In a recent post for Foreign Policy’s Shadow Government blog, Strauss Center Distinguished Scholar and Clements Center Director William Inboden asks, Is Finland Rejecting Finlandization? In assessing the current conflict in Ukraine, Inboden points out that many have resurrected Finlandization as a potential solution: allow Russia to keep the territory it has seized and defuse the situation by halting developments in Ukraine’s relationship with the West.

However, Inboden argues that the concept of Finlandization may have outlived its usefulness—particularly if the concept’s namesake rejects it. Finland’s maintenance of its position as a neutral buffer state, and the compromises that requires, served as inspiration for the term. However, in response to current Russian aggression, Inboden notes that Finland appears to be reconsidering its former position, taking measures to raise the defense budget, contemplating NATO membership, and pursuing closer ties to the West.

While Finland may be taking steps to abandon its Cold War neutrality, Inboden points out that Russia continues to rely on the same outdated tactics. Ultimately, Inboden questions whether these familiar methods, like funding protestors to undermine hydrocarbon development and preserve Gazprom’s market power or “salami slicing’ territory, might yield unfamiliar results—and alter the meaning of Finlandization.