Finland's leadership in the OSCE Minsk Group forced Finland to look at Russia from a new perspective and expand Finland's expertise on Russia. Finland and Russia's co-chairmanship of the OSCE Minsk Group, the diplomatic body responsible for peace mediation in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, was the first time that Finland received an international mandate to shape peace in a conflict that Russia considered part of its imperial politics.
"This was a significant change in Finland's Cold War policy, when Finnish diplomats tried to separate the Baltic Sea and the Nordic countries from the security situation in Central and Eastern Europe and the Soviet area," says Bradley Reynolds, a doctoral researcher at the University of Helsinki.
From 1995 to 1997, Finland and Russia co-chaired the OSCE Minsk Group, the diplomatic forum responsible for mediation between Armenia, Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh, and the international community. In the mid-1990s, mediation in Nagorno-Karabakh was among the three most important issues on the agenda between the United States and Russia.
"The South Caucasus in the mid-1990s was a critical moment for discussions on whether European security in continental Europe should be tied to security in the post-Soviet space," Reynolds said.
In his dissertation, he has utilized archival materials from different countries and interviewed many Finnish and American decision-makers, including President Tarja Halonen, Heikki Talvitie, and René Nyberg.
U.S. peace projects and oil interests hampered Finland's mediation efforts
Finland as a new EU member in 1995 brought with it both expertise on Russia and a kind of “burden of proof” to show that Helsinki had really overcome the Cold War stereotype of a "special relationship," or what has been pejoratively termed “Finlandization.”
The majority of scientific literature claims that EU membership was the most visible factor in Finland's transition from neutrality to non-alignment. Debate on changes in Finland’s Russia policy in the post-Cold War period has only begun to be researched from the perspective of archives. “The current debate is largely defined by politicians, former decisionmakers, and political analysis who assessed events at the time,” says Reynolds.
Reynolds' doctoral dissertation sets the tone for these discussions with new archival material from Finland, the United States, the UK, the UN, the EU and the OSCE. In the OSCE, Finnish diplomats had extensive experience and political capital to start changing not only the relationship between Finland and Russia, but also the relationship between Finland, and America, as well as with Brussels. This was particularly apparent with regard to developing European and North American policies toward the post-Soviet space.
"While it was initially thought balancing Moscow would be the largest task for Finland and international mediators in the South Caucasus, countering American unilateral peace proposals and oil interests became equally, if not more challenging for Finnish diplomats", Reynolds said.
An important mantra of American and Finnish diplomats was to tie Russia to multilateral mediation. According to the researcher, maintaining Russia in mediation formats was thought to require Moscow to manage relations with neighbouring states in accordance with OSCE and UN standards. The thinking went that if Russia conducted relations in the South Caucasus by these standards, Moscow would also do so in the Baltic Sea region.
Although the Finnish Minsk Group team achieved this largely in 1995, American decision-makers began their own unilateral mediation efforts at the beginning of 1996, which infuriated the Russians and made Finnish mediation attempts more difficult.
An important reminder for Finland's security debate
Unilateral peace projects by the United States were also burdensome for peace and stability in the South Caucasus, the researcher says. When Washington had multiple problems in the world to attend to, Nagorno-Karabakh was an example of the limitations of American power.
"This is an interesting reflection in thinking about Finland as a new NATO member and future aspirations of working with Washington," Reynolds says.
Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, as well as Finland's and Sweden's NATO membership in 2023 and 2024, sparked debate about whether and when the post-Cold War security order collapsed. As new divisions emerge across Eurasia, nowhere more obvious than the border between Russia and Finland, the question of if and how the European security architecture can be salvaged, or reconstructed, has surfaced.
“This work hopes to promote public debate on Finnish foreign and security policy, as well as Finland’s Russia policy,” Reynolds adds.
*******************************
Bradley Reynolds, MScS will defend the doctoral dissertation entitled "Alternating Visions of Europe´s Post-Cold War Security Architecture - Finnish, American, and Russian Peace Mediation in Nagorno-Karabakh 1995-1997" in the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki, on 14 December 2024 at 12:00. The public examination will take place at the following address: Porthania, Suomen Laki-sali, Yliopistonkatu 3.
Professor Jussi Hanhimäki, Geneva Graduate Institute, will serve as the opponent, and Professor Juhana Aunesluoma as the custos.
The dissertation is also available in electronic form in Helda.
Contact informations:
Bradley Reynolds
bradley.reynolds@helsinki.fi