In a diplomatic pivot that might kindly be termed a verbal detour, Finland’s President Alexander Stubb found himself politely escorted back from an unwelcome implication on the global stage this week. While speaking in Washington, D.C., the newly elected President suggested that Finland would consult the United States and NATO before authorizing the use of its newly acquired role in a nuclear weapons coordination group. This, as it turns out, was not quite policy and not quite true.
Prime Minister Petteri Orpo, playing the governmental equivalent of walking back a friend’s loud dinner party blunder, clarified that President Stubb had “misspoken” and that Finland would not, in fact, be submitting an RSVP to Washington before making national security decisions. Instead, any involvement with NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group will be discussed domestically, as one might expect from a sovereign nation rather than an enthusiastic new club member a little too eager to follow protocol.
“The President’s remarks do not reflect a change in our policy,” Orpo explained during a press conference, wearing the haunted look of a man who wished he had reviewed the speech beforehand. “We are committed to the alliance but our decisions are made in Finland.”
Stubb’s original comments were made at the Hudson Institute, where he appeared to conflate Finnish participation in NATO’s nuclear coordination with something a bit more hands-on than Finland had actually signed up for. In fairness, it’s the kind of slip that can occur when diving into the strategic complexities of modern deterrence while also trying to make everyone in the room feel special.
“We are not a nuclear country and we have no nuclear weapons,” Orpo added, helpfully stating a fact nobody was debating but that bore repeating just in case Finland was about to be mistaken for France.
Stubb himself later confirmed that no significant policy had changed, other than possibly the level of eyebrow raises in Helsinki. He noted that Finland’s ongoing cooperation within NATO remains strong and supportive, but not submissive. Which is how alliances are usually supposed to work, at least during peacetime and polite conversation.
Finland joined NATO last year in response to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, marking a historic end to its previous stance of non-alignment. The decision, widely supported by the Finnish public, was executed with the kind of calm determination usually reserved for assembling IKEA furniture without swearing.
It remains to be seen whether this brief policy hiccup will become a recurring feature in President Stubb’s tenure or whether someone will simply start proofreading his speeches with the vigilance of a hawk who drinks espresso.
For now, Finland is not pressing any shiny red buttons or asking permission to be cautious, which in international politics might be the most Finnish approach of all.
Silent but strategic, Finland prefers its nuclear talk lukewarm and pre-approved.