Skip to main content

‘Do Not Tease the Bear’, 1949–55

  • Chapter
  • 21 Accesses

Abstract

Norwegian and Danish membership in NATO had direct repercussions on Finland’s strategic position. In addition to bringing the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to Finland’s northern border, the participation of these Nordic states in NATO resulted in increasing Soviet concern over the security of her north-western border. The new situation put Finland in an awkward position. On the one hand Norwegian membership in NATO required Finland to improve its defence posture against the modernist threat scenario of Finnish territory or airspace being used for an attack against one of Finland’s neighbours. On the other hand, the Soviet Union regarded any military build-up in Finland as a hostile act linked to aggressive Western designs concerning the entire Nordic area. This Soviet attitude was expressed, for example, in countless newspaper articles in which the Soviet press was anxious to find any evidence of Finland moving closer to the ‘aggressive’ Atlantic Alliance and its covert organisation in the north, the Nordic Council. Despite the propagandistic nature of these articles they appeared to stem from a genuine concern that the West might attempt to turn all of Fenno-Scandia into a potentially aggressive military outpost for NATO.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Paasikivi, J. K. Paasikiven päiväkirjat II, p. 425, 21 June 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  2. N. A. A. Simojoki, ‘Nykytyyppisen ilmatorjuntatykistön ajankohtaista arviointia’, Tiede ja Ase 8/1950, p. 189: the poor materiel preparedness of the anti-aircraft artillery was‘as much a crisis connected with the defensive capabilities of the air force’.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Y. E. Järvinen, ‘Yleissotatieteellinen katsaus vuosien 1949 ja 1950 vaihteessa’, Tiede ja Ase, 8/ 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  4. V. Koppinen,‘Vesistöhyökkäyksistä ja niiden torunnasta’, Tiede ja Ase, 8/1950.

    Google Scholar 

  5. V. Koppinen,‘Viivytystaktiikasta’, SAL 1/1950.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Kiveliö,‘Rannikkojoukkojen kehityksestä’, Tiede ja Ase, 8/1950.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R. A. Rautasaari,‘Metsäpuolustus vai avomaapuolustus’, SAL 2/1949.

    Google Scholar 

  8. B. W. Kontiopää,‘II Maailmansodan vastarintaliikkeistä ja niistä tehtävistä johtopäätöksistä’, Tiede ja Ase 9/1951.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. Pajula,‘Maamme eri osien sotilaallinen merkitys nykyisin voimassa olevien ja Suomea velvoittavien kansainvälisten sopimusten valossa’, Sotakorkeakoulu, MSL 19, 524/1952, p. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nils Ørvik,‘Defence Against Help — A Strategy for Small States?’, Survival, London, September–October 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Päaesikunta, Jalkaväen taisteluohiesäänto 11. Patalioonantaistelu, Helsinki 1955, pp. 281–2.

    Google Scholar 

  12. S. Enkiö,‘Mitä jokaisen upseerin tulee tietää atomipommista’, Sotilasaikakauslehti 3/1947 and 6/1947.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R. Arimo, ‘Atomipommin ja vetypommin vertailua’, SAL, 4/1952.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cited in J. O. Valtonen,‘Sotakokemukset ja tulevaisuuden sota’ SAL 4/1947.

    Google Scholar 

  15. V-P Somerkari,‘Pohjolan asema maailman sotilas-ja geo-poliittisessa voimakentässä’ written for a Sotilasaikakauslehti competition in 1950, published in SAL 1/1952. For a later version of the same‘Great Circle Theory’ see G. C. Magnusson,‘Lentoase ja Suomen Turvallisuus V’, Uusi Suomi, 19 July 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Johan Jörgen Holst, Norsk Sikkerhetspolitik i Strategisk Perspektiv, Bind II: Dokumentasjon, Oslo 1967, pp. 71–2.

    Google Scholar 

  17. G. C. Magnusson,‘Lentoase ja Suomen turvallisuus’, Uusi Suomi, 19 July 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  18. See also G. E. Magnusson, ‘Suomen lentoaseen kehittäminen’, Uusi Suomi, 31 January 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nils Ørvik,‘Defence Against Help — A Strategy for Small States?’ Survival, London, September–October 1973.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 1991 Risto E. J. Penttilä

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Penttilä, R.E.J. (1991). ‘Do Not Tease the Bear’, 1949–55. In: Finland’s Search for Security through Defence, 1944–89. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-11636-2_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-11636-2_4

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-349-11638-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-349-11636-2

  • eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics