THE ROLE OF STRATEGIC CULTURE IN SHAPING THE SECURITY POLICY OF SMALL STATES (THE CASE OF FINLAND IN THE 1990S–2020S)

The article examines the role of strategic culture in shaping security policies of small states, using Finland as a case study. The logic and driving forces behind Finnish foreign and defence policy have remained constant for more than three decades since the end of the Cold War. They are based on the concept of republican realism, within which Finland seeks the state of non-domination of any single power in the security system in the Scandinavian-Baltic region and in Europe as a whole. The observed metamorphosis – from neutrality to membership in a military alliance – represents a process of adaptation to the changing global and regional security situation and reflects the country's leadership's threat perception. The evolution of Finland's policy has been determined by the relationship between two strategic subcultures: ‘relations with Russia’ and ‘integration into the community of Western states’. We can roughly divide this into two stages: ‘Europeanisation’ (1990s – late 2010s) and ‘Euro-Atlantisation’ (late 2010s – 2020s). During the Euro-Atlantic period, a correlation can be observed between the two strategic subcultures: the more Finland perceived Russia's policy as a potential threat, the more it gravitated towards the major Western powers and their institutions, not only in political terms but also in matters of security. The transition from Europeanisation to Euro-Atlanticism was caused by Finland's disappointment in the EU's ability to guarantee its security against the backdrop of the general deterioration of the European security system. Throughout the period under review, the country maintained strong national defence. The case of Finland demonstrates the decisive importance of strategic culture in shaping security policies of small states, despite their limited resources and room for manoeuvre. The concept of strategic culture represents a productive epistemological alternative to the neorealist approach in analysing the behavioural patterns of small states.

1. Agius C. (2006). The Social Construction of Swedish Neutrality: Challenges to Swedish Identity and Sovereignty. Manchester: Manchester University Press. 288 p.

2. Alekseeva T. (2012). Strategicheskaya kul'tura: evolyutsiya kontseptsii [Strategic culture: evolution of the concept]. Polis. Political Studies. No. 5. P. 130–145.

3. Aunesluoma J., Rainio-Niemi J. (2016). Neutrality as Identity? Finland’s Quest for Security in the Cold War. Journal of Cold War Studies. Vol. 18. No. 4. P. 51–78. https://doi.org/10.1162/JCWS_a_00680

4. Belukhin N. E., Vorotnikov V. V., Dianina S. Y. (2023). Reputation And Status in Denmark's Strategic Culture. Baltic Region. Vol. 15. No. 3. P. 4–28. doi: 10.5922/2079-8555-2023-3-1

5. Beneš J., Karásek T. (2021). Small and impressionable? Strategic cultures of the Czech Republic and Slovakia in evolving international contexts. In: T. Weiss, G. Edwards (eds) Small States and Security in Europe: Between National and International Policymaking. London; New York: Routledge. P. 60–77. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003082453

6. Blank D.S.J. (1996). Finnish Security and European Security Policy. Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College. 36 p.

7. Bloomfield A. (2012). Time to Move On: Reconceptualizing the Strategic Culture Debate. Contemporary Security Policy. Vol. 33. No. 3. P. 437–461. DOI: 10.1080/13523260.2012.727679

8. Bloomfield A., Nossal K.R. (2007). Towards an Explicative Understanding of Strategic Culture: The Cases of Australia and Canada. Contemporary Security Policy. Vol. 28. No. 2. P. 286–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260701489859

9. Brundtland A.O. (1966). The Nordic Balance: Past and Present. Cooperation and Conflict. Vol. 1. No. 4. P. 30–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/001083676600100403

10. Chekov A.D. (2023). Estonskaya «pribaltiyskost'» kak sotsial'nyy konstrukt: smysly i kontekstual'naya spetsifika [Estonian ‘Balticness’ as a Social Construct: Meanings and Contextual Specifics]. Baltic Region. Vol. 15. No. 1. P. 34–51. DOI: 10.5922/2079-8555-2023-1-3

11. Danilov D.A. (2022). Finlyandiya i Shvetsiya u otkrytykh dverey NATO [Finland and Sweden at the NATO doors]. Sovremennaya Evropa. No. 2. P. 16–23. DOI: 10.15211/vestnikieran220221623

12. De Castro R.C. (2014). Philippine Strategic Culture: Continuity in the Face of Changing Regional Dynamics. Contemporary Security Policy. Vol. 35. No. 2. P. 249–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2014.927673

13. Etzold T., Haukkala H. (2011). Is There a Nordic Russia Policy? Swedish, Finnish and Danish Relations with Russia in the Context of the European Union. Journal of Contemporary European Studies. Vol. 19. No. 2. P. 249–260, DOI: 10.1080/14782804.2011.580913

