Digre 1

Peder Digre Scott Radnitz / TA - Meri Bauer SIS 201 - The Making of the 21st Century (Section AE) 25 May 2010

In a Fortnight or Less The Soviet Unions Failed Ambitions for Finland in the Twentieth Century You may be familiar with the Soviet Unions invasions of Poland at the beginning of

World War II in 1941, Czechoslovakia in 1968, and Afghanistan in 1979; but you probably have not heard of the three incursions the Soviet Union made into Finland between 1917 to 1944. These incursions were the attempt of the Soviet Union to protect and spread Communism by not only attempting to restore the Tsarist borders and form a buffer zone against the West, but also trying to establish a model region to bring other Scandinavian countries within the sphere of Soviet inYluence. These goals may be expected of the Soviet Union, but the Soviet Unions failure to secure these goals is surprising. Why would one of the most dominant military powers of the time fail when attempting to subdue a sparsely populated country recently declared independent? Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalins failed understanding of the Finnish political identity (including the strength of Finnish Nationalism and the decreasing support for Communism in Finland) generated policies that were irreconcilable with their goal of subduing Finland. Finnish Nationalism The independent country of Finland with a unique national identity is a relatively

recent phenomenon. Finland was a region in the Kingdom of Sweden for six hundred years until the nineteenth century, at which point it became an autonomous Grand Duchy of Tsarist Russia. Towards the end of the nineteenth century, the Fennoman movement

Digre 2

emerged which called for a uniquely Finnish culture and strong national pride as many other nationalist movements of the nineteenth century did. Finns found the most deYinitively Finnish culture originated in the border region between Finland and Russia called Karelia.1 The Karelian culture, including the Finnish language and heritage, was ampliYied and transplanted throughout Finland. The revelation of a unique cultural identity traceable to a speciYic region made Karelia very important to Finland and led to the rise of strong, prideful nationalism in Finland. The common Lutheran Faith, bestowed upon Finland by centuries of Swedish rule and shared by the majority of Finns, was also a deeply uniting aspect of society. The newfound idea of a homeland with a codiYied language gave the newly independent Finland a sense of purpose when engaging in three wars with the Soviet Union. Finnish nationalism continued to gain in strength after the Finnish Civil War and by the time of the Winter War in 1939, Finland had a strong national pride. The national pride Finns felt for their homeland, especially Karelia, and their pride for their accomplishment of driving communism from Finland, made them a dynamic and powerful adversary for the Soviet Union. Declining Support for Communism Although most Finns strived for a uniquely Finnish identity before the Finnish Civil

War, many Finns did not become immediately engrained with the aforementioned strong nationalism. After Finland declared independence from the Soviet Union, many Finns (especially poor, rural Finns) identiYied themselves with the universal proletariat, having common goals to the proletariat expressing their interests in Soviet Russia. With the peasants becoming part of the universal proletariat, the image of peasantry began to give
1

Kirby, D. G. A Concise History of Finland. Cambridge concise histories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 153.

Digre 3

way to a darker picture of a surly, brutal and vengeful rural proletariat, made bolder and more threatening by revolution and unscrupulous agitation of the socialists. 2 The Soviet Union intervened in the Finnish Civil War to support this vengeful rural proletariat in their classic Marxist struggle and to impose socialism in Finland. The Marxist-driven Russian Revolution of 1917 brought turmoil not only to Russia,

but to Finland as well. Early in 1918, Finland became engulfed in civil war largely because of the same cause as the Russian Revolution -- a small bourgeoisie repressing a large proletariat. The proletariat (with their newly formed army, The Red Guard) was highly inYluenced by Marxist ideals and wished to remain part of the Soviet Union. The opposing conservative White Guard fought for the retention of their power in an independent Finnish state. The Soviet Union supported the Red Guard, but The Red Guard succumbed to the White Guard later in the year. After the war, the communist movement in Finland (and along with it the desire to

join the Soviet Union) died away largely because the avid leaders of communism in Finland moved to Russia after it was clear they had lost the war. The passive communists (the majority of the proletariat) became supporters of social democracy and became prosperous as such. The loss of support for communism directly within the Finnish state and the transition of the majority of the population to social democracy wiped away the Soviet Unions ideological foothold within Finland, making all future attempts to subdue Finland purely political and not to support communism in Finland. With the Soviet Union no longer Yighting for even a small faction of Finns, the Soviet Union became a common

Ibid. 156.

