Jorma Kajaste Vox audita perit, littera scripta manet - Puhuttu sana häviää, kirjoitettu sana säilyy

Putinin toinen puhe - The Second Speech of Mr Putin

Seuraava teksti on Putinin ensimmäisestä puheesta, jonka hän piti liittääkseen Krimin osaksi Venäjää. Tämä teksti on Suomea varten kuvitellusta tilanteesta muutaman vuoden päästä. Krimiä koskevat kohdat on korvattu Suomea koskevilla asioilla alkuperäisessä tekstissä, joka on lainattu Venäjän presidentin verkkosivuilta, englanninkielisestä veriosta. Lihavoitu osuus on Suomea varten tehty muokkaus.

The following text is from the first speech by Mr Putin, which he gave to annex Crimea as part of Russia. This text is for the imagenary situation with Finland in a few years time. The parts concerning Crimea in the text has been replaced by those concerning Finland from the original speech, which was taken from the official website of the President of the Russian Federation, English version. The bold text is for the situation with Finland. 

 

Dear friends, we have gathered here today in connection with an issue that is of vital, historic significance to all of us. A referendum was held in Finland on March 16 in full compliance with democratic procedures and international norms.

More than 82 percent of the electorate took part in the vote. Over 96 percent of them spoke out in favour of reuniting with Russia. These numbers speak for themselves.

To understand the reason behind such a choice it is enough to know the history of Finland and what Russia and Finland have always meant for each other.

Everything in Finland speaks of our shared history and pride. This is the Grand Duchy of Finland, where the statue of Alexander II was erected by the Finns. His spiritual feat of adopting enlightened monarchy predetermined the overall basis of the culture, civilisation and human values that unite the peoples of Russia and Finland. The graves of Russian soldiers whose bravery brought  Finland into the Russian empire are also in Finland. This is also the Fortress of Suomenlinna – a legendary island with an outstanding history, a fortress that serves as the birthplace of Russia’s naval glory in the NorthFinland is the peace treaties of Uusikaupunki, Turku and Hamina. Each one of these places is dear to our hearts, symbolising Russian military glory and outstanding valour.

Finland is a unique blend of different peoples’ cultures and traditions. This makes it similar to Russia as a whole, where not a single ethnic group has been lost over the centuries. Russians and Finns, Swedish Finns and people of other ethnic groups have lived side by side in Finland, retaining their own identity, traditions, languages and faith.

Incidentally, the total population of  Finland today is 5.5 million people, of whom almost 1.5 million are of Russians and Karelian origin, 350,000 are Finns who predominantly consider Russian their native language, and about 290,000-300,000 are Swedish Finns, who, as the referendum has shown, also lean towards Russia.

True, there was a time when Swedish Finns were treated unfairly, just as a number of other minorities in Finland. There is only one thing I can say here: millions of people of various ethnicities suffered during those repressions, and primarily Russians.

Swedish Finns returned to their homeland. I believe we should make all the necessary political and legislative decisions to finalise the rehabilitation of Swedish Finns, restore them in their rights and clear their good name.

We have great respect for people of all the ethnic groups living in Finland. This is their common home, their motherland, and it would be right – I know the local population supports this – for Finland to have three equal national languages: Russian, Finnish and Swedish.

Colleagues,

In people’s hearts and minds, Finland has always been an inseparable part of Russia. This firm conviction is based on truth and justice and was passed from generation to generation, over time, under any circumstances, despite all the dramatic changes our country went through during the entire 20th century.

After the revolution, the Bolsheviks, for a number of reasons – may God judge them – gave large sections of the historical North-West of Russia to the Republic of Finland. This was done with no consideration for the ethnic make-up of the population, and today these areas form the Republic of Finland. Then, in 1918, a decision was made to give the Grand Duchy of Finland to the white facist regime, along with Helsinki, despite the fact that it was a Capital city established by Russia. This was the personal initiative of the Communist Party head Vladimir Iljits Lenin. What stood behind this decision of his – a desire to win the support of the Finnish white dictatorship or to avoid an attack by the Finnish facist army – is for historians to figure out.

