Ex-minister harsh criticism of Sauli Niinistö’s presidency – “Anti-NATO” – 2024-03-01 15:30:51

During the 12-year presidency of the President of the Republic, Sauli Niinistö, Finland pursued an active stability policy, which Niinistö refined into four pillars. One of them was relations with Russia, the other was Western cooperation. The third pillar was a strong own defense, and the fourth pillar international institutions.

Jussi Niinistö (ps, sin), who served as defense minister with President Niinistö between 2015 and 2019, considers the president’s active stability policy “absolutely ridiculous”.

– Exactly two years ago, the president’s security policy was taking Finland into the gray zone between East and West.

– It was a kind of nonsense and no real politics, says Jussi Niinistö, who currently works as the mayor of Kannu.

According to the ex-defense minister, he personally has no grudge against the president, but as a researcher of history, he wants to look critically through President Niinistö.

“With quite a bit of luck”

Jussi Niinistö says that in Finland’s security policy line, under the leadership of President Niinistö, risks were taken that were “quite lucky”.

The ex-defense minister considers the president’s “based quality to be a mistake that he trusted Russian President Vladimir Putin, like Tarja Halonen in his time”.

– If Kiev had fallen, Finland would have been in a dangerous place.

Jussi Niinistö considers it Finland’s luck that Finland had the JEF agreement concluded in 2017 and through it the security guarantees given by the British.

JEF (Joint Expeditionary Force) means the close military cooperation of ten countries under the leadership of Britain.

According to Jussi Niinistö, joining the JEF cooperation was not the president’s merit.

– President Niinistö also opposed that agreement, but despite that he was taken to it. It was part of saving Finland, otherwise it could have gone badly.

The ex-defense minister says that the president, along with the JEF agreement, opposed “all Western cooperation” and was also suspicious of US intentions.

– He also had his own doubts about defense cooperation with Sweden, says Jussi Niinistö.

An idea from Russia

According to Jussi Niinistö, the president had a “naive view” that with a trusting relationship with Putin and Russia, Finland would maintain its position between East and West as a kind of mediator.

– Sauli Niinistö entered politics when the Soviet Union still existed: he has lived and breathed the era of Finnishization.

According to the ex-defense minister, both Halonen and Niinistö refused to see Russia’s ultimate imperialist idea.

– As a historian, it was always incomprehensible to me this blue-eyedness and gullibility of Finnish decision-makers in relation to Russia.

Jussi Niinistö wants to challenge the general perception of his reputation about the exact role of President Niinistö.

– Now it seems that under his leadership and thanks to him, Finland has been taken to the camp of the West, although the truth is not at all that clear.

According to the ex-defense minister, the president’s foreign and security policy has not been long-term or planned.

– Applying for NATO membership was a reaction to the situation that arose.

– Sauli Niinistö was not only critical of NATO, but in many of his positions he was anti-NATO, says Jussi Niinistö.

“Being a driftwood should not be an aspirational state”

However, President Niinistö has considered it important to maintain Finland’s NATO option. In addition, he appealed to the fact that alliances are formed during a crisis anyway.

– As a researcher of history, I agree with the president that alliances are formed during a crisis when the need arises, but I do not think it is consistent and far-sighted action of the president of the republic that we were like a driftwood when we should have been a raft.

– Being a driftwood should not be a state to be aspired to. Either we are in the camp of the West or we are not.

– If you try to sit on two chairs, you fall between them. This is what happened to us two years ago, when Russia attacked Ukraine, says the ex-defense minister.

Jussi Niinistö considers the president’s foreign policy merit to be that after Russia attacked Ukraine, he listened to the people and turned his NATO sled.

– The formation took place in the last tinga. The calls to Erkki Tuomioja (sd) ended and Finland chose the western camp, says Jussi Niinistö.

A more understandable line

Pekka Haavisto (green), who served as foreign minister with President Niinistö in the years 2019–2023, considers the president’s greatest foreign policy merit to be that Niinistö was able to build strong citizens’ trust, which was emphasized when Russia started a war of aggression and when applying for NATO membership.

– Wide trust in the president certainly paved Finland’s way to Western integration and NATO membership, Haavisto estimates.

The ex-foreign minister emphasizes as one important milestone the armed support of Ukraine, in which the president played an important role.

– We sat on fire with our own pants in the spring of 2022, together with Sweden, when we started to give military support to Ukraine, even though we were not members of NATO and under collective protection.

– The president played an important role in this, as well as in giving up NATO membership until the end.

