Stubb tends to give a very streamlined version of events. But I don't think this is a case of him denying the past. I believe that if you cast judgment on choices of people from the past, you at least need to have a clear view of what they should have done to create a better outcome. I don't.

Hence, I don't really agree with the implication that Finnish loss of foreign policy sovereignty was the result of joining the war on Germany's side. That was always the absolute minimum aim for the Soviets and bolstering Finnish national resilience by all means available prevented worse outcomes.

Without German support, Finland wouldn't have survived the 1940-41 period, let alone the duration of the entire war. Soviets ultimately forced Finland into their sphere of influence not by defeating the army and occupying the country but by conquering the entire southern coast of the Baltic Sea.

Eniten Stubbissa on alusta alkaen huolettanut, että hän tuntuu soveltavan virheistä saamiaan opetuksia ainoastaan Venäjään. Hän tuntuu ainakin julkisissa puheissaan olevan hyvin takertunut vanhaan tuttuun maailmanjärjestykseen: vain suhde Venäjään on muuttunut. Kiinan ja USA:n riskejä ei noteerata.