A question from Helsinki: where are the Kuriles and where are the Karelians?
Henry Hautamyakki, a representative of the nationalist party True Finns, said the other day:
Such a provocative statement could be completely ignored. You never know what the politicians say from the curb! But after all, the party in which Hautamyakki is listed, after the parliamentary elections of 2015, became the second in terms of the number of seats (17) in the Suomi parliament.
“True Finn” by Henry Hautamäki. Personal photos from social networks
Especially since the same question and at the same time put forward the nationalist organization ProCarelia existing since the middle of 1940, including, among others, immigrants and their descendants from the former Finnish regions. We are talking about, we recall, the subarctic Pechenga (Murmansk region), the Vyborg-North-Ladoga region of the Leningrad region, a number of regions of western Karelia, and some small islands at the junction of the postwar borders of the USSR with Finland. It is characteristic that such synchronous injections concerning territorial claims took place simultaneously with a new round of intergovernmental discussions in Moscow and Tokyo on the status of the South Kuriles.
Probably, it is not bad at all that there was no official reaction from Moscow to these statements. And the Finnish Foreign Ministry promptly stated that Suomi
The situation seems to be settled? But how to say! If only because in the museums of many cities in Finland, including Helsinki, maps of Mannerheim's Suomi with the designated territories have been posted since the late 1940s. And in 2004, one of the authors of this material happened to visit the museum of the city of Lahti, adjacent to Russia, better known as the center of winter sports. And there they explained to him very clearly that the Finns remember and will remember their historical borders, regardless of the current borders of Suomi. At the same time, many Finnish media periodically note: if Moscow actually agreed to discuss with Japan the status of the Southern Kuriles, then why should Finland forget about its "primordial" territories? It is also noted that since Moscow is not interested in Finland's participation in NATO, discussions on territorial issues with Moscow are quite possible.
However, about the "primordial" - a question, to put it mildly, controversial. It is not by chance that the most vivid answers to the discussion that G. Hautamyakki recently launched in social networks on the border issue were the proposals to return to the 1917 borders of the year. Recall that soon after the failure that befell Leninist comrades in the attempt to Bolshevik Finland (at the turn of 1917-18), the first Soviet-Finnish war broke out. In order to preempt Suomi from the White Guards, as well as to prevent the implementation of the plans of the new intervention of the Entente in northwest Russia, the Tartu Soviet-Finnish peace treaty (1920) was urgently signed. According to him, the designated Russian territories were transferred to Finland.
The same conditions were repeated in the Moscow bilateral agreement "On the adoption of joint measures to ensure the inviolability of the border between the USSR and Finland" (1922), which was signed at the end of the second Soviet-Finnish war, which in 1921 provoked the invasion of Suomi troops the purpose of the occupation of all of Karelia. It is possible, by the way, that in the rebellious Kronstadt they could then count on support from Finland, but the real events were too different in time. The uprising happened in March, but by this time the first Finnish offensive was already exhausted, and the Finns had not yet begun preparing for the second.
The Soviet-Finnish frontier remained relatively stable for the entire 17 years. It is obvious that on the eve and even more so during the Second World War, Moscow could not arrange such a vulnerable border with Finland. As you know, it took place in close proximity to Leningrad and very close to Murmansk and the White Sea-Baltic Canal. The rest is also well known: by June 1941, all the territories transferred to Suomi at the beginning of 1920 were returned to the USSR.
But throughout almost the entire war of Germany against the USSR, specifically from July 1941 until July 1944, Finland, being an ally of the Nazis, first occupied and soon included not only the same territories, but also almost all of Karelia together with Petrozavodsk and up to 85% of the Ladoga basin.
Russian Petrozavodsk under the Finnish flag. 1942 Photo of the Year
However, by August 1944, the Soviet troops liberated all of these regions from the Finnish occupation, and in September 1944 was negotiated a truce of the USSR and its allies with Finland, securing the Soviet affiliation of the same territories. The same was subsequently confirmed by the Paris Peace Treaty with Finland 1947 of the year. It is impossible not to recall the characteristic detail: the United States did not declare war on Finland, primarily because it considered the only legitimate Soviet-Finnish border on 26 November 1939. And this is the eve of the war between the USSR and Finland (1939-40). ). We also note that the official refusal of the United States from such a position was not and is not up to our time. Therefore, it is possible that it is from this fact that revanchist groups and aspirations "flow" in Suomi.
