.

Researcher Raik warns against interpretations of the Karelia parable, in which Ukraine could buy itself peace with painful territorial concessions alone.

“Peace is not born by handing over territories and imagining that Russia would be satisfied with that. It doesn’t work that way,” says Raik.

Probably for the same reason, President Stubb mentioned security guarantees as the second item on his list.

Finland lost Karelia to a communist dictator in World War II Joseph Stalin For the Soviet Union. More than 400,000 Karelians had to leave their homes.

“Finland lost about ten percent of its territories as a result of the Winter and Continuation War. It wasn’t the kind of deal where territorial ceding alone would have ensured lasting peace,” says Raik.

“What was needed was that broader factors were also favorable.”

The Soviet Union was tied down on many fronts and was experiencing war fatigue. Raik reminds that Finland faced difficult years after the end of the war, during which the Soviet Union tried to subjugate its neighbor to become part of the Eastern Bloc.

The handover of Karelia was not a guarantee that the Soviet Union would not still want to get involved in Finnish affairs.

Raik likes it it is possible that at some point in the future Russia and Ukraine will begin to tune in to a truce in a situation where Russia holds some territory that legally belongs to Ukraine.

“However, it cannot go to the extent of legitimizing Russia’s territorial occupations,” says Raik.

By legitimization, Raik means a situation where Russia’s territorial occupations would be accepted as legal borders.

That is why it is difficult for Western leaders to talk about peace options in which the old borders of Ukraine would not be realized in practice: they do not want to risk the misunderstanding that the statement would be interpreted as an acceptance of conquests.

Acco
rding to Raik, the second item on Stubb’s list is even more important than the territorial issue, i.e. security guarantees.

Stubb assessed Yle said in the interview that the situation in Ukraine is still serious, but nevertheless “significantly better” than three months ago. Stubb pointed especially to the improvement of Ukraine’s financial and armament situation.

Kristi Raik agrees with this assessment.

“When the decision of the United States on a new arms aid package was expected in the late winter and early spring, that’s when there started to be despair in the air,” says Raik.

“Since then things have gone in a better direction. But when you look at the frontline situation in eastern Ukraine, the initiative is still with Russia.”