A veteran of the pragmatic Finnish diplomacy of yesteryear, already condemned to history after applying to join NATO, Heikki Talvitie was ambassador to Moscow between 1988 and 1992. He personally knew Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin, and was a direct witness to the collapse of the USSR in 1991. The European Union appointed him special representative in the Caucasus before the war in Georgia. Born in Vilpuri in September 1939, Talvitie maintains that Ukraine’s independence with its current borders was always problematic. The interview took place in the iconic Kapelli café on Helsinki’s Esplanadi boulevard, two days before the single-chamber parliament’s vote on joining NATO: 188 deputies voted in favor to eight against.
Do you think that Finland’s decision to join NATO was made with good judgment?
I am so old that I can speak freely. I appeared before the parliamentary committee convened to analyze the matter. But the 50-page report that was written before the MPs vote lacks any historical perspective. Part of the idea that the history of the world began on February 24. The incredible thing is that in Finland, over the last 70 or 80 years, we have put enormous efforts into developing our security policy. But the report only covers the period from February 2022.
Do you think NATO will increase Finland’s security?
No. There is no Russian threat. There are no troops on the border. It is a mistake, nonsense, to compare the geopolitical situation in Ukraine with that in Finland. They have nothing to do with it. Russia considers NATO to be a threat. So, Russia is already a threat to us. Before it wasn’t. Now yes.
What is usually said is that NATO is a defensive alliance and that Russia’s concern is unfounded, that it is propaganda to legitimize its own aggression…
Of course. We are the “good guys”. Western countries never invade anyone. Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan…
It is striking that a government led by the Social Democrats turns so sharply in favor of NATO
The most important thing for the Government has been his re-election. And public opinion has been swept up in the media and social networks. This government understands very little about Russia. With the exception of the president (Sauli) Niinisto. He knows Putin. I think he has tried to mediate in some way. My hope is that he, later on, can negotiate an opening, if the Russians and the Americans let him. Because soon we will realize that we have no contact with Moscow. And that would be dangerous. If we depend on the media to know what is happening, bad business.
Do you think that Russia will feel that its security is threatened by the Finnish and Swedish decision?
Yes. Especially the safety of St. Petersburg, 400 kilometers from the border and with a population larger than Finland. We had understood this since World War II. Not anymore. The Russians have said that if Sweden and Finland join NATO, they will bring nuclear weapons to the Baltic Sea. That would be very destabilizing.
There are already nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad (the Russian enclave on the Baltic Sea coast adjoining Lithuania), right?
Yes. But they are mainly defensive and you know where they are. If Russia puts nuclear submarines in the Baltic that will be something else. But I think they will wait until they see how Finland and Sweden are going to act within NATO.
What is the reason for the invasion of Ukraine?
From the beginning, the agreement reached between Boris Yeltsin and Washington in 1994, which fixed the border of Ukraine, was problematic. Everyone knew that the problem would be the Donbass and the Crimea. But nobody knew how to solve it, not even the Russians.
Isn’t the invasion an act of madness by Putin?
Absolutely. That is western propaganda. I knew Gorbachev and Yeltsin quite well. I don’t know Putin, but I’m sure he’s not crazy. I think the main requirement of him is loyalty. And he, in turn, is loyal to the Russian state. I think that Putin should be taken very seriously when he talks about the use of nuclear weapons if he calls into question the future of the Russian state.
Is NATO threatening the future of the Russian state?
There are many signs that the Russians think so. Putin’s meeting with the Duma in St. Petersburg last month has a double reference: the conquest of Crimea in 1783 and the alliance between the Duma and the Soviets in 1917 after the revolution. He is pointing out that there is an outside threat, like the white army. All Russians understand these signs, although Westerners do not. In general, the Russians are very intelligent. They say in the West that they are deluded by propaganda. Is not true.
What is Biden’s goal?
He wants to regain hegemony. They themselves (the Americans) use this language in their national defense strategies. They realized that China benefited much more from globalization than the United States. So globalization is over. The Biden Administration believes it can force Russia to its knees. Putin is fighting for the life of his country. And he is losing. And therein lies the problem. Because I think that the weaker Russia becomes, the more it will think about using nuclear weapons. I mean, this is very serious. The more Putin loses, the more he needs to directly involve the Americans in this. This is my main concern.