Digre 4

enemy for the people of Finland, therefore uniting Finland even more and making it less likely for the Soviet Union to subdue Finland. Vladimir Lenins Policies Regarding Finland As the preeminent Marxist, Vladimir Lenin did not believe in nationalism, but did

believe in self-determination. He saw self-determination mainly as a tool to combat imperialism, but also as a method to promote communism. If the proletariat were allowed to rule themselves and promote their interests, they would surely adhere to communist ideals. Therefore, when Finland declared its independence on 6 December 1917 thereby proclaiming the people of Finland have by this step taken their fate in their own hands, 3 Lenin and The Soviet of Peoples Commissars recognized Finlands independence on 18 December 1917, apparently leaving Finland to become a democracy under bourgeoisie control.4 However, Lenin recognized Finlands independence in the conviction that the Finnish proletariat would soon seek to reunify with the new Soviet republic.5 This conviction of Lenins was based on his assumptions that the majority of Finlands proletariat was favourable to communism, and sought to incorporate Finland into the Soviet Union. Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks did not surrender their plans for Finland and

further believed that the proletariats ideological struggle would prevail in Finland. They had in fact experienced similar situations in the Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltic States. In such a mindset, they issued the Decree on Borders in January 1918 which stated that
3 4

Finnish Parliament. Finnish Declaration of Independence. Helsinki, Finland. 6 December 1917.

The Soviet of Peoples Commissars. Recognition of Finlands Independence. Petrograd, USSR. 18 December 1917.
5

Baron, Nick. "Nature, Nationalism and Revolutionary Regionalism: Constructing Soviet Karelia, 1920-1923." Journal of Historical Geography. 33. 3 (2007): 565.

Digre 5

each locality had the right to secede from any territorial unit into which it had been forcibly incorporated during tsarist rule, and to group itself around those natural centres towards which they feel gravitation. 6 The Decree on Borders was announced to draw favour from the states that seceded and hopefully to incorporate them into the Soviet Union as allies. In the Bolshevik geographical mind, post-revolutionary socialist boundary- drawing was to generate a new integration of social and natural landscapes and processes, a more organic human ecology of the regions. 7 Finland, with its unique common heritage, was to become another piece of the puzzle (which was the Soviet sphere of inYluence). However, Lenin failed to acknowledge that Finland did not Yit into this organic human ecology. Finland was a country with a fairly solidiYied democratic structure remaining intact from the Grand Duchy period. There are many reasons why Finland was less likely than other states in Europe to abandon the democratic for the authoritarian path. Foremost amongst these is the resilience and strength of the basic ediYice of laws, institutions, and practices that had developed and matured during the course of the nineteenth century. 8 Finlands strong social and political traditions made inYiltration and takeover difYicult for the Soviet Union. Finland had already embarked on a journey of democratic path dependence that made the ideological transition to communism highly unlikely. Either intentionally or unintentionally, Vladimir Lenin disregarded several distinct characteristics of Finland that were different from Russia. This disregard led to the failure of the Yirst attempt to subdue Finland -- the Finnish Civil War.

6 7 8

Ibid. Ibid.

Kirby, D. G. A Concise History of Finland. Cambridge concise histories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 167

Digre 6

Joseph Stalins Policies Regarding Finland As opposed to Lenins ideological policy for Finland, Joseph Stalin (even during the

time of Lenin) was inclined to a bolder and more empirical policy. Stalin favoured this approach because of his inherent paranoia and lack of trust of Finns when he said, if the bourgeois elements of this or that region sought to lend a national colouring to these conYlicts, it was only because it was advantageous to them to do so, since it was convenient for them to conceal behind a national cloak the Yight against the power of the labouring masses within their region. 9 For Stalin it appeared advantageous to apply military force, rather than ideological force as Lenin did. Stalin sought to make a model out of Soviet part of Karelia (even going so far as to abolish the Finnish language in the region and institute Soviet Karelian 10) and eventually Finland to inYluence other countries in the region. Edvard Gylling, a Finnish Social Democrat with whom Stalin agreed, wrote that, Soviet Karelia would form the basis of a future Scandinavian Soviet Republic, which could dictate its will to capitalist western Europe. 11 Stalin became enamoured with this idea and didnt forget it, even two decades later when he sought Finland for other reasons as well. At the beginning of World War II when Finland declared neutral status, Stalin

realized Finland would not become an ally of the Soviet Union providing them with a buffer zone from the Germans in the West, so he decided to take action. Stalin planned to

As cited in Baron, Nick. "Nature, Nationalism and Revolutionary Regionalism: Constructing Soviet Karelia, 1920-1923." Journal of Historical Geography. 33. 3 (2007): 565.
10

Austin, P.M. "Soviet Karelian: The language that failed." Slavic Review: Interdisciplinary Quarterly of Russian, Eurasian, & East European Studies 51.1 (1992): 16. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 21 May 2010.
11

As cited in Baron, Nick. "Nature, Nationalism and Revolutionary Regionalism: Constructing Soviet Karelia, 1920-1923." Journal of Historical Geography. 33. 3 (2007): 565.

Digre 7

[conquer] the whole of Finland in a few weeks. 12 Stalins unenlightened plan was largely based on Soviet intelligence reports of [Marshal C.G.E.] Mannerheims deeply pessimistic assessment of the capacity of the Finnish armed forces to resist for more than a fortnight. 13 By acting quickly against a country that looked like it would reportedly offer little resistance, Stalin wished to gain a buffer zone quickly before intensive battle ensued between the Soviet Union and Germany and to make a statement to the world about Soviet strength. The Soviet Union won what became known as the Winter War, but it resulted in little gained territory and left Finland feeling humiliated and vengeful. Finland launched an offensive (with German support 14) for revenge against the Soviet Union in 1941 starting The Continuation War. Instead of ceding the gained territory from the Winter War and ending the war to focus on World War II, the Soviet Union prolonged the war until 1944 and once again won the war, but gained very little. Unfortunately for Stalin before the wars, he failed to acknowledge Finlands strong nationalism and home-Yield advantage and the lack of support for communism that was present during the Finnish Civil War. This is largely due to Stalins Great Purge which greatly reduced communist-supporting Finns who immigrated to Russia after the Finnish Civil War. What Stalin also failed to realize the importance that the border region of Karelia held for Finland and how gallantly they would Yight to defend the source of their heritage. Stalins failed realizations cost the Soviet Union its last two attempts to control Finland completely. Failed Beginnings and Failed Endings

12 13

Mannerheim, Carl Gustaf Emil. Memoirs. London: Cassell, 1953.

Kirby, D. G. A Concise History of Finland. Cambridge concise histories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 208.
14

Ibid. 219.

Digre 8

Although the Soviet Union technically won the Winter War and the Continuation

War, their grand plans of domination were diminished by the meek people of Finland Yighting for their freedom after centuries of foreign rule. As Risto Heikki Ryti, Prime Minister of Finland, said nine days after the beginning of the Winter War, The conquest of Finland will not be in the nature of a parade march, but will demand at every step heavy sacriYices of the attacker. 15 Because of the Soviet Unions eventual victory in World War II, their failures in Finland were all but forgotten. However, for anyone who bothered to look, one of the worlds superpowers had ideological and political weaknesses that were evident in their discourse with Finland -- far before the close of the Cold War. The Soviet Unions inadequate measure of the strength of Finnish Nationalism, their false sense of support for communism, and their own failed policies regarding Finland certainly did not stand up to the intrepid Finns defending their newly formed identity and homeland.

15

Finland. The Development of Finnish-Soviet Relations During the Autumn of 1939 in the Light of Ofcial Documents. Helsinki: Oy. Suomen kirja, 1940. 80.

Digre 9

Works Cited Austin, P.M. "Soviet Karelian: The language that failed." Slavic Review: Interdisciplinary Quarterly of Russian, Eurasian, & East European Studies 51.1 (1992): 16. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 21 May 2010.

Baron, Nick. "Nature, Nationalism and Revolutionary Regionalism: Constructing Soviet Karelia, 1920-1923." Journal of Historical Geography. 33. 3 (2007): 565.

Finland. The Development of Finnish-Soviet Relations During the Autumn of 1939 in the Light of OfYicial Documents. Helsinki: Oy. Suomen kirja, 1940.

Finnish Parliament. Finnish Declaration of Independence. Helsinki, Finland. 6 December 1917. Kirby, D. G. A Concise History of Finland. Cambridge concise histories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Mannerheim, Carl Gustaf Emil. Memoirs. London: Cassell, 1953. The Soviet of Peoples Commissars. Recognition of Finlands Independence. Petrograd, USSR. 18 December 1917.