14. Fedorov R.A. (2024). Izmenenie podkhodov v oblasti voprosov bezopasnosti Finlyandii posle raspada Sovet- skogo Soyuza [Changing approaches to Finnish security issues after the collapse of the Soviet Union]. History and Modern Perspectives. Vol. 6. No. 4. P. 87–94. DOI: 10.33693/2658-4654-2024-6-4-87-94

15. Fomin I. (2023). Strategic culture as a meaning-making system: towards a social semiotic account of multimodal cultural constraints in international relations. International Theory. Vol. 15. No. 3. P. 351–378. DOI: 10.1017/S175297192300009X

16. Forsberg T. (2002). Nato-kirja. Helsinki: Ajatus. 327 p.

17. Forsberg T. (2023). Four rounds of the Finnish NATO debate. Nordic Review of International Studies. No. 1. P. 41–50.

18. Glenn J. (2009). Realism versus Strategic Culture: Competition and Collaboration? International Studies Review. Vol. 11. No. 3. P. 523–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00872.x

19. Gray C. (1999). Strategic Culture as Context: the First Generation of Theory Strikes Back. Review of International Studies. Vol. 25. No. 1. P. 49–69. doi:10.1017/S0260210599000492

20. Haukkala H., Ojanen H. (2011). The Europeanization of Finnish foreign policy: pendulum swings in slow motion. In: C. Hill, R. Wong (eds) National and European Foreign Policy: Towards Europeanization. London; New York: Routledge. P. 149–166.

21. Heikka H. (2005). Republican Realism: Finnish Strategic Culture in Historical Perspective. Cooperation and Conflict. Vol. 40. No. 1. P. 91–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836705049736

22. Howlett D., Glenn J. (2005). Epilogue: Nordic Strategic Culture. Cooperation and Conflict. Vol. 40. No. P. 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836705049737

23. Istomin I.A., Bolgova I.V., Sokolov A.P., Avatkov V.A. (2019). «Znak kachestva» ili «chernaya metka»? NATO kak marker statusa gosudarstv [A «Badge of Honour» or a «Stamp of Infamy»? NATO As A Marker of Status in International Politics]. MGIMO Review of International Relations. No. 2(65). P. 57–85. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2019-2-65-57-85

24. Kaveshnikov N.Yu. (2008). «Malye i vrednye?» [‘Small and Naughty?’]. International Trends / Mezhdu- narodnye protsessy. Vol. 6. No. 3. P. 84–92.

25. Kennedy P. (Ed.) (1991). Grand Strategies in War and Peace. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 228 p.

26. Keohane R. O. (1969). ‘Lilliputians’ Dilemmas: Small States in International Politics. International Organization. Vol. 23. No. 2. P. 291–310.

27. Khudoley K., Lanko D. (2019). Finskaya dilemma bezopasnosti, NATO i faktor Vostochnoy Evropy [Finnish Security Dilemma, NATO and the Factor of Eastern Europe]. World Eсonomy and International Relations. Vol. 63. No. 3. P. 13–20. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-3-13-20

28. Korunova E. V. (2024). «Reshenie prinyato»: dolgaya istoriya prisoedineniya Shvetsii i Finlyandii k NATO [The Die is Cast: Sweden and Finland’s Long Road to NATO]. Lomonosov World Politics Journal. Vol. 16. No. 3. P. 53–97. DOI: 10.48015/2076-7404-2024-16-3-53-97

29. Lanko D.A. (2021). Finlyandizatsiya, neytralitet ili Kekkoslovakiya? Liniya Paasikivi–Kekkonena v finskikh diskursakh cherez 30 let posle kholodnoy voyny [Finlandization, Neutrality, or Kekkoslovakia? Paasikivi– Kekkonen’s Line in Finnish Discourses 30 Years after the End of the Cold War]. Journal of International Analytics. Vol. 12. No. 3. P. 139–153. https://doi.org/10.46272/2587-8476-2021-12-3-139-153

30. Lehtilä H. (2012). Tarja Halonen. Paremman maailman puolesta. Helsinki: Tammi. 251 p.

31. Long T. (2017). Small States, Great Power? Gaining Influence Through Intrinsic, Derivative, and Collec tive Power. International Studies Review. Vol. 19. No. 2. P. 185–205. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viw040

32. Loshkariov I.D., Kuchuk A.V. (2022). Strategicheskaya kul'tura Pol'shi: variatsii i ikh otrazhenie v ofitsial'nom diskurse [Poland's Strategic Culture: Variations and Their Reflection in Official Discourse]. Sovremennaya Evropa. No. 4(111). P. 37–49. DOI 10.31857/S0201708322040039

33. Mezhevich N.M., Nogaev I.V. (2024). Finlyandiya v NATO. Genezis sovremennoy situatsii i perspektivy ee evolyutsii [Finland in NATO. Genesis of the Current Situation and Prospects for its Evolution]. Sovremennaya Evropa. No. 7. P. 134–144. DOI: 10.31857/S0201708324070118

