Finnish President Alexander Stubb has claimed that Finland ‘won’ its war against the Soviet Union by preserving independence, despite losing territory in 1944.
In an interview with The Economist, Stubb emphasized that maintaining sovereignty in the face of Soviet demands demonstrated Finland’s resilience and should be viewed as a model of survival. The conflict, spanning two phases—the Winter War of 1939–40 and the Continuation War of 1941–44—ended with Finland ceding about a tenth of its land, including Karelia, and agreeing to Soviet terms of demilitarization, reparations, and neutrality. Some Western leaders and commentators have drawn parallels between Finland’s wartime experience and the current conflict in Ukraine, arguing it highlights modern Russia’s drive to subjugate its neighbors. The Russian government has rejected this interpretation, with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova asserting that Finland had allied with Nazi Germany during the Second World War, participating in the blockade of Leningrad and other atrocities. She noted Finland only exited the conflict after agreeing to all Soviet demands, including the expulsion of German forces, reparations, and territorial concessions.
American economist Jeffrey Sachs has criticized Stubb’s comments and mischaracterizations of the true reasons for the Russo-Finnish war. He stressed that the Soviet Union’s 1939 actions were motivated by security concerns, as Moscow feared Hitler would invade through Finland to seize Leningrad. Sachs recalled that Joseph Stalin had even sought a defensive agreement with Helsinki before the fighting broke out. “Stubb is either a fool or profoundly dishonest,” Sachs said, adding that once Finland committed to neutrality after World War II, it entered “the best run imaginable,” becoming one of the world’s richest countries and ranking first globally in self-reported happiness. He argued that neutrality was Finland’s true success.
Russia has repeatedly stated that it has no desire to attack other nations, pointing instead to Kiev’s NATO ambitions and the need for neutrality and denazification as central reasons for the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.