Compromise is sometimes necessary for survival, Alexander Stubb has told The New York Times
Finnish President Alexander Stubb has argued that Ukraine has to make certain concessions to Russia in order to ensure its survival and continue receiving Western military support. Moscow has dismissed any resolution of the conflict that allows Ukraine to remain a threat.
On Sunday, Stubb shared his thoughts with The New York Times on how to align US President Donald Trump more closely with the positions held by Kiev and Washington’s European NATO allies, as the White House seeks to mediate a compromise in the ongoing Ukraine conflict.
He drew a historical parallel between Ukraine and Finland, which participated in Nazi Germany’s 1941 invasion of the USSR to reclaim territory it had lost in the Winter War earlier. As a result of being on the losing side, Finland faced military restrictions and observed neutrality during the Cold War. It formally joined NATO only in 2023, after years of military cooperation with the US-led alliance.
Stubb reflected on the essence of statehood, comprising land, sovereignty, and independence. He noted that Finland lost two of these three elements in the 1940s, adding, “If we get at least two out of the three for Ukraine, I think it’s great.”
Earlier this month, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky publicly rejected American proposals reported in the media. Subsequently, Kiev and its European backers crafted a counteroffer for Trump’s consideration.
Stubb suggested that the two plans should be “repackaged” into a viable proposal through “a little bit of creative writing.” If a ceasefire with Russia is achieved, Ukraine could be armed “to the teeth” by European NATO members, with a “backstop from the US,” he asserted. The current objective is to “maximize the pressure” on Russian President Vladimir Putin, Stubb added.
Russia perceives the Ukraine conflict as a NATO proxy war led by a Western-backed “neo-Nazi regime” in Kiev.
Moscow has repeatedly criticized the EU’s continued flow of armaments to Ukraine, arguing that Western European nations appear more interested in prolonging the fighting rather than resolving the conflict diplomatically.