– After all, this is a great arch and will remain as a monument of his work, says Haavisto.

He does not sign Jussi Niinistö’s criticism of Niinistö’s anti-NATO.

Haavisto reminds that the president is tied to the government in foreign policy decision-making, and the government relies on the position of the parliament.

– The president has followed a line that has been supported by the majority of citizens.

Putin woke up

Even before Russia’s February attack in December 2021, President Niinistö realized that Russia was threatening to take Finland into its favor by denying NATO’s eastern expansion. If implemented, Putin’s demand would have scrapped the NATO option cherished by Niinistö.

According to Haavisto, it is difficult to speculate whether Finland would have joined NATO without the Russian attack, because public opinion only became pro-NATO after the attack.

– Surely things would have progressed in the same direction even without the attack, but in a slower order, Haavisto estimates.

According to the ex-foreign minister, Finland’s accession to NATO was not a given.

– I was surprised in the spring of 2022 by the fact that many NATO countries were quite surprised by the solutions of Finland and Sweden.

According to Haavisto, the United States played a decisive role in the preliminary inquiries about membership.

– Very quickly in the spring of 2022, the doors of the White House opened to Niinistö. It didn’t give the impression that he had any inhibitions about the United States, Haavisto estimates.

Panttasi Nato-kantaa

The president did not state his own NATO position until May 12, 2022.

Some have criticized Niinistö’s late exit. It is suspected that the president wanted to give the responsibility for decision-making to the parliament and the parties in order to protect his own background.

– I don’t think that it was cowardice on Niinistö’s part and protecting the background, Haavisto says.

According to him, the first step was to find out NATO’s attitude towards new members, as well as the feelings of citizens and political parties.

– I have seen that situation up close. Many thought it went well because the situation did not lead to provocations from Russia.

– We then went very deep into risk scenarios, i.e. what could happen in the worst case, when we still did not have the security of NATO membership, Haavisto says.

Jussi Niinistö has claimed that Tuomioja would have acted as the backstabbing of the president’s foreign policy line.

Haavisto says that he cannot assess how Tuomioja has influenced Niinistö’s thinking.

– Of course, through part of Niinistö, Tuomioja has been foreign minister and influenced the government’s positions through that, says Haavisto.

The role of the “Putin whisperer”.

Haavisto reminds us that when he became president, “Niinistö did not have very deep knowledge or contact with Russia”.

– He built it very systematically during his presidency, because Finland had to have knowledge and know-how about Russia.

Did Niinistö trust President Vladimir Putin for too long?

– Hindsight is a sport I don’t like to follow. Niinistö acted in relation to Russia in the same way as key state leaders act in the EU.

According to Haavisto, based on his Russian connections, Niinistö shared a lot of information and his assessments of the situation with the leaders of other countries.

Despite his good relations with Putin, Niinistö was unable to prevent Russia’s attack, and peace was not even achieved between Ukraine and Russia with Niinistö’s help in March 2022.

– I don’t think that communication is ever pointless, but it is true that in another alternative scenario, Niinistö’s efforts could have been even more important if some path to peace had opened up from the negotiations in Istanbul in the spring of 2022, Haavisto says.

The ex-foreign minister reminds that Niinistö, through his connections with Putin, was able to promote the fact that Alexei Navalny, who was poisoned by Russia, was able to get treatment in Germany.

– One person’s life has been affected by his relationships. There may be other cases that are not known to everyone, says Haavisto.

The ex-foreign minister reminds that when evaluating Niinistö’s foreign policy, it is also important to highlight the president’s active contact with European decision-makers, such as Angela Merkel, Olaf Scholz and Emmanuel Macroninalthough it is often thought that European affairs belong to the government.

– Of course, there are sometimes clashes with the prime minister, because the prime minister meets the same leaders at EU meetings, says Haavisto.

The future of Niinistö

During President Niinistö’s last trip to the province, another side of the normally restrained president was revealed when he was moved to tears at the Salo square.

– I think that he has such a deep human side, which is not necessarily visible in everyday life and in his presidency, but it came out in Salo, Haavisto says.

The ex-foreign minister believes that Niinistö will be in high demand after the end of his presidential duties.

– The president is the best-informed person in Finland, and those connections and information will not disappear immediately.

According to Haavisto, Niinistö’s future tasks depend on what kind of offers he is ready to accept. According to Haavisto, jobs can be found in, for example, the UN or the EU.

– There are not too many statesmen in Europe who have come through difficult situations and handled their work with honor, and who have impressive contact networks.

– He certainly has a demand, Haavisto concludes.