34. Murphy S. (2021). Friends with Benefits? NATO and the European Neutral/Non-aligned States. In: A.M. Brady, B. Thorhallsson (eds) Small States and the New Security Environment. The World of Small States. Vol. 7. Cham: Springer. P. 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51529-4_11

35. Neumann I.B., Heikka H. (2005). Grand Strategy, Strategic Culture, Practice: The Social Roots of Nordic Defence. Cooperation and Conflict. Vol. 40. No.1. P. 5–23. DOI: 10.1177/0010836705049731

36. Palosaari T. (2013). Neither neutral nor non-aligned: The Europeanization of Finland’s foreign and security policy. Finnish Foreign Policy Papers. No. 3. 32 p.

37. Palosaari T. (2013). Still a Physician rather than a Judge? The Post-Cold War Foreign and Security Policy of Finland. Swiss Political Science Review. Vol. 19. No. 3. P. 357–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12041

38. Plevako N.S. (2022). Shvedskiy i finskiy neytralitet. V proshlom? [Swedish and Finnish neutrality. In the past?]. Scientific and Analytical Herald of the Institute of Europe RAS. No. 2. P. 24–31. DOI: 10.15211/vestnikieran220222431

39. Pyykönen J. (2016). Nordic Partners of NATO: How similar are Finland and Sweden within NATO cooperation? Helsinki: Finnish Institute of International Affairs. 138 p.

40. Rolf J.N. (2021). Strategic culture and small states: From norm breakers to norm takers to norm shapers. In: T. Weiss, G. Edwards (eds) Small States and Security in Europe: Between National and Inter national Policymaking. London; New York: Routledge. P. 41–59. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003082453

41. Romanov D. G. (2020). Politika Finlyandii v otnoshenii Rossiyskoy Federatsii pri prezidente M. Akhtisaari (1994–2000): popytka kognitivnogo analiza [Finland’s Policy towards the Russian Federation under M. Ahtisaari (1994–2000): A Cognitive Approach]. Lomonosov World Politics Journal. Vol. 12. No. 4. P. 171–200. https://doi.org/10.48015/2076-7404-2020-12-4-171-200

42. Rothstein R.L. (1968). Alliances and Small Powers. New York: Colombia University Press. 331 p.

43. Salminen M., Moshes A. (2009). Practice What You Preach: The Prospects for Visa Freedom in Russia– EU Relations. FIIA Report. No.18. Helsinki: The Finnish Institute of International Affairs. 61 p.

44. Särkkä I. (2019). Nato-retoriikka Suomen turvallisuuspoliittisessa keskustelussa. Helsinki: University of Helsinki. 298 p.

45. Smith H. (2018). EU-medlem och Rysslands granne: En analys av Finlands strategiska kultur. Nordisk Østforum. Vol. 32. P. 87–103. DOI: 10.23865/noros.v32.1252

46. Tillotson H.M. (1996). Finland at peace and war: 1918–1993. Wilby, Norwich: Michael Russell. 354 p.

47. Vasina A.V. (2022). Transformatsiya politiki neytraliteta Shvetsii i Finlyandii v 1945–1991 gg. [Trans for- mation of the Policy of Neutrality in Finland and Sweden in 1945–1991]. Sovremennaya nauchnaya mysl'. No. 3. P. 147–156. DOI: 10.24412/2308-264X-2022-3-147-156.

48. Voronov K. V. (2018). Severnyy neytralizm: istoricheskiy final ili transformatsiya? [Nordic neutralism in the XXI century: Historical Finale or a New Transformation?]. Sovremennaya Evropa. No. 1. P. 80–89. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/soveurope120188089

49. Vorotnikov V.V. (2021). Natsional'nyy istoricheskiy mif kak element strategicheskikh kul'tur gosudarstv Baltii: na primere tematiki pochtovykh marok [National Historical Myth as an Element of the Baltic States’ Strategic Cultures: Examining Postage Stamps]. Istorya. Vol. 12. No. 7(105). DOI: 10.18254/S207987840016559-3

50. Willis J. (2021). Breaking the paradigm(s): A review of the three waves of international relations small state literature. Pacific Dynamics: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research. Vol 5. No. 1. P. 18–32. DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.26021/10639

51. Wood D. P. J. (1967). The Smaller Territories: Some Political Considerations. In: B. Benedict (Ed.) Problems of Smaller Territories. London: The Athlone Press–University of London. P. 23–35.

52. Zeleneva I. V., Burukhina Ye. N. (2018). Evolyutsiya politiki bezopasnosti Finlyandii i NATO [Evolution of Finland’s and Nato’s Security Policy]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. No. 434. P. 119–124. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/434/15