Finland-Russia: migrants between hammer and anvil

There has been an ongoing crisis in Finland for several months now. In November 2023, the Nordic country decided to close its border with Russia following an increase in the number of asylum seekers entering its territory. For Helsinki, there was no doubt: the crossings – more than a thousand between August and December 2023 – had been orchestrated by the Kremlin, in retaliation for its accession to NATO in April 2023. Since then, the country's gates have remained closed, and irregular entries have been rare. To counter any further pressure, Finland now wants to introduce new anti-migration legislation.

The emergency bill is known as the "Pushback procedure Act". One of the provisions of the much-discussed bill is to allow migrants to be turned back at the border without being able to apply for international protection. Repeatedly delayed, the bill is due to be voted on by Parliament in July, though its content could still be amended.

The law, designed as an emergency measure, would only apply for a limited period and only in exceptional circumstances – in other words, if the instrumentalisation of migrants can be proved.

The bill has been drafted in order  to combat Russia's destabilising operations, should they continue. However, the bill has been criticised by NGOs, some European institutions, Finnish lawyers and a many experts. At issue is the failure to respect the fundamental rights affected by these pushbacks, which would also conflict with several international texts as well as the Finnish Constitution. The pressure that the new law would put on border guards has also been criticised.

But the majority of the Finnish population considers it essential to ensure the country's security against its Russian neighbour, as shown in a poll by the Uutissuomalainen news service, reported here by Helmi Henell in Iltalehti. "62 percent of Finns support the law, 17 percent are opposed, and 21 percent are unable to say. Men are more in favour of the law than women, and older people are more in favour than younger people", explains the tabloid. These results bolster the position of those in favour of the new legislation.

Political dispute

A political battle has followed in the wake of the proposed bill: the text, which requires a five-sixths majority vote, puts the Social Democratic Party MPs (SDP, centre-left) in a tricky position. Currently in opposition, and divided over the bill, they are now being asked to follow the majority in order to achieve the necessary number of votes. Worried about the impact the pushback law could have, the Social Democrats have repeatedly called for the text to be re-examined and amended. If the text remains as is, they refuse to vote in its favour.

"Information on the current situation and the situation in autumn [2023] shows that there is no reason to adopt such a law, which is in flagrant violation of the Constitution, international law and human rights conventions", SDP vice-president Nasima Razmyar said in an interview with Erno Laisi for Ilta Sanomat. "We have to be convinced of the nature and extent of the threat, and of the total ineffectiveness of other options, before enacting such a law," she continued.

Cautiousness about lack of information, a desire not to give in to Russian pressure, and concerns for human rights and international treaties, have left the Finnish Social Democrats with a dilemma. Should they vote for pushbacks, or stick to their guns – even if it means prolonging the closure of the border? In government, the second option is seen as difficult to sustain, while the threat of a new Russian operation looms, as Iida Hallikainen, also for Ilta Sanomat, explains.

Winners and losers

In an extensive article for Novaya Gazeta Europe, Andrey Smolyakov points out that there are many factors leading to today's situation. "The new bill and the possible opening of borders with Russia have turned out to be the point of intersection of several processes underway in Finnish politics", he writes. "It is easy to see the agenda of the new right-wing government and the Party of the Finns (PS, extreme right) in the adoption of this law. Even if it is temporary, this law fits perfectly into the new immigration paradigm, and the other initiatives don't stand out much in this context."

For Smolyakov too, a total closure of the borders is not sustainable. For Smolyakov, the Finnish government, the pushbacks law therefore represents a pragmatic, albeit controversial, solution to a very real problem. "And for refugees, it is probably the worst possible option, even compared to the tougher-than-ever measures that the government is currently drafting", he concludes. Indeed, the government also intends to tighten up access to international protection and Finnish citizenship through other reforms.

---

---

"The border security bill proposed by the government sets a precedent that could have major consequences for the rule of law in Finland," declares a Helsingin Sanomat editorial. "The stage is now set for another government, in another situation, to easily violate the constitution and international agreements.”

According to the Finnish daily, the bill will not solve the problem. "Russia can still allow migrants to cross the border, and people can always cross Finland's long land border without being detected or apprehended". Thus, the writer comes to a bitter conclusion: "There is an open conflict between national security and the rule of law. For the government, it is the rule of law that must lose."

The debate surrounding the pushbacks law takes place against a particularly difficult geostrategic backdrop, with a succession of Russian troop movements at the border, and an increase in destabilising operations, making concerns about respect for human rights or the rule of law all the more inaudible. Faced with a dilemma, Finland is choosing what it hopes is the best option for its security - even if it comes at a high price.

Updated on 3 July 2024