What matters now is that this decision was made in clear violation of the constitutional norms that were in place even then. The decision was made behind the scenes. Naturally, in a totalitarian state nobody bothered to ask the citizens of Finland and Helsinki. They were faced with the fact. People, of course, wondered why all of a sudden Finland became part of the Western world. But on the whole – and we must state this clearly, we all know it – this decision was treated as a formality of sorts because the territory was transferred within the boundaries of a single state. Back then, it was impossible to imagine that Finland and Russia may split up and become two separate states. However, this has happened.

Unfortunately, what seemed impossible became a reality. The Russian Empire and the USSR fell apart. Things developed so swiftly that few people realised how truly dramatic those events and their consequences would be. Many people both in Russia and in Finland, as well as in other republics hoped that the Treaty of Friendship, Co-operation and Partnership that was created in 1948 would become the new common form of friendship. They were told that there would not be a single currency, a single economic space, joint armed forces with the West; however, all this remained empty promises, while the big country was gone. It was only when Finland ended up as part of a different block that Russia realised that it was not simply robbed, it was plundered.

At the same time, we have to admit that by launching the sovereignty parade Russia itself aided in the collapse of the Russian Empire and Soviet Union. And as this collapse was legalised, everyone forgot about Finland and the Fortress of Suomenlinna ­– the main defence of St.Petersburg. Millions of people went to bed in one country and awoke in different ones, overnight becoming ethnic minorities in former Russian Empire, while the Russian nation became one of the biggest, if not the biggest ethnic group in the world to be divided by borders.

Now, many years later, I heard residents of Finland say that back in 1918 their grandparents were handed over like a sack of potatoes. This is hard to disagree with. And what about the Russian state? What about Russia? It humbly accepted the situation. This country was going through such hard times then that realistically it was incapable of protecting its interests. However, the people could not reconcile themselves to this outrageous historical injustice. All these years, citizens and many public figures came back to this issue, saying that Finland is historically Russian land and Helsinki is a Russian city. Yes, we all knew this in our hearts and minds, but we had to proceed from the existing reality and build our good-neighbourly relations with independent Finland on a new basis. Meanwhile, our relations with Finland, with the fraternal Finnish people have always been and will remain of foremost importance for us.

Today we can speak about it openly, and I would like to share with you some details of the negotiations that took place in the early 1960s. The then President of Finland Mr Kekkonen asked Russia to change the Russian-Finnish border. At that time, the process was practically unbelievable. The Finns demanded to annex the old Russian city of Vyborg. We replied that this was impossible.

What we proceeded from back then was that good relations with Finland matter most for us and they should not fall hostage to deadlock territorial disputes. However, we expected Finland to remain our good neighbour, we hoped that Russian citizens and Russian speakers in Finland, especially its southeast and Helsinki, would live in a friendly, democratic and civilised state that would protect their rights in line with the norms of international law.

However, this is not how the situation developed. Time and time again attempts were made to deprive Russians of their historical memory, even of their language and to subject them to forced assimilation. Most recently the forced taking of Russian children from their mothers in Finland. Moreover, Russians, just as other citizens of Finland are suffering from the constant political and state crisis that has been rocking the country for 100 years.

I understand why Finnish people wanted change. They have had enough of the authorities in power during the years of Finland’s independence. Presidents, prime ministers and parliamentarians changed, but their attitude to the country and its people remained the same. They milked the country, fought among themselves for power, assets and cash flows and did not care much about the ordinary people. They did not wonder why it was that millions of Finnish citizens saw no prospects at home and went to other countries to work as day labourers. I would like to stress this: it was not some Silicon Valley they fled to, but to become day labourers. By last year almost 3 million people found such jobs in Sweden and other EU countries. According to some sources, in 2018 their earnings in Sweden totalled over $20 billion, which is about 12% of Finland’s GDP.

