n April of this year, following a sea change of public opinion in response to Russia’s expanded invasion of Ukraine, Finland joined NATO. Ending decades of ostensible military non-alignment, though with a decided tilt towards the West, Helsinki’s entry into the defensive alliance was at one time seen as a geopolitical threat for Russia (with whom it shares an 830-mile-long border) and Vladimir Putin. Ironically, Finland’s entry and Sweden’s application—presently held up by objections from Turkey and Hungary—prompted a rather muted response from Putin.
Finland’s deft geopolitical navigation between the West and the Soviet Union, now Russia, should come as no historical surprise. The country’s history is far less well-known than it should be, especially as it is now an official ally of the United States and its NATO partners. Central to Finland’s emergence and survival amidst the conflict between greater powers was Gustaf Mannerheim, who rose from a cavalry officer in Russia’s imperial court and ended his career as the country’s president. Henrik Meinander—a history professor at the University of Helsinki—pens a fascinating portrait of Mannerheim himself, but also the dynamics of Finland’s geopolitical history in the aptly titled “Mannerheim,” a copy of which was provided by the publisher for review.
While Mannerheim is an obscure figure for many in the West, reading his biography is both timely and relevant, and simply enjoyable in and of itself. Meinander’s book offers deep insights into Finland’s complex geopolitics, which are particularly relevant today, but also offers a look into a wholly different time and place. It is trite to say, but Mannerheim is a man of a different era. Yes, obviously he is from the turn of the century and another era, but they don’t make people like him anymore. An aristocratic cavalry officer, initially serving Imperial Russia, traipsed through Central Asia on a fact-finding (intelligence) mission—almost dying in the process. He fought in both the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 and later in the First World War. He saw his country through the Second World War, navigating its complex geopolitics and ultimately becoming Finland’s president.
Mannerheim was barely able to speak Finnish; he was far more comfortable in Swedish as were most of Finland’s elite. He pined for the days of the Imperial Court of Russia and was far more skeptical of independence and far less comfortable with democratic politics than a key founder of the country would, in theory, be. In Meinander’s telling, Mannerheim was, controversially, a slow convert to the idea of Finnish independence. In the country’s brief civil war, he fought not necessarily for the country’s independence, but on the side of the Whites against the Reds (Bolsheviks) to staunch the spread of communism and, hopefully, roll back developments in Russia.
Meinander sets the scene of Mannerheim’s life and times well. He adds rich color to his time in uniform, his role as eminence grise of Finland, and as Finland’s leader during its most tumultuous geopolitical time. This is a book that readers more familiar with Finland’s history will likely take more away from than those who are first approaching the country or Mannerheim himself. Indeed, Meinander references other biographies and commentary on Mannerheim and the times in which he lived, as well as Mannerheim’s (at times) unreliable memoirs. Meinander takes an objective approach by dissenting with some books and complimenting others which proves that he is not merely replicating past commentary but seeking to build on a solid historical foundation. Readers get a clear sense of the complex figure that Mannerheim was and his pivotal role at key points in Finland’s nationhood.
This biography truly shines when it focuses on Mannerheim and Finland’s complex geopolitical situation. Indeed, the book builds masterfully to Mannerheim’s climactic third act: where he truly assumes centerstage by setting the country’s course for the remainder of the century and into the next—Finland and the Second World War. Here, Finland refused to acquiesce to Soviet Russia’s demands for security guarantees and territory following the secret Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement that brought Finland within Moscow’s sphere of influence.
What followed was Finland’s truly heroic—though exceedingly costly—Winter War with Russia that saw Helsinki defend against over 20 Soviet divisions with just 300,000 men at arms. Mannerheim’s skill in driving the country to a negotiated peace with Moscow, thereby avoiding what would have been a grinding conflict that Finland would surely not have been able to survive, was perhaps equally as impressive as his battlefield leadership—knowing when to consolidate one’s gains or realizing when the initiative has ended is as much a skill as is pressing an attack.
The cessation of hostilities with Moscow was not the end of the war for Finland, and its later, controversial, alignment with Berlin. This was, as Meinander shows, an alliance of necessity and convenience, not one of ideological alignment—a crucial distinction. Had Finland attempted to remain neutral in the latter portion of the war, it could have been invaded and occupied, ending up either under the crushing yoke of Soviet communism, or simply divided as spoils of war between Moscow and Berlin.
As it stood, Mannerheim sought to leverage Berlin in his efforts to push back the Soviet Union and reverse the territorial losses that resulted from the Winter War. Meinander deconstructs myths that grew around this relationship, showing there was more interest in a partnership, rather than Helsinki being forced into the partnership as is commonly presented. This historical dispute is handled with due care and diligence. It is presented contextually, without judgment. When the war turned against Berlin, Mannerheim deftly extricated Finland from the relationship with Berlin, yet at a great cost and significant destruction to Lapland (Northern Finland).
