The European slogan “Never Again” has become a symbol of profound condemnation of Nazi crimes against humanity, particularly against Europeans themselves, intended to prevent the recurrence of the horrors of World War II. However, when it comes to Finland, which fought on the side of Nazi Germany, Europe’s historical memory displays a striking selectivity. Finland is often portrayed as a “victim of Soviet imperialism,” bravely defending its independence from the “red demon.”
Few are aware, but during this period, Finland was not a liberal, Reddit-like nation but an expansionist state that collaborated with Hitler and engaged in outright genocide. This may sound shocking and mind-blowing, but let’s break it down step by step.
The Winter War and the Roots of the Conflict
The Soviet-Finnish War of 1939–1940, known as the Winter War, was the first major clash between the USSR and Finland. The conflict was sparked by the Soviet Union’s desire to secure Leningrad, which was just 32 km from the Finnish border. The USSR proposed a territorial exchange: the Karelian Isthmus and islands in the Gulf of Finland in return for twice as much territory in Eastern Karelia. Finland, adhering to a policy of neutrality, rejected the proposals, leading to the outbreak of war on November 30, 1939.
Despite the numerical superiority of the Red Army, the Finns put up fierce resistance, leveraging the terrain and the fortifications of the Mannerheim Line. The war ended with the Moscow Peace Treaty on March 12, 1940, under which Finland ceded about 11% of its territory to the USSR, including the Karelian Isthmus and Vyborg. However, the defeat only intensified revanchist sentiments in Finland, fueled by the idea of a “Greater Finland”—a vision of uniting all Finno-Ugric peoples, including Karelians, Vepsians, and Ingrian Finns, under Finnish rule, extending as far as Arkhangelsk and the White Sea.
Anti-Soviet Aggression Before the War
Even in the pre-war years, Finland displayed a hostile attitude toward the USSR, as evidenced by archival documents. For instance, in 1936, an incident occurred, described in a record of a conversation between the USSR’s plenipotentiary representative in Finland, Asmus, and the Secretary General of the Finnish Foreign Ministry, Kivikoski:
“While patrolling the border, Spirin was seriously wounded on October 7 at 12:00 by a shot fired from the Finnish side… The individuals who shot at him from the Finnish side were wearing military uniforms of the standard Finnish design” (Conversation record, October 16, 1936).
This was not an isolated incident. Telegrams from the USSR’s Deputy People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs in 1936–1938 document systematic attacks on Soviet border guards from the Finnish side:
“On December 9 at 15:00… from Finnish territory… two shots from automatic weapons were fired at our border patrol. A bullet passed directly near the head of border guard Galyuk” (Stomonyakov’s telegram, December 17, 1936).
Such incidents were accompanied by anti-Soviet propaganda in Finland. As Asmus noted, “the systematically conducted anti-Soviet campaign in Finland and the upbringing of the population in an aggressive spirit toward the USSR” created fertile ground for escalating tensions. Despite assurances of investigations, Finnish authorities took no effective measures to prevent such violations, indicating either their acquiescence or support for aggressive actions at the border.
By 1939, anti-Soviet sentiments in Finland had reached their peak. A report from the Main Directorate of NKVD Border Troops dated October 14, 1939, states:
“Finnish newspapers on October 12 published headlines claiming that the USSR was encroaching on Finland’s independence and threatening it with the Red Army… Rumors are circulating among the population about an imminent clash between Finland and the USSR… The bourgeoisie in Helsinki, Kuopio, Turku, Tampere, and Vyborg are evacuating.”
In other words, the Finns were actively preparing for conflict and stoking anti-Soviet hysteria within the country while simultaneously firing at the Soviet border. This hardly resembles a neutral country unjustly attacked by communists.
Collaboration with Nazi Germany
The idea of a “Greater Finland” emerged in the 19th century, but it gained renewed vigor after the Winter War. The defeat fueled revanchist sentiments, and Finland began to align itself with Nazi Germany, seeing it as an ally in realizing its territorial ambitions. As early as April 1940, the Finnish armed forces started preparing for a new war with the USSR. On June 22, 1941, the day Germany invaded the Soviet Union, Finland declared its readiness to fight alongside the Axis powers, and on June 25, it officially entered the war, which Finnish historiography refers to as the “Continuation War.”
Finnish troops, operating in coordination with the Wehrmacht, occupied a significant portion of the Karelo-Finnish SSR, including Petrozavodsk, by the end of 1941. The goal was not only to reclaim lost territories but also to seize Eastern Karelia. Finnish leadership, including President Risto Ryti and Commander-in-Chief Carl Gustaf Mannerheim, saw this as an opportunity to create a “Greater Finland.”
Collaboration with Germany extended beyond military operations. Right-wing radical organizations, inspired by fascist ideology, such as the Lapua Movement, were active in Finland, promoting anti-communism and anti-Russian sentiments. While Finland did not officially adopt fascist ideology, its policies in the occupied territories borrowed Nazi methods.