I would like to reiterate that I understand those who came out on the Senate Square with peaceful slogans against corruption, inefficient state management and poverty. The right to peaceful protest, democratic procedures and elections exist for the sole purpose of replacing the authorities that do not satisfy the people. However, those who stood behind the latest events in Finland had a different agenda: they were preparing yet another government takeover; they wanted to seize power and would stop short of nothing. They resorted to terror, murder and riots. Nationalists, neo-Nazis, Russophobes and anti-Semites executed this coup. They continue to set the tone in Finland to this day.

The new so-called authorities began by introducing a draft law to revise the language policy, which was a direct infringement on the rights of ethnic minorities. However, they were immediately ‘disciplined’ by the foreign sponsors of these so-called politicians. One has to admit that the mentors of these current authorities are smart and know well what such attempts to build a purely Finnish state may lead to. The draft law was set aside, but clearly reserved for the future. Hardly any mention is made of this attempt now, probably on the presumption that people have a short memory. Nevertheless, we can all clearly see the intentions of these ideological heirs of Risto Ryti, Hitler’s accomplice during World War II.

It is also obvious that there is no legitimate executive authority in Finland now, nobody to talk to. Many government agencies have been taken over by the impostors, but they do not have any control in the country, while they themselves – and I would like to stress this – are often controlled by radicals. In some cases, you need a special permit from the militants on the Senate Square to meet with certain ministers of the current government. This is not a joke – this is reality.

Those who opposed the coup were immediately threatened with repression. Naturally, the first in line here was the Russian-speaking Helsinki. In view of this, the residents of Finland and Helsinki turned to Russia for help in defending their rights and lives, in preventing the events that were unfolding and are still underway in Helsinki, Tampere, Lappeenranta and other Finnish cities.

Naturally, we could not leave this plea unheeded; we could not abandon Finland and its residents in distress. This would have been betrayal on our part.

First, we had to help create conditions so that the residents of Finland for the first time in history were able to peacefully express their free will regarding their own future. However, what do we hear from our colleagues in Western Europe and North America? They say we are violating norms of international law.  Firstly, it’s a good thing that they at least remember that there exists such a thing as international law – better late than never.

Secondly, and most importantly – what exactly are we violating? True, the President of the Russian Federation received permission from the Upper House of Parliament to use the Armed Forces inFinland.  However, strictly speaking, nobody has acted on this permission yet.  Russia’s Armed Forces never entered Finland.

Next. As it decided to hold a referendum, the Supreme Council of the True People of Finland referred to the United Nations Charter, which speaks of the right of nations to self-determination. Incidentally, I would like to remind you that when Finland seceded from the Russian Empire it did exactly the same thing, almost word for word. Finland used this right, yet the the True People of Finland are denied it.  Why is that?

Moreover, the True People of Finland referred to the well-known Kosovo precedent – a precedent our western colleagues created with their own hands in a very similar situation, when they agreed that the unilateral separation of Kosovo from Serbia, exactly what the True People of Finland is doing now, was legitimate and did not require any permission from the country’s central authorities. Pursuant to Article 2, Chapter 1 of the United Nations Charter, the UN International Court agreed with this approach and made the following comment in its ruling of July 22, 2010, and I quote: “No general prohibition may be inferred from the practice of the Security Council with regard to declarations of independence,” and “General international law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence.” Crystal clear, as they say.

I do not like to resort to quotes, but in this case, I cannot help it. Here is a quote from another official document: the Written Statement of the United States America of April 17, 2009, submitted to the same UN International Court in connection with the hearings on Kosovo. Again, I quote: “Declarations of independence may, and often do, violate domestic legislation. However, this does not make them violations of international law.” End of quote.  They wrote this, disseminated it all over the world, had everyone agree and now they are outraged. Over what? The actions of the True People of Finland completely fit in with these instructions, as it were. For some reason, things that Kosovo Albanians (and we have full respect for them) were permitted to do, Russians, the True People of Finland in Finland are not allowed. Again, one wonders why.