As Meinander clearly demonstrates, there was little hope of Allied support coming to Helsinki. Finland was on its own, stuck between two warring powers, attempting to survive and retain its national independence. Mannerheim successfully navigated these turbulent political waters. Informed by his military expertise he was ahead of his peers in Finnish politics in understanding the operational and strategic practicalities of war.
However, he was, by no means, infallible. Meinander notes how the cavalry officer missed the emergence of the modern general staff—the command-and-control structure that administered military matters and provided advice and counsel to the commander. His imperial manner was better served for the Russian court than managing complex, modern military operations. Whilst Finland achieved battlefield successes, the process could well have been smoother had Mannerheim been more modern in his approach. He was also not a natural democrat, though this is not surprising given his familial, aristocratic background and formative experiences in Tsarist Russia.
The end of the war defined Finland’s geopolitical situation for the remainder of the century and into the next. Mannerheim’s deft leadership and navigation of turbulent waters set the country up for success well beyond the end of the war. Its military non-alignment, its program of national resilience, and significant investment in defense made it a formidable middle-power, one with such an 830-mile border with its chief opponent.
Meinander’s biography is, therefore, as timely and relevant as it is generally interesting as a biography. Learning about the rich history of any country is invaluable in and of itself, but Finland’s recent accession to NATO makes this even more significant. Understanding where a country came from, its unique history, and the dynamics that shaped its past, helps inform and strengthen its present relations. Finland’s geopolitics during the Mannerheim era is also instructive for how middle powers have acted and may act in the future.
Mannerheim is a fascinating figure—a soldier, a Field Marshal, a statesman, and a president. Far less well-known abroad and certainly controversial at home, Meinander provides a riveting, complex, and highly approachable portrait of this pivotal figure in Finland’s history. Mannerheim surely ranks alongside Winston Churchill and Charles de Gaulle in terms of the great statesmen of the Second World War, and through Meinander’s biography, readers will see why.
a global affairs media network
Finland's Geopolitics Through the Complex Legacy of Mannerheim
Helsinki Cathedral. Image by Tapio Haaja from Pixabay
October 21, 2023
Finland recently joined NATO, ending decades of ostensible military non-alignment. It is only the latest development in a rich history of deft geopolitical maneuvering—a history that Henrik Meinander explores through an insightful biography of Finnish legend Gustaf Mannerheim, writes Joshua Huminski
I
n April of this year, following a sea change of public opinion in response to Russia’s expanded invasion of Ukraine, Finland joined NATO. Ending decades of ostensible military non-alignment, though with a decided tilt towards the West, Helsinki’s entry into the defensive alliance was at one time seen as a geopolitical threat for Russia (with whom it shares an 830-mile-long border) and Vladimir Putin. Ironically, Finland’s entry and Sweden’s application—presently held up by objections from Turkey and Hungary—prompted a rather muted response from Putin.
Finland’s deft geopolitical navigation between the West and the Soviet Union, now Russia, should come as no historical surprise. The country’s history is far less well-known than it should be, especially as it is now an official ally of the United States and its NATO partners. Central to Finland’s emergence and survival amidst the conflict between greater powers was Gustaf Mannerheim, who rose from a cavalry officer in Russia’s imperial court and ended his career as the country’s president. Henrik Meinander—a history professor at the University of Helsinki—pens a fascinating portrait of Mannerheim himself, but also the dynamics of Finland’s geopolitical history in the aptly titled “Mannerheim,” a copy of which was provided by the publisher for review.
While Mannerheim is an obscure figure for many in the West, reading his biography is both timely and relevant, and simply enjoyable in and of itself. Meinander’s book offers deep insights into Finland’s complex geopolitics, which are particularly relevant today, but also offers a look into a wholly different time and place. It is trite to say, but Mannerheim is a man of a different era. Yes, obviously he is from the turn of the century and another era, but they don’t make people like him anymore. An aristocratic cavalry officer, initially serving Imperial Russia, traipsed through Central Asia on a fact-finding (intelligence) mission—almost dying in the process. He fought in both the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 and later in the First World War. He saw his country through the Second World War, navigating its complex geopolitics and ultimately becoming Finland’s president.
Mannerheim was barely able to speak Finnish; he was far more comfortable in Swedish as were most of Finland’s elite. He pined for the days of the Imperial Court of Russia and was far more skeptical of independence and far less comfortable with democratic politics than a key founder of the country would, in theory, be. In Meinander’s telling, Mannerheim was, controversially, a slow convert to the idea of Finnish independence. In the country’s brief civil war, he fought not necessarily for the country’s independence, but on the side of the Whites against the Reds (Bolsheviks) to staunch the spread of communism and, hopefully, roll back developments in Russia.
