Finlandization, Neutrality, or Kekkoslovakia? Paasikivi–Kekkonen’s Line in Finnish Discourses 30 Years after the End of the Cold War

Although the Cold War ended thirty years ago, the Paasikivi–Kekkonen’s line, which characterized Finland’s foreign and domestic politics in the Cold War era, remains an essential element of various competing discourses in the country. This article is based on a study of the “Paasikivi–Kekkonen’s line” concept as a fl oating signifi er frequently used in competing Finnish discourses, including those on the Finnish–Russian relations, on the Finnish foreign policy strategy, and on Finnish domestic politics. The discourse on the relations with Russia involves the proponents of continuing with the Paasikivi–Kekkonen’s line aiming at transforming Russia’s geographical proximity into an opportunity for Finland, and those who oppose this line on the grounds that in the Cold War era it resulted in a shameful “Finlandization” of the country. The Finnish discourse on the country’s foreign policy strategy involves those who argue in favor of continuing with the Paasikivi–Kekkonen’s line, of which the core was neutrality in the Cold War era and is non-alignment today, and those in favor of giving up with non-alignment to choose the NATO option. The article discovers that Sweden plays a critical role in this discourse than Russia. Finally, the Finnish discourse on the country’s domestic politics involves those in favor of continuing with the Paasikivi–Kekkonen’s line, of which the core is consensual politics, and those who support the transition to more transparent, albeit inevitably partisan politics.