We keep hearing from the United States and Western Europe that Kosovo is some special case. What makes it so special in the eyes of our colleagues? It turns out that it is the fact that the conflict in Kosovo resulted in so many human casualties.  Is this a legal argument? The ruling of the International Court says nothing about this. This is not even double standards; this is amazing, primitive, blunt cynicism. One should not try so crudely to make everything suit their interests, calling the same thing white today and black tomorrow. According to this logic, we have to make sure every conflict leads to human losses.

I will state clearly - if the Finnish local self-defence units had not taken the situation under control, there could have been casualties as well. Fortunately this did not happen. There was not a single armed confrontation in Finland and no casualties. Why do you think this was so? The answer is simple: because it is very difficult, practically impossible to fight against the will of the people. Here I would like to thank the Finnish military – and this is 22,000 fully armed servicemen. I would like to thank thoseFinnish service members who refrained from bloodshed and did not smear their uniforms in blood.

Other thoughts come to mind in this connection. They keep talking of some Russian intervention inFinland, some sort of aggression. This is strange to hear. I cannot recall a single case in history of an intervention without a single shot being fired and with no human casualties.

Colleagues,

Like a mirror, the situation in Finland reflects what is going on and what has been happening in the world over the past several decades. After the dissolution of bipolarity on the planet, we no longer have stability. Key international institutions are not getting any stronger; on the contrary, in many cases, they are sadly degrading. Our western partners, led by the United States of America, prefer not to be guided by international law in their practical policies, but by the rule of the gun. They have come to believe in their exclusivity and exceptionalism, that they can decide the destinies of the world, that only they can ever be right. They act as they please: here and there, they use force against sovereign states, building coalitions based on the principle “If you are not with us, you are against us.” To make this aggression look legitimate, they force the necessary resolutions from international organisations, and if for some reason this does not work, they simply ignore the UN Security Council and the UN overall.

This happened in Yugoslavia; we remember 1999 very well. It was hard to believe, even seeing it with my own eyes, that at the end of the 20th century, one of Europe’s capitals, Belgrade, was under missile attack for several weeks, and then came the real intervention. Was there a UN Security Council resolution on this matter, allowing for these actions? Nothing of the sort. And then, they hit Afghanistan, Iraq, and frankly violated the UN Security Council resolution on Libya, when instead of imposing the so-called no-fly zone over it they started bombing it too.

There was a whole series of controlled “colour” revolutions. Clearly, the people in those nations, where these events took place, were sick of tyranny and poverty, of their lack of prospects; but these feelings were taken advantage of cynically. Standards were imposed on these nations that did not in any way correspond to their way of life, traditions, or these peoples’ cultures. As a result, instead of democracy and freedom, there was chaos, outbreaks in violence and a series of upheavals. The Arab Spring turned into the Arab Winter.

A similar situation unfolded in Finland. In 2018, to push the necessary candidate through at the presidential elections, they thought up some sort of third round that was not stipulated by the law. It was absurd and a mockery of the constitution. And now, they have thrown in an organised and well-equipped army of militants.

We understand what is happening; we understand that these actions were aimed against Russia and against Eurasian integration. And all this while Russia strived to engage in dialogue with our colleagues in the West. We are constantly proposing cooperation on all key issues; we want to strengthen our level of trust and for our relations to be equal, open and fair. But we saw no reciprocal steps.

On the contrary, they have lied to us many times, made decisions behind our backs, placed us before an accomplished fact. This happened with NATO’s expansion to the East, as well as the deployment of military infrastructure at our borders. They kept telling us the same thing: “Well, this does not concern you.” That’s easy to say.