Meinander sets the scene of Mannerheim’s life and times well. He adds rich color to his time in uniform, his role as eminence grise of Finland, and as Finland’s leader during its most tumultuous geopolitical time. This is a book that readers more familiar with Finland’s history will likely take more away from than those who are first approaching the country or Mannerheim himself. Indeed, Meinander references other biographies and commentary on Mannerheim and the times in which he lived, as well as Mannerheim’s (at times) unreliable memoirs. Meinander takes an objective approach by dissenting with some books and complimenting others which proves that he is not merely replicating past commentary but seeking to build on a solid historical foundation. Readers get a clear sense of the complex figure that Mannerheim was and his pivotal role at key points in Finland’s nationhood.
This biography truly shines when it focuses on Mannerheim and Finland’s complex geopolitical situation. Indeed, the book builds masterfully to Mannerheim’s climactic third act: where he truly assumes centerstage by setting the country’s course for the remainder of the century and into the next—Finland and the Second World War. Here, Finland refused to acquiesce to Soviet Russia’s demands for security guarantees and territory following the secret Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement that brought Finland within Moscow’s sphere of influence.
What followed was Finland’s truly heroic—though exceedingly costly—Winter War with Russia that saw Helsinki defend against over 20 Soviet divisions with just 300,000 men at arms. Mannerheim’s skill in driving the country to a negotiated peace with Moscow, thereby avoiding what would have been a grinding conflict that Finland would surely not have been able to survive, was perhaps equally as impressive as his battlefield leadership—knowing when to consolidate one’s gains or realizing when the initiative has ended is as much a skill as is pressing an attack.
The cessation of hostilities with Moscow was not the end of the war for Finland, and its later, controversial, alignment with Berlin. This was, as Meinander shows, an alliance of necessity and convenience, not one of ideological alignment—a crucial distinction. Had Finland attempted to remain neutral in the latter portion of the war, it could have been invaded and occupied, ending up either under the crushing yoke of Soviet communism, or simply divided as spoils of war between Moscow and Berlin.
As it stood, Mannerheim sought to leverage Berlin in his efforts to push back the Soviet Union and reverse the territorial losses that resulted from the Winter War. Meinander deconstructs myths that grew around this relationship, showing there was more interest in a partnership, rather than Helsinki being forced into the partnership as is commonly presented. This historical dispute is handled with due care and diligence. It is presented contextually, without judgment. When the war turned against Berlin, Mannerheim deftly extricated Finland from the relationship with Berlin, yet at a great cost and significant destruction to Lapland (Northern Finland).
As Meinander clearly demonstrates, there was little hope of Allied support coming to Helsinki. Finland was on its own, stuck between two warring powers, attempting to survive and retain its national independence. Mannerheim successfully navigated these turbulent political waters. Informed by his military expertise he was ahead of his peers in Finnish politics in understanding the operational and strategic practicalities of war.
However, he was, by no means, infallible. Meinander notes how the cavalry officer missed the emergence of the modern general staff—the command-and-control structure that administered military matters and provided advice and counsel to the commander. His imperial manner was better served for the Russian court than managing complex, modern military operations. Whilst Finland achieved battlefield successes, the process could well have been smoother had Mannerheim been more modern in his approach. He was also not a natural democrat, though this is not surprising given his familial, aristocratic background and formative experiences in Tsarist Russia.
The end of the war defined Finland’s geopolitical situation for the remainder of the century and into the next. Mannerheim’s deft leadership and navigation of turbulent waters set the country up for success well beyond the end of the war. Its military non-alignment, its program of national resilience, and significant investment in defense made it a formidable middle-power, one with such an 830-mile border with its chief opponent.
Meinander’s biography is, therefore, as timely and relevant as it is generally interesting as a biography. Learning about the rich history of any country is invaluable in and of itself, but Finland’s recent accession to NATO makes this even more significant. Understanding where a country came from, its unique history, and the dynamics that shaped its past, helps inform and strengthen its present relations. Finland’s geopolitics during the Mannerheim era is also instructive for how middle powers have acted and may act in the future.
Mannerheim is a fascinating figure—a soldier, a Field Marshal, a statesman, and a president. Far less well-known abroad and certainly controversial at home, Meinander provides a riveting, complex, and highly approachable portrait of this pivotal figure in Finland’s history. Mannerheim surely ranks alongside Winston Churchill and Charles de Gaulle in terms of the great statesmen of the Second World War, and through Meinander’s biography, readers will see why.
