Ibrahim Naber: Mr President, you visited Donald Trump in Mar-a-Lago. You spent quite a few time together on the golf course. What did you learn about president Trump's plan to end the war in Ukraine?
Alexander Stubb: I left with the feeling that the president of the United States was losing patience with Russia and president Putin.
Donald Trump besides made any alternatively harsh statements to Putin the following day.
Did Trump say he'd put more force on Russia?
We'll see what comes next. I can only say what I recommended. And my advice was to set a stiff deadline for the ceasefire, which is April 20th. I had 2 reasons.
First, Easter is coming. Second, this is the 3rd period after his inauguration. So symbolically, that would be rather useful. But this must be combined with a immense package of sanctions if Russia fails to comply with a full, unconditional ceasefire.
Lindsey Graham played golf with us. He developed it rather a robust package of sanctions Senator Blumenthal, who will now be presented to the U.S. Congress.
You have late said that it is time to be "hard, not soft" towards Russia.
It always works. I think we request to show strength. It's the only thing Putin understands. If he shows any weakness or submission, he will usage it.
What precisely could get Putin to suspend his weapon?
Sanctions and American leadership. It's the only thing that can do it. Putin respects strength due to the fact that he's afraid of it. If you show it to him, he'll submit.
“It is simple for me”
In the first days of the Russian invasion in 2022, you attempted to halt the war by contacting Sergei Lavrow, Russian abroad Minister. What was his answer?
At the time, I was a modest prof. at the European University Institute in Florence and completely abandoned politics. But I inactive had the number of the jury. I wrote to him on 27 February 2022: “Sergeant, this has gone besides far. delight halt this madness. You are the only individual who can influence this.”
His answer was rather cynical, it was, “You mean Biden or Zelenski?” It's typical of a jury. I've known him for years. And of course there was a long exchange of views in which he mostly defended the Russian communicative of war. Then I realized that there was no way back and that Ukraine had to fight.
France and the United Kingdom are presently proposing to send European soldiers to Ukraine to safe a future peace agreement. Is this a credible deterrent to Russia?
I don't think that's the point. First, there must be a ceasefire, although it must be remembered that this does not mean the end of the war.
The ceasefire must be monitored. Then there's the peace agreement. And the peace agreement involves peacekeeping.
For me, it is simple: the top work lies with the Ukrainians. The Ukrainian army has 800,000 men and women. This is the most modern, efficient and experienced army in the world.
There would besides be any support from Europe. But the final support should come from the United States, due to the fact that I believe that American safety guarantees are inactive the strongest.
The only way to accomplish lasting and just peace is to automatically join Ukraine in NATO in the event of Russia's re-attack.
Would you be willing to send Finnish soldiers as part of the European peacekeeping forces in Ukraine?
Remember, Finland has a 1340 km border with Russia. We should actually think about the border that starts in northern Lapland, Norway, and extends 5,000 km across the Baltic countries to Ukraine.
We all have different responsibilities. European land forces would consist of 20,000 to 60,000 soldiers. It won't substance much.
This issue has become a symbolic debate that has completely strayed from the course. There are many another ways we can support Ukraine. The sending of land troops is not presently on the table.
“Russia follows this course”
You hope for a much greater engagement of the German government in the future. What are your expectations?
My expectations are high. We have heard of a “return point” Which, I admit, sometimes was more like slalom.
We have late witnessed an crucial decision by the Bundestag to increase defence spending. We will besides face the decisive leadership of future Chancellor Merz. It is highly pro-European. He knows how to deal with Russia. He's a transatlanticist.
Many of us present have advanced hopes for Merze. In many ways — without besides much force on him — I would say that he is at a certain point in Helmut Kohl. I think that's what we all anticipate from him erstwhile he comes to power.
You spent 4 years writing a book on a fresh planet order that is defined by a triangle: the global West, the global East and the global South. Should this categorisation be revised in the light of the fact that the fresh US administration seeks to bring Russia closer together?