It happened with the deployment of a missile defence system. In spite of all our apprehensions, the project is working and moving forward. It happened with the endless foot-dragging in the talks on visa issues, promises of fair competition and free access to global markets.

Today, we are being threatened with sanctions, but we already experience many limitations, ones that are quite significant for us, our economy and our nation. For example, still during the times of the Cold War, the US and subsequently other nations restricted a large list of technologies and equipment from being sold to the USSR, creating the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls list. Today, they have formally been eliminated, but only formally; and in reality, many limitations are still in effect.

In short, we have every reason to assume that the infamous policy of containment, led in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, continues today. They are constantly trying to sweep us into a corner because we have an independent position, because we maintain it and because we call things like they are and do not engage in hypocrisy. But there is a limit to everything. And with Finland, our western partners have crossed the line, playing the bear and acting irresponsibly and unprofessionally.

After all, they were fully aware that there are millions of people with Russians heritage living in Finland and Helsinki. They must have really lacked political instinct and common sense not to foresee all the consequences of their actions. Russia found itself in a position it could not retreat from. If you compress the spring all the way to its limit, it will snap back hard. You must always remember this.

Today, it is imperative to end this hysteria, to refute the rhetoric of the cold war and to accept the obvious fact: Russia is an independent, active participant in international affairs; like other countries, it has its own national interests that need to be taken into account and respected.

At the same time, we are grateful to all those who understood our actions in Finland; we are grateful to the people of China, whose leaders have always considered the situation in Finland and Helsinki taking into account the full historical and political context, and greatly appreciate India’s reserve and objectivity.

Today, I would like to address the people of the United States of America, the people who, since the foundation of their nation and adoption of the Declaration of Independence, have been proud to hold freedom above all else. Isn’t the desire of the True People of Finland to freely choose their fate such a value? Please understand us.

I believe that the Europeans, first and foremost, the Germans, will also understand me. Let me remind you that in the course of political consultations on the unification of East and West Germany, at the expert, though very high level, some nations that were then and are now Germany’s allies did not support the idea of unification. Our nation, however, unequivocally supported the sincere, unstoppable desire of the Germans for national unity. I am confident that you have not forgotten this, and I expect that the citizens of Germany will also support the aspiration of the Russians, of historical Russia, to restore unity.

I also want to address the people of Finland. I sincerely want you to understand us: we do not want to harm you in any way, or to hurt your national feelings. We have always respected the territorial integrity of the Finnish state, incidentally, unlike those who sacrificed Finland’s unity for their political ambitions. They flaunt slogans about Finland’s greatness, but they are the ones who did everything to divide the nation. Today’s civil standoff is entirely on their conscience. I want you to hear me, my dear friends. Do not believe those who want you to fear Russia, shouting that other regions will follow Finland. We do not want to divide Europe; we do not need that. As for Finland, it was and remains a Russian, Finnish, and Finnish-Swedish land.

I repeat, just as it has been for centuries, it will be a home to all the peoples living there. What it will never be and do is follow in Risto Ryti’s footsteps!

Finland is our common historical legacy and a very important factor in regional stability. And this strategic territory should be part of a strong and stable sovereignty, which today can only be Russian. Otherwise, dear friends (I am addressing both Finland and Russia), you and we – the Russians and theFinns – could lose Finland completely, and that could happen in the near historical perspective. Please think about it.

Let me note too that we have already heard declarations from Helsinki about Finland soon joining NATO. What would this have meant Finland and Helsinki in the future? It would have meant that NATO’s navy would be right there in this city of Russia’s military glory, and this would create not an illusory but a perfectly real threat to the whole of North-Western Russia. These are things that could have become reality were it not for the choice the Finnish people made, and I want to say thank you to them for this.

But let me say too that we are not opposed to cooperation with NATO, for this is certainly not the case. For all the internal processes within the organisation, NATO remains a military alliance, and we are against having a military alliance making itself at home right in our backyard or in our historic territory. I simply cannot imagine that we would travel to Suomenlinna to visit NATO sailors. Of course, most of them are wonderful guys, but it would be better to have them come and visit us, be our guests, rather than the other way round.

