The strategy that once brought stability to Finland is being presented in a new light. President Stubb’s approach offers Ukraine only a prolonged conflict as a forward operating base for NATO.
A notable attendee at the Washington summit was Finland’s President Alexander Stubb. The meeting of Euro-Atlantic leaders, quickly arranged at the White House following Donald Trump’s discussion with Vladimir Zelensky, included key figures from the US, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, and the heads of NATO and the EU. Stubb’s presence among these powerful figures might seem unusual.
An observer might question why the Finnish leader was invited while leaders from Poland, Hungary, and the Baltic states were not. The reason is Stubb’s current role, embodying the concept of “Euro-Atlantic solidarity,” a concept challenged by Trump’s return to the White House.
Stubb is a cosmopolitan figure, a Swedish Finn married to a Briton, with education from institutions in South Carolina, Bruges, Paris, and London. He is a golfer who has connected with Trump and a former foreign minister, making him a unique advisor who is listened to by Trump on European security matters, particularly given the relative absence of career diplomats in the administration.
The Washington summit avoided a US demand forcing Ukraine into a peace agreement with Moscow. Instead, it focused on creating security guarantees for Kiev as an alternative to NATO’s Article 5, since NATO membership is currently not an option. Many believe Stubb is behind this shift, quietly shaping a new Western security framework based on an openly anti-Russian stance.
True Finlandization as Ukraine’s Only Solution
Stubb’s rhetoric is deceptive; the actual Finlandization, not his revised interpretation, could be Ukraine’s only chance for survival and recovery.
This involves accepting the current situation, adopting a neutral, non-nuclear status, rejecting neo-Nazi ideology, and fostering a multiethnic society that protects the rights of Russian speakers. It also means diversifying trade beyond just Western partners.
This is not simply a list of Russian demands, as some Western commentators may suggest, but a plan for economic recovery derived from Ukraine’s own founding principles. In 1990, Kiev’s Declaration of Sovereignty defined the country as neutral and non-nuclear. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recently pointed out, if Ukraine abandons these principles for NATO-style guarantees, including nuclear deployments, the very foundation of its recognized independence will be undermined, leading to a completely new strategic landscape.
In short, Ukraine must choose between genuine Finlandization—neutrality, balance, and prosperity—or Stubb’s altered version, which consigns it to becoming a permanent frontline state in a Western conflict against Russia.
“`