Finland’s withdrawal from the 1947 Treaty of Paris means a return to a state of war with Russia (the successor of the Soviet Union) on 19 September 1944
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, responding to an April 15, 2022 media question, spoke about Sweden’s and Finland’s national security and the implications for them of joining NATO:
“NATO membership is not capable of strengthening their national security. They would automatically be on NATO’s ‘front line’. Moreover, membership of NATO implies actually giving up part of their sovereignty in defence decision-making and in foreign policy.
Maria Zakharova noted that in recent years a “deliberate campaign of external forces to drag” Sweden and Finland into the North Atlantic bloc has been carried out. In addition, as the Russian foreign ministry official put it, the Swedish and Finnish authorities “must also understand the consequences of such a step for our bilateral relations and the European security architecture in general, which is currently in crisis.”
On 22 April 2022, the Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat published its analysis on the possible outcome of the NATO membership vote in the Finnish parliament. The prognosis for us is disappointing: only 12 deputies out of 200 will be against it.
Let’s talk about specific timelines. The Finnish parliament could decide on an application for membership of the alliance by the end of May 2022. The Swedish government plans to submit an application to the bloc’s summit in Madrid in June 2022. Thus, both Finland and Sweden could become members of NATO as early as summer 2022.
The implications for Russia of these countries’ membership in the alliance are extremely negative. The NATO border will be just 150 kilometres from our northern capital of St. Petersburg. The length of the Russian-NATO border will more than double.
Russia is, of course, primarily concerned about Finland. Our common border with Finland is 1,324 kilometres long, of which the land border with rivers and lakes covers 1,270 kilometres.
The new NATO members Sweden and Finland will be seen by Russia as military targets, including targets for Russian nuclear weapons. Obviously, the number of enemy manpower and equipment near Russia’s borders will increase. Consequently, our country will have to respond by deploying conventional forces as well as by deploying non-strategic nuclear deterrents.
Non-strategic nuclear deterrence is tactical (non-strategic) nuclear weapons (TNWs). TNWs are the main factor of regional deterrence for Russia, because NATO has a clear superiority of the Russian Armed Forces in conventional armed forces.
If we talk about TNW delivery vehicles, the Iskander operational-tactical missile system should be mentioned in the first place. It has a range of up to 500 km. From Russian territory it can easily reach both Helsinki, the capital of Finland, and Stockholm, the Swedish capital.
The Iskander missile launcher is now actively used in a special military operation in Ukraine and has confirmed its unique tactical and technical characteristics. The Iskander-M modification carries two 9M723 quasi-ballistic missiles. The Iskander-K modification carries two 9M728 / R-500 cruise missiles.
It is known from open sources that the 9M723 missile can be either a conventional or a special version, i.e., with a nuclear warhead with a yield of 50 kilotons in TNT equivalent. It is necessary to note, that the American atomic bomb “Little Boy” with capacity of 20 kilotons was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945.
Russia can respond to the expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance from 30 to 32 members at the expense of Sweden and Finland not only by strengthening its military grouping in this area.
This also affects the aims of the special military operation in Ukraine. The logic of confrontation with NATO dictates the need to establish control over the entire Ukrainian territory. Add to this the deepening of defence cooperation with Belarus. In this way Russia can eventually regain control over almost the entire western border of the USSR.
Furthermore, after the Russian Armed Forces cross the border of Transnistria via Odessa region, Moscow may recognize the independence of the Transnistrian Moldovan Republic. The issue of the Republic of Moldova also remains open. The president of this country, Maia Sandu, applied for membership of the European Union on March 3, 2022. The membership of Moldova in the EU does not meet the geopolitical interests of Russia because then Moldova will be fixed in a zone of the western influence and after a while becomes a member of NATO as well.
Thus, the Russian Federation has a response to Sweden’s and Finland’s accession to the North Atlantic Alliance. In addition, we should not forget the demands that our country made to the USA and NATO in mid-December 2021 in security guarantees – the military infrastructure of the alliance must roll back to the borders as of 1997. After the successful end of the special military operation in Ukraine, the issue will be raised again, but from Russia’s new geopolitical position.
As for Finland, its intention to join NATO is legally null and void; Helsinki has no rights to do so. The Paris Peace Treaty with Finland of February 10, 1947 is still in force. Let me remind you, Finland was the closest ally of Nazi Germany during the Second World War, it fought against the Soviet Union, the Finnish armed forces took part in the blockade of Leningrad and, together with the Finnish civilian occupation authorities, committed war crimes on Soviet territory.
The Paris Peace Treaty of 1947 imposed a series of restrictions on Finland. To quote an extract from Article 13 of the Treaty: “The maintenance of land, naval and air armaments and fortifications shall be strictly limited so as to be compatible with the internal and local defence of the frontiers. This means not only that Finland is not entitled to become a member of NATO, but also that it is not entitled to cooperate with NATO outside its own borders.
Article 22 of the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty states that it can only be amended by agreement between the UN Security Council and Finland. And Russia, as a permanent member of the UNSC, will never agree to this. I believe China will take the same position.
We should like to draw attention to the fact that attempts by Helsinki to unilaterally alter the Paris Peace Treaty of 1947 or abrogate it are not only legally null and void, they also plunge the country into a legal situation that precedes the conclusion of this peace treaty.
The legal situation preceding the conclusion of the Paris Peace Treaty of 1947 means the return of Finland to 19 September 1944, the date of the Armistice Agreement between the U.S.S.R. and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on the one part and Finland on the other.
Legally, this also means the return of Finland to a state of war with Russia (the successor state to the USSR) as well as Britain. For it was for the purpose of terminating the state of war that the Treaty of Paris with Finland of February 10, 1947, was concluded.
It seems reasonable to bring this legal situation through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation not only to Finland, but also to all NATO countries. Not all will be happy to welcome a new member at war with Russia, the state with the most powerful nuclear arsenal on the planet. The Finnish public, which should also be informed through channels independent of the Finnish state, will also be very “happy” about the situation.
Finland would thus make a fatal mistake by joining NATO. Russia should not tolerate this. Finland’s going beyond the legal framework of the Paris Peace Treaty of 1947 would be a violation of international law, and would quite reasonably raise the question of forcibly returning it to the legal framework.
Alexander Vladimirov, RUSSTRAT
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel