AT PENPOINT
The world is appreciative that Ukraine has resisted the initial Russian onslaught, but even this is not the last word of Russia. The initial bumbling of the Russian Army revives memories of how the Red Army initially stumbled in its 1939-1940 campaign against Finland, known as the Winter War.
The War came after the German invasion of Poland had occurred, and after the UK and France had declared war on it, thus setting off World War II. This was a period of ‘phoney war’, as it was called by the Anglophone press, because there was no actual fighting between the completion of the German conquest of Poland and its invasion of France.
There was much excitement in the West at the Finnish resistance, but the USSR was not to be deterred. Though its initial offensive was blocked, there was a change in Soviet command, a greater artillery preparation, and a renewal of the tank offensive. The Soviets began a new offensive in February using 600,000 troops, more than the 500,000 used on November, and 600,000 shells were fired into the Finnish line in 24 hours. After that, the attack began, with 25-26 divisions, up from the 10 used in the initial assault.
The invasion had in its background the pre-Soviet Czarist occupation of Finland, not as a part of the Russian Empire, but as the Grand Duchy of Finland, with the Czar as the Grand Duke. Finland separated from Russia, but the USSR began hounding it because it wanted to make St Petersburg (then Leningrad) defensible.. It is worth noting that Russian President Vladimir Putin was not only born in Leningrad, but educated there, and worked there in the KGB until 1991, when he resigned, and began a political career. He only went to Moscow in 1996, before becoming Prime Minister in 1999.
Though Finland made territorial concessions enhancing Soviet security in the March 1940 Treaty of Moscow, the real guarantee of Finnish security was what is called ‘Finlandization’. Finland was perhaps the only country which fitted the category, but it saved Finland from any further encroachments for four and a half decades. While Finland remained capitalist, it maintained a strict neutrality, as it still does, having refused to join NATO. However, after the collapse of the USSR, Finland did join the European Union in 1995.
The only other country that could be said to fit the ‘finlandization’ category would be Sweden, which was neutral during World War II. However, after the invasion of Ukraine, both Sweden and Finland are thinking of ending their neutrality and joining NATO. Therefore Russia is incentivized to make sure neither does so. As mentioned, Russia has fought Finland in the 20th century. It has not fought Sweden since 1809, but before than there were more than a dozen wars going back to the 15th century. In fact, the last Russo-Swedish War was not just the last time that Sweden went to war, but was also when it ceded the Grand Duchy of Finland to Russia.
There are past influences on Russia which help explain the past, but do not justify the invasion. When the USSR invaded Finland, it had set up a rival government in exile, headed by a Finnish communist living in Moscow. So far, there has been no such puppet Ukrainian government, even though there are quite a few Ukrainians still in Russia.
While there has been attention paid to Ukraine, the fate of the three Baltic republics of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia is also up for grabs. All three joined both NATO and the EU in 2004. They had first become independent after the 1917 Revolution, and Russia used the freedom it had got from the 1938 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact for occupying these three countries. The regained their independence after the USSR collapsed, and indeed it was Lithuania’s declaration of independence which signaled the break-up of the USSR.
Again, the Baltic Republics were considered important for the defence of Leningrad. In World War II, the three were first occupied by Russia, then by Germany when it attacked the USSR in 1942, and later re-taken by the USSR. It might be remembered that the famous Kharkov offensive, one of the largest tank battles of World War II, took place near the Ukrainian city, now Kharkiv. It might be remembered that some of the heaviest Soviet-German fighting took place on Ukrainian soil.
It might also be remembered that when Poland was split up in the 18th century, Austro-Hungary got a large portion of Ukraine, while Russia got the rest. However, when Poland was recreated after World War I, it got those Ukrainian territories. When Germany conquered Poland, it left the USSR to occupy the eastern, Ukrainian, portion, which it retained after World War II. This is perhaps the reason that the Western part of Ukraine is not only Catholic, but also more supportive of joining NATO than the East.
It is interesting that what the USSR demanded from Finland in 1940 was less than what it actually took from Finland. One of the war aims of Russia is the defence of the Donetsk and Luhansk republics, which now claim a larger territory than before. The Russian absorption of Crimea is instructive. First a republic was set up, and then Russian forces moved to support it, and then the republic acceded to Russia. The expanded republics will probably accede to Russia.
Is Putin aiming for the Iron Curtain to be reimposed or merely the borders of the USSR? If the former is the case, then all those countries which got out of the Iron Curtain after the collapse of the USSR, had better watch out. That includes a lot of NATO members. Such countries as Poland, Hungary and Rumania would be liable to have Russian tutelage at least, if not necessarily absorption.
Apart from Ukraine, Putin may look at the Caucasian republics, such as Georgia and Armenia, and then there are the Central Asian Republics. The example of Belarus might be a good one, for that tiny country is closely linked to Russia. However, it is technically independent.
When the British in India dealt with the native states, they left to them the running of the country to the advantage of the dynasty, even leaving many armies of their own. However, they insisted on their letting the Paramount Power (Britain) handle foreign relations and defence.
Even monarchies like Nepal and Afghanistan, who were theoretically free in that respect, had to stay on the right side of Britain. Afghanistan did not allow itself to be occupied by the Raj, but its monarchs retained power by virtue of maintaining friendly relations with the Raj; and their attempt to play off Russia against the UK failed miserably. Nepal went so far as to allow the Raj to recruit among its citizens for its own Army.
Is Russia trying to develop some such system? Its imperial outreach had led to imperial overstretch, and it appears that Russia, propped up by its oil and gas exports, has regained enough confidence to aspire for world-power status once again. On its side is now China. However, that support is a double-edged sword, for China itself aspires to Great-Power status. It is giving Russia support on Ukraine, but it has territorial disputes of its own. Will Russia break with China later?
There are past influences on Russia which help explain the past, but do not justify the invasion. When the USSR invaded Finland, it had set up a rival government in exile, headed by a Finnish communist living in Moscow. So far, there has been no such puppet Ukrainian government, even though there are quite a few Ukrainians still in Russia.