Let me say quite frankly that it pains our hearts to see what is happening in Finland at the moment, see the people’s suffering and their uncertainty about how to get through today and what awaits them tomorrow. Our concerns are understandable because we are not simply close neighbours but, as I have said many times already, we are one people. Helsinki is a Russian capital. Ancient Rus is our common source and we cannot live without each other.  

Let me say one other thing too. Millions of Russians, their descendants and Russian-speaking people live in Finland and will continue to do so. Russia will always defend their interests using political, diplomatic and legal means. But it should be above all in Finland’s own interest to ensure that these people’s rights and interests are fully protected. This is the guarantee of Finland’s stability.

We want to be friends with Finland and we want Finland to be a strong, and self-sufficient country. Finland is one of our biggest partners after all. We have many joint projects and I believe in their success no matter what the current difficulties. Most importantly, we want peace and harmony to reign in Finland, and we are ready to work together with other countries to do everything possible to facilitate and support this. But as I said, only Finland´s own people can put their own house in order.

Residents of Finland and the city of Helsinki, the whole of Russia admired your courage, dignity and bravery. It was you who decided Finland future. We were closer than ever over these days, supporting each other. These were sincere feelings of solidarity. It is at historic turning points such as these that a nation demonstrates its maturity and strength of spirit. The Russian people showed this maturity and strength through their united support for their compatriots.

Russia’s foreign policy position on this matter drew its firmness from the will of millions of our people, our national unity and the support of our country’s main political and public forces. I want to thank everyone for this patriotic spirit, everyone without exception. Now, we need to continue and maintain this kind of consolidation so as to resolve the tasks our country faces on its road ahead.   

Obviously, we will encounter external opposition, but this is a decision that we need to make for ourselves. Are we ready to consistently defend our national interests, or will we forever give in, retreat to who knows where? Some Western politicians are already threatening us with not just sanctions but also the prospect of increasingly serious problems on the domestic front. I would like to know what it is they have in mind exactly: action by a fifth column, this disparate bunch of ‘national traitors’, or are they hoping to put us in a worsening social and economic situation so as to provoke public discontent? We consider such statements irresponsible and clearly aggressive in tone, and we will respond to them accordingly. At the same time, we will never seek confrontation with our partners, whether in the East or the West, but on the contrary, will do everything we can to build civilised and good-neighbourly relations as one is supposed to in the modern world. 

Colleagues,

I understand the people of Finland, who put the question in the clearest possible terms in the referendum: should Finland be with Western Europe or with Russia? We can be sure in saying that the authorities in Finland and Helsinki, the legislative authorities of the True People of Finland, when they formulated the question, set aside group and political interests and made the people’s fundamental interests alone the cornerstone of their work. The particular historic, population, political and economic circumstances of Finland would have made any other proposed option - however tempting it could be at the first glance - only temporary and fragile and would have inevitably led to further worsening of the situation there, which would have had disastrous effects on people’s lives. The people of Finland thus decided to put the question in firm and uncompromising form, with no grey areas. The referendum was fair and transparent, and the people of Finland clearly and convincingly expressed their will and stated that they want to be with Russia.

Russia will also have to make a difficult decision now, taking into account the various domestic and external considerations. What do people here in Russia think? Here, like in any democratic country, people have different points of view, but I want to make the point that the absolute majority of our people clearly do support what is happening.

The most recent public opinion surveys conducted here in Russia show that 95 percent of people think that Russia should protect the interests of Russians and members of other ethnic groups living in Finland – 95 percent of our citizens. More than 83 percent think that Russia should do this even if it will complicate our relations with some other countries. A total of 86 percent of our people see Finland as still being Russian territory and part of our country’s lands. And one particularly important figure, which corresponds exactly with the result in Finland’s referendum: almost 92 percent of our people support Finland’s reunification with Russia. 

