Since Finland closed four checkpoints on its eastern border last week in response to a suspected 'hybrid operation' by Russia, speculation has been rife about what Moscow is trying to achieve.
Despite denials by the Kremlin of any involvement in the uptick in asylum seekers arriving at Finland's eastern border, many suspect it is a response to Finland's continued support for Ukraine, the decision to join Nato, and the negotiating of a Defence Cooperation Agreement with the US.
Yle asked two foreign policy specialists — Hanna Smith of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and Jukka Savolainen of the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats (Hybrid CoE) — for their views.
What is Russia aiming for on the eastern border?
HS: There are two things in the bigger picture. Russia is at war with Ukraine — and from Russia's point of view against the West more broadly — and Finland has joined Nato. The background is that Russia has warned of consequences to Finland's alliance membership, and the situation on the eastern border is one of those consequences.
JS: Russia can test Finland and see how this chosen method [the hybrid operation] works. At the same time, it also poses a potential threat. It will show Russia how the 'immigration weapon' could be used if needed.
What are the benefits for Russia?
HS: Russia wants to create an image of a hostile West that is of benefit to the Russian leadership. Finland has not fit this image in the past, but now they are trying to build it. Relations between Finland and Russia are at a turning point. The Russians have realised that they do not know Finland after all. They want to see who Finland cooperates with and at the same time try to stir up discord within Finnish society. Building a new relationship will be a long-term process.
JS: Russia can create a fortress mindset due to a perceived 'threat' from the West. Finland's eastern border is becoming a useful confrontational narrative for the Kremlin. When the same narrative is repeated, a kind of protection mechanism kicks in and even sceptics will start to believe it.
How can people in Finland prepare for these attempts at hybrid influencing?
HS: We can try to understand it. Some see the situation as a security issue, others as a refugee issue. The danger is that the debate gets sidetracked. Radicalisation of the two camps must be avoided.
Talk of Finland being a 'Russophobic' society [as claimed by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Monday] can drive a wedge between Finns and Russian people living in Finland. Demonstrations that have so far remained peaceful could be subject to disruption.
JS: If the situation worsens, we can expect there to be further discord. If strong restrictive measures are continued and increased, some people will find them excessive. Finland may be brought into a Europe-wide debate on this issue, where there will be two extreme options on the table. Tight controls versus free movement. Finland should avoid becoming a pawn in the European debate, as well as the petty short-term politics of certain vested interests. Patience is needed.
How far can Russia take the situation?
HS: Obviously pretty far. This was attempted in 2015-2016. Now it's more systematic. Official Russia can decide whether to continue or not.
JS: If even part of the global migration flows here, the potential of new arrivals can be counted in the millions. Then the situation will be difficult to manage. Russia may also decide that this is just a temporary disturbance and the situation could end well for Finland. The middle ground is that the measures are aimed at creating a negotiating position. Discussions may also take place in the future.
Why are there asylum seekers at the Finnish borders, but not at the Estonian borders, for example?
HS: Russia's relationship with Estonia or Norway has not changed. Finland's Nato membership is a new thing.
JS: The reasons are unknown, but the social media phenomenon is now pointing towards the Finnish border.
How does the situation in Finland differ from the border situation in Poland and Belarus?
HS: Belarus ran a concerted campaign including organising flights from the countries of origin. This has not been detected so far in this case. Those trying to get to Finland appear to have already been in Russia. But there are similarities. The situation in Finland in 2015-2016 could be seen as a training exercise, but the bigger exercise was in Belarus in 2021. The leadership of an authoritarian state may well benefit from EU countries restricting entry to migrants.
JS: There's a big difference. People were gathered from third countries. People were forcibly pushed to the land borders and not to the crossing points. This was aimed at causing the immigration system to collapse by preventing the immigrants from coming under the control of authorities. The situation in Finland is much better.
Is Russia trying to influence campaigning in the Finnish presidential elections?
HS: At the moment, I don't think so. The relationship between Finland and Russia is changing in general. There is talk about the US presidential campaign that Donald Trump is a candidate favoured by Russia, but there is no similar candidate running in Finland right now. Rather, the Russian authorities are hoping to perhaps influence the government's ability to function and undermine civil society's trust in decision-makers.
JS: There is no difference between the presidential candidates about this issue.
Users with an Yle ID can leave comments on our news stories. You can create your Yle ID via this link. Our guidelines on commenting and moderation are explained here.
Correction: Hanna Smith is senior strategic adviser to the Secretary-General of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, or OSCE.