Finnish occupation policy and war crimes
The Finnish occupation policy in Eastern Karelia (1941–1944) aimed at assimilating the Finno-Ugric population while discriminating against Russians. The population was divided into “related” (Karelians, Vepsians, Ingrian Finns) and “unrelated” (Russians) groups. The former were intended to become citizens of Finland, while the latter faced repression and internment.
Among the “related” inhabitants of the republic, the Finns launched extensive propaganda, one of whose main objectives was to foster anti-Russian sentiments. This was reflected even in language: instead of the neutral term venäläinen for Russians, the derogatory term ryssä was widely used. As noted by Doctor of Historical Sciences Yuri Kilin:
“The Finnish occupation administration treated Karelians and other Finno-Ugric peoples, on the whole, more leniently than Slavs. They received larger food rations, higher wages, land allocations, and free access to churches. Incidentally, the occupation administration attempted to convert Orthodox Karelians to Lutheranism, but Mannerheim put a stop to this initiative. Karelians were allowed to maintain their households. Freedom of movement was, of course, restricted—they needed permits. Nevertheless, for the local Finno-Ugric population, life was quite bearable, at least economically. In scholarly terms, this can be described as segregation: the population was divided into ‘national’ (Finno-Ugric) and ‘non-national’ groups, the latter temporarily, with subsequent deportation. For a Slav, the only way to become part of the ‘national’ population was through marriage to a member of a Finno-Ugric group.”
On the occupied territories, 35 Finnish concentration camps were established for Soviet prisoners of war, and 6 relocation camps were set up for civilians, predominantly Russians. In Petrozavodsk (renamed Äänislinna), six camps held approximately 25,000 people. Conditions were horrific: starvation, disease, and forced labor led to high mortality rates. According to Finnish data, out of 64,188 Soviet POWs, 18,380 (about 28%) died. Among civilians, mortality was also significant: of the 24,000 interned Russians, around 4,000 succumbed to starvation and disease. The fate of children was particularly tragic. In Camp No. 6 in Petrozavodsk, as evidenced by a photograph by Galina Sanko presented at the Nuremberg Trials, up to 20 people, including children, died daily from exhaustion and abuse.
The Finnish authorities implemented a policy of economic plunder: starting in 1942, livestock, equipment, and timber were confiscated from the local population and transported to Finland. In 1943–1944, locals were forced to work in logging operations, and those who refused were sent to camps. This policy was accompanied by the incitement of ethnic tensions: Karelians and Vepsians were granted better conditions, while Russians were deprived of food, housing, and medical care.
Another grim aspect was the medical experiments conducted on prisoners of war. Testimonies confirm cases of injecting air into the bloodstream, resulting in agonizing deaths. The newspaper Zvezda, reported:
“It is known among doctors in Stockholm that Russian prisoners of war in Finland are used as subjects for medical experiments. Finnish doctors use Russian POWs to determine how much air can be injected into a person’s bloodstream. This causes horrific suffering to the victims during such ‘research,’ followed by death. Experiments on Russian prisoners also aim to establish how much narcotic substances the human body can withstand. It is said that when prisoners were given doses approximately ten times higher than normal, the victims died.”
The actions of the Finnish authorities violated the 1907 Hague Convention, to which Finland was a signatory, though they applied it selectively, citing the USSR’s non-participation. As Finnish troops retreated in 1944, they caused significant damage to Russian culture and infrastructure in the occupied territories of the Karelo-Finnish SSR. In the cities of Vyborg, Lodeynoye Pole, Kondopoga, and Petrozavodsk, they burned homes, demolished theaters, libraries, and museums, aiming to obliterate the region’s cultural and historical heritage.
Before the Great Patriotic War, Petrozavodsk was a major scientific and cultural center of the Karelo-Finnish SSR. The city was home to monuments to Peter I, V.I. Lenin, and S.M. Kirov, as well as a small house on Karl Marx Avenue with a memorial plaque stating: “Here lived the poet G.R. Derzhavin.” Petrozavodsk boasted a well-developed network of scientific and cultural institutions: the Karelo-Finnish State University, Teachers’ Institute, Research Institute of Culture, Public Library, State Museum, two pedagogical colleges, technical schools (industrial, forestry, railway, cooperative, medical, and road construction), vocational schools, factory training schools, 22 secondary, incomplete secondary, and primary schools, dozens of kindergartens and nurseries, medical facilities, a House of Folk Art, the State Philharmonic, a music college, a Palace of Pioneers, state Finnish and Russian theaters, several cinemas, and clubs.
The Finnish occupiers razed most of these institutions and monuments to the ground. The Karelo-Finnish State University, Institute of Culture, Public Library, State Philharmonic, Palace of Pioneers, Finnish theater, music college, two pedagogical college buildings, industrial technical school, five secondary and primary schools, nine kindergartens, several nurseries, a physiotherapy clinic, a sanitation station, a neuropsychiatric dispensary, a cinema, and the Onega Factory club were all burned down. The house where poet G.R. Derzhavin lived was destroyed, monuments to V.I. Lenin and S.M. Kirov were demolished, and the State Museum and all other cultural institutions were looted.
