"European geopolitical landscape - what lessons can we learn from Finland's example?"

In light of the current developments and military crisis in Europe, particularly the conflict in Ukraine, the importance of neutrality plays a significant role both in security architecture terms and in the peaceful development of the continent with the principle of good neighbourhood as outlined in the UN Charter. Several European countries (Austria, Ireland, Malta, and Switzerland) can justify their neutral positions based on their unique histories and geopolitical positionality. Finland's evolution from imposed neutrality since the end of WWII until the 1990s merits careful attention in terms of “costs and benefits”, even more so in the recent development of joining NATO. There is plenty of literature on the topic, but in conclusion, it can be assumed that past Finnish policymakers conducted a sober analysis of Europe's security situation throughout the Cold War era and before joining the Union in 1994. Given this background, the paper tries to understand recent years and lessons learned from the process, applying, for instance, securitisation theory and critical discourse analysis to the “feminist” foreign policy style adopted by the Sanna Marin government. With the return of Great Power competition settings, this situation, compared to the historical experience of a more pragmatic, pondered, and realist policy can pose risky challenges to Finland's newly NATO-aligned status and to Europe as a whole. In the conclusion, the issue related to Ukraine's geopolitical similarities to Finland highlights the possibility of neutrality of this country for the sake of European security and to avoid further generational mistakes.