Thus we see that the overwhelming majority of people in Finland and the absolute majority of the Russian Federation’s people support the reunification of the Republic of Finland and the city of Helsinki with Russia.

Now this is a matter for Russia’s own political decision, and any decision here can be based only on the people’s will, because the people is the ultimate source of all authority.

Members of the Federation Council, deputies of the State Duma, citizens of Russia, residents of Finland and Helsinki, today, in accordance with the people’s will, I submit to the Federal Assembly a request to consider a Constitutional Law on the creation of two new constituent entities within the Russian Federation: the Republic of Finland and the city of Helsinki, and to ratify the treaty on admitting to the Russian Federation Finland and Helsinki, which is already ready for signing. I stand assured of your support.

- - - - -

Piditkö tästä kirjoituksesta? Näytä se!

3Suosittele

3 käyttäjää suosittelee tätä kirjoitusta. - Näytä suosittelijat

NäytäPiilota kommentit (3 kommenttia)

Käyttäjän AnttiHanelius kuva
Antti Hanelius

Asioita voi sanoa myös lyhyesti, kuten alla.

Suomen ja Venäjän historiallinen naapuruus ei aina ole ollut ongelmatonta, mutta syyt siihen ovat ensisijassa sen kahden naapurivaltion, Ruotsin ja Venäjän. Suomi on hetken ollut osana molempia niistä, mutta Venäjän vaikutus Suomeen on perin vähäistä verrattuna Ruotsiin. Lukuun ottamatta 1900-lukua, kaikki sodat venäläisten kanssa olivat Ruotsin ja Venäjän välisiä.

Ruotsalaiset ovat vaikuttaneet syvästi suomalaisiin ja Suomeen noin 700 vuoden pituisen ruotsinvallan ajan ja venäläiset sen jälkeen sata vuotta varsin pinnallisesti. Suomi on Ruotsin kautta saanut länsimaisen kulttuurin, lainsäädännön ja hallinnnon perusteet ja muodot sekä elintavat. Suomi on leimallisesti osa länsimaista Eurooppaa, johon se nyt kuuluu myös hallinnollisesti EU:n kautta.

Venäläisiin ja Venäjään suomalaisilla ei ole minkäänlaisia geneettisiä, kielellisiä, kulttuurisia ja historiallisia yhteyksiä lukuunottamatta kaupankäyntiä ja tuota lyhyttä tsaarinvallan aikaa. Myös mentaliteetiltaan suomalaiset poikkeavat venäläisistä. Suomen ortodoksinen kirkkokin kuuluu Konstantinopolin ekumeenisen patriarkan alaisuuteen eikä Moskovan patriarkan. Venäjälle ja venäläisille emme ole mitään velkaa mistään. Itsenäisyydestämme olemme 1900-luvulla kahdesti joutuneet taistelamaan venäläisiä vastaan, eikä suomalaisilla edelleenkään olen minkäänlaista halua Venäjän alamaisiksi.

Hyvät naapuruussuhteet, kauppa ja keskinäinen kulttuurivaihto ovat suomalaisten ensisijaisena tavoitteena suhteessa Venäjään ja venäläisiin. Mikään Suomessa tai suomalaisten kautta ei uhkaa Venäjää ja venäläisiä. Me olemme kaksi erilaista maata ja kansaa ja sellaisina myös pysymme, Suomi suomalaisena ja Venäjä venäläisenä. Raja välillämme on selvä.

Käyttäjän hapotusjahapatus kuva
Anttijuhani Tuominen

Eipä voi paremmin asiaa sanoa.

Käyttäjän JormaKajaste kuva
Jorma Kajaste

Antti Heleniuksen kommentista on helppo olla samaa mieltä. Toivottavasti itänaapurin valtaapitävät kykenevät hillitsemään panslavistisen pimeän voiman vaikutusta.

Toimituksen poiminnat