In addition, the United States had plans to create its own after the war. aviation and naval bases on the Finnish Åland Islands, located in the very center of the Baltic Basin, and therefore their strategic location is difficult to overestimate. But those US plans foiled two circumstances at once. Firstly, the post-war neutralization of Finland, and secondly, the signing of the Soviet-Finnish agreement on mutual assistance (1948), designed first for 10 years, but extended in 1955, 1970 and 1983. However, who knows ... Since the second half of the 1990s, Suomi has increasingly been participating in NATO maneuvers in northwestern Europe. Although the Aland Islands are demilitarized under the Paris Treaty of 1947, further rapprochement between Suomi and NATO may well remilitarize (at least de facto) this strategic archipelago. And it’s not at all a benefit to Russia.
By the way, during the period of the abolition of the Karelian-Finnish SSR and its decline in status as an autonomous republic within the RSFSR (July 1956), Väine Tanner (1881-1966), one of the founders of the Finnish Republic, noted that "in Moscow, apparently, they expect and fear “profinland” sentiment in a neighboring republic with an ethnically and geographically close name to Finland. "
Väin Tanner
Recall in this regard that the reason expressed by V. Tanner became the main one in lowering the status and renaming not only the Karelian-Finnish SSR (created in March 1940), but also the Buryat-Mongol Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic geographically, ethnically and confessionally close to Mongolia , in the Buryat Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in July 1958.
One way or another, the periodic propaganda campaigns in Finland about the ex-Finnish territories are directly related primarily to the precedent of the Southern Kuriles, which was somehow provoked by Russian diplomacy itself, we recognize, not all and not always consistently. But its, and quite significant, role continues to play and the fact that the United States over the past eighty years since then has by no means "annulled" the Soviet-Finnish border that existed as of 26 in November 1939 of the year ...
"Finland should demand that Russia return the territories received by the Soviet Union after victory in World War II. To return to the legitimate borders of 1939 of the year."
Such a provocative statement could be completely ignored. You never know what the politicians say from the curb! But after all, the party in which Hautamyakki is listed, after the parliamentary elections of 2015, became the second in terms of the number of seats (17) in the Suomi parliament.
“True Finn” by Henry Hautamäki. Personal photos from social networks
Especially since the same question and at the same time put forward the nationalist organization ProCarelia existing since the middle of 1940, including, among others, immigrants and their descendants from the former Finnish regions. We are talking about, we recall, the subarctic Pechenga (Murmansk region), the Vyborg-North-Ladoga region of the Leningrad region, a number of regions of western Karelia, and some small islands at the junction of the postwar borders of the USSR with Finland. It is characteristic that such synchronous injections concerning territorial claims took place simultaneously with a new round of intergovernmental discussions in Moscow and Tokyo on the status of the South Kuriles.
Probably, it is not bad at all that there was no official reaction from Moscow to these statements. And the Finnish Foreign Ministry promptly stated that Suomi
"there are no territorial claims to any country in the world, including Russia. This is a fact enshrined in the fundamental bilateral agreement 1992 of the year on the basis of relations between both countries. In this connection, Finland is not going to demand from Russia the territories transferred by the USSR on the Paris Peace contract 1947 of the year. "
The situation seems to be settled? But how to say! If only because in the museums of many cities in Finland, including Helsinki, maps of Mannerheim's Suomi with the designated territories have been posted since the late 1940s. And in 2004, one of the authors of this material happened to visit the museum of the city of Lahti, adjacent to Russia, better known as the center of winter sports. And there they explained to him very clearly that the Finns remember and will remember their historical borders, regardless of the current borders of Suomi. At the same time, many Finnish media periodically note: if Moscow actually agreed to discuss with Japan the status of the Southern Kuriles, then why should Finland forget about its "primordial" territories? It is also noted that since Moscow is not interested in Finland's participation in NATO, discussions on territorial issues with Moscow are quite possible.