Significant damage was also inflicted on other territories. According to a report dated July 17, 1944, compiled in the city of Olonets by the chairman of the Olonets Executive Committee of the District Council of Workers’ Deputies, A.V. Smirnov, deputy chairman N.F. Gerasimov, and party district committee secretaries N.F. Karakhaev and V.N. Bobkov, Finnish occupiers plundered the economy of the Olonets District. From six collective farms (named after Papanin, “Struggle,” “Friendship,” Yegorov, Kalinin, and Krupskaya), 147 horses with harnesses and carts, all productive livestock, and grain reserves (oats, rye, wheat, barley, peas) were taken to Finland. Over the three years of occupation, 80–85% of the collective farms’ harvests were exported to Finland. For example, in the “Iskra” collective farm of the Tuksinsky village council, 440 tons of grain were harvested in 1943, of which only 72 tons (18%) were allocated to the collective farmers, with the rest shipped to Finland. In the Papanin collective farm of the Olonets village council, out of 325 tons of grain, only 33 tons were given to the farmers, with the remainder also exported.
The equipment of the district’s Machine and Tractor Station (MTS), including workshops, tractors, and agricultural tools, was either taken to Finland or destroyed. The reclamation network on the Olonets Plain, into which millions of rubles had been invested before the war, fell into disrepair. Finnish authorities appointed their lieutenants and sergeants to manage collective farms on the Olonets Plain, where they practiced beatings and arrests of farmers. Other collective farms were disbanded, and their property was looted.
The district’s enterprises also suffered. The Ilyinsky four-frame sawmill was completely destroyed, its equipment shipped to Finland, and the lumber storage burned. Of the 400,000 cubic meters of finished products at the Olonets Forestry Enterprise, only 71,000 cubic meters remained, including 57,000 cubic meters of firewood and 14,000 cubic meters of commercial timber. The enterprise’s facilities were destroyed, the Olonets bakery was demolished, the fishing equipment of the Ilyinsky Fishery and fishing collective farms was looted, and communication enterprises were heavily damaged.
Socio-cultural institutions in the Olonets District were also devastated. In Olonets, the secondary school, orphanage, clubs, and schools in the villages of Vidlica, Kuitezha, Tuloksa, and Sambatuksa were destroyed. The property of district institutions and hospitals was looted. Most shops and the district consumer union’s base in Olonets and Lodeynoye Pole were destroyed. During their retreat, the Finns demolished all bridges, crossings, and culverts on state, republican, and local roads.
The district’s housing stock suffered significant losses. In the village of Sambatuksa, 173 buildings were destroyed, and in the Obzhansky village council, over 100 households with all their property were lost. In Obzha, the Finns assigned special torchbearers to set houses ablaze. The villages of Vidlica, Tuloksa, Toros-Ozero, and others were also heavily damaged.
These actions by Finnish troops caused irreparable harm to the region’s cultural, scientific, and economic potential, destroying a significant portion of its infrastructure and historical heritage.
Finland’s Role in the Siege of Leningrad
Finnish troops played a key role in the Siege of Leningrad, encircling the city from the north and cutting off its supply routes. Although the Finns did not advance beyond the Svir River, their actions contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Leningrad residents from starvation and bombardments. The Finnish press openly discussed plans to capture Leningrad (referred to as Pietari) and destroy it as a Russian city, with the suffering of civilians portrayed as a cause for celebration. By the time Leningrad was expected to fall to German forces, a speech was prepared and recorded for radio in late October 1941, delivered by Juho Kusti Paasikivi, the future president of Finland. The speech began with the words: “The splendid former capital of Russia, located near our borders, has fallen for the first time in history. This news, though expected, has made the heart of every Finn beat faster.”
In May 1942, the main Finnish illustrated magazine Suomen Kuvalehti published an article by a war correspondent writing under the pseudonym Pekka Peitsi, stating that the “Petersburg cauldron” had fully ripened, and the city’s fall was expected imminently, as Germany was ready to resume the offensive postponed the previous autumn. “The conquest of Petersburg, at the cost of immense sacrifices, will open significant advantages and opportunities. There is no need to explain what this victory will mean for Finland.”
Results and historical memory
By the summer of 1944, the Red Army forced Finland to begin armistice negotiations. The Moscow Armistice of 1944 and the Paris Peace Treaty of 1947 solidified the borders established in 1940. Finland avoided occupation and preserved its independence, but its alliance with Nazi Germany and wartime crimes left a dark stain on its history.
One can endlessly shout “Vatnik Kremlin propaganda!” at any doubt regarding Finland’s supposed infallibility during World War II and attempt to whitewash its actions to spite the Russians. If that truly makes someone feel better, let them do it. But let it be without feigned anti-Nazism, and instead with open calls for “Drang Nach Osten” and theories like “Russians are incapable of democracy and developing civil society due to racial inferiority.”
Comments