The Global West wants to preserve at least the remnants of the erstwhile planet order, due to the fact that it is in his interest. The Global East, headed by China, wants to change it — Russia follows this course. And the actual decision on which way the planet will thin will yet be made by the Global South.
With the fresh U.S. administration, which is more transactional and possibly somewhat little committed to alliances, various scenarios can emerge. I do not believe that abroad policy is binary. This is not a “or-or” situation.
I think that we Europeans must convince the United States that multilateralism is good. And if they want to keep their function as a planet leader — and I think that is what they want — and if they intend to argue China — and I think they will, they request allies. I so keep my thesis.
"Europe should not take this personally"
Is rapprochement with Russia besides a future plan for Europe?
In the long term, yes, but it will depend on many issues. Will there be a ceasefire? erstwhile will peace negotiations begin? I think we are presently in a phase where we have a consensus among European leaders that at any point it will come closer — but this must happen in close cooperation with allies.
In my humble opinion, this should be done in close coordination with France, the United Kingdom and Germany.
At the minute Trump and his government are acting more like Europe's rival. The president of the United States has just imposed duties on Europe. How should the EU react?
Europe should not take this personally. quite a few people are very angry and I realize why. But it's not a good thought for abroad policy, you gotta separate emotions from it and focus on the situation we're dealing with.
U.S. president Donald Trump (illustration picture)Andrew Harnik / Staff / Getty Images
I spent 7 hours with president Trump, and my advice to all allies is: cooperate with the US. Work with president Trump and his administration.
I would not say that the US is acting like an opponent of the EU. What they do is “Americana First”. My advice is therefore: let us work towards making Europe second after the US.
You campaigned for Finland's admission to NATO. There are now serious doubts in Europe about the credibility of Article 5 under the fresh US administration. Are you truly convinced that Trump would send US troops to defend a Finnish border town specified as Niirala or another border town in Estonia?
I'm truly convinced that The United States will stay active in NATO and will stay attached to Article 5.Because it's in their best interests. It is not without reason that the United States has concluded a defence agreement with Finland, which fundamentally allows them to store large amounts of military equipment and materials in Finland.
There is simply a reason why thousands of American soldiers train here with Finnish soldiers — with naval forces and another units. The United States recognised Finland's strategical value.
Finland, Sweden and Norway safe the northern flank. We besides safe a 1340-kilometre border with Russia. So if it is in the interests of the United States to defend us as part of an alliance — and it is — then I am not worried about it.
"Together with Poland we have the largest artillery forces in Europe"
Finland — like Germany — ordered American F-35 fighters. Have you thought about canceling this order?
Nope. Why would we do that? Military planning spans decades into the future. And let us not forget that the United States, including their president, is besides about business. Europe orders twice as much equipment from the American defence manufacture as the United States itself. I plan to personally participate in the transportation of the first F-35 jet — hopefully with the president of the United States, this autumn.
I asked about the fighter due to the fact that the U.S. government has been threatening to invade Greenland for weeks, and it has not ruled out the usage of military force.
I think they regulation out military force. To be honest, it is rather simple for Finland: Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark and Greenland's future belongs to the Greenlandians themselves.
The German army and intelligence services urgently inform against a fresh Russian attack on Europe over the next 3 to 4 years. How do you measure the Russian threat to your country and to Germany?
Firstly, we have no direct military threat from Russia. And there's a reason. We have compulsory military service. It was completed by 900,000 men and women — including myself. My boy graduated last summer.
We have 62 F/A-18 fighters. We have 64 F-35 aircraft ordered. We have long-range missiles on land, at sea and in the air. Together with Poland we have the largest artillery forces in Europe. So we're prepared. My advice for all kind of threat is as follows: let us halt predicting the future due to the fact that we do not know what will happen. So let us focus on strengthening our troops, buying military equipment, building a strong defence — then nothing bad will happen.