However, about the "primordial" - a question, to put it mildly, controversial. It is not by chance that the most vivid answers to the discussion that G. Hautamyakki recently launched in social networks on the border issue were the proposals to return to the 1917 borders of the year. Recall that soon after the failure that befell Leninist comrades in the attempt to Bolshevik Finland (at the turn of 1917-18), the first Soviet-Finnish war broke out. In order to preempt Suomi from the White Guards, as well as to prevent the implementation of the plans of the new intervention of the Entente in northwest Russia, the Tartu Soviet-Finnish peace treaty (1920) was urgently signed. According to him, the designated Russian territories were transferred to Finland.
The same conditions were repeated in the Moscow bilateral agreement "On the adoption of joint measures to ensure the inviolability of the border between the USSR and Finland" (1922), which was signed at the end of the second Soviet-Finnish war, which in 1921 provoked the invasion of Suomi troops the purpose of the occupation of all of Karelia. It is possible, by the way, that in the rebellious Kronstadt they could then count on support from Finland, but the real events were too different in time. The uprising happened in March, but by this time the first Finnish offensive was already exhausted, and the Finns had not yet begun preparing for the second.
The Soviet-Finnish frontier remained relatively stable for the entire 17 years. It is obvious that on the eve and even more so during the Second World War, Moscow could not arrange such a vulnerable border with Finland. As you know, it took place in close proximity to Leningrad and very close to Murmansk and the White Sea-Baltic Canal. The rest is also well known: by June 1941, all the territories transferred to Suomi at the beginning of 1920 were returned to the USSR.
But throughout almost the entire war of Germany against the USSR, specifically from July 1941 until July 1944, Finland, being an ally of the Nazis, first occupied and soon included not only the same territories, but also almost all of Karelia together with Petrozavodsk and up to 85% of the Ladoga basin.
Russian Petrozavodsk under the Finnish flag. 1942 Photo of the Year
However, by August 1944, the Soviet troops liberated all of these regions from the Finnish occupation, and in September 1944 was negotiated a truce of the USSR and its allies with Finland, securing the Soviet affiliation of the same territories. The same was subsequently confirmed by the Paris Peace Treaty with Finland 1947 of the year. It is impossible not to recall the characteristic detail: the United States did not declare war on Finland, primarily because it considered the only legitimate Soviet-Finnish border on 26 November 1939. And this is the eve of the war between the USSR and Finland (1939-40). ). We also note that the official refusal of the United States from such a position was not and is not up to our time. Therefore, it is possible that it is from this fact that revanchist groups and aspirations "flow" in Suomi.
In addition, the United States had plans to create its own after the war. aviation and naval bases on the Finnish Åland Islands, located in the very center of the Baltic Basin, and therefore their strategic location is difficult to overestimate. But those US plans foiled two circumstances at once. Firstly, the post-war neutralization of Finland, and secondly, the signing of the Soviet-Finnish agreement on mutual assistance (1948), designed first for 10 years, but extended in 1955, 1970 and 1983. However, who knows ... Since the second half of the 1990s, Suomi has increasingly been participating in NATO maneuvers in northwestern Europe. Although the Aland Islands are demilitarized under the Paris Treaty of 1947, further rapprochement between Suomi and NATO may well remilitarize (at least de facto) this strategic archipelago. And it’s not at all a benefit to Russia.
By the way, during the period of the abolition of the Karelian-Finnish SSR and its decline in status as an autonomous republic within the RSFSR (July 1956), Väine Tanner (1881-1966), one of the founders of the Finnish Republic, noted that "in Moscow, apparently, they expect and fear “profinland” sentiment in a neighboring republic with an ethnically and geographically close name to Finland. "
Väin Tanner
Recall in this regard that the reason expressed by V. Tanner became the main one in lowering the status and renaming not only the Karelian-Finnish SSR (created in March 1940), but also the Buryat-Mongol Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic geographically, ethnically and confessionally close to Mongolia , in the Buryat Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in July 1958.
One way or another, the periodic propaganda campaigns in Finland about the ex-Finnish territories are directly related primarily to the precedent of the Southern Kuriles, which was somehow provoked by Russian diplomacy itself, we recognize, not all and not always consistently. But its, and quite significant, role continues to play and the fact that the United States over the past eighty years since then has by no means "annulled" the Soviet-Finnish border that existed as of 26 in November 1939 of the year ...
Information