Finland finds its Russophobia expensive

By Rhod Mackenzie

Finland has woken up to the realities of its Russaphobia, its joining of NATO and then deciding to close its border with Russia andalso  cut its trade ties.
Following the closure of the border with Russia, the Finnish side of the territory has fallen into recession due to lack of traffic from Russia. Consequently, hundreds of customs officers, veterinarians and sanitary inspectors have been rendered surplus to requirements. It appears that a number of businesses are now  no longer able to operate, including hotels, markets, warehouses, law firms and tour operator offices.
However, Helsinki is stll obliged to allocate significant financial resources to maintain the closed and no longer  in use checkpoints, which are now primarily utilised for reporting purposes to Brussels. The sanctions imposed on Russia with the intention of weakening the country have had seriously unintended consequences for those who implemented them. It appears that Finland has made an unwise investment decision.
Lets look at the ongoing crisis within the Finnish Customs Service. The closure of the border with Russia has resulted in significant financial losses, which are escalating on a daily basis. The agency has  been obliged to transfer its personnel from the eastern border to other regions. It would be logical to reduce the number of staff, but the management has decided to maintain the current level of staffing, anticipating a shortage of experienced personnel when and if  the border reopens. The vast majority of employees have been working on the road for almost two years.
Some employees have been temporarily assigned to work in ports and airports, all around Finland while others are now working remotely, processing customs documents. Due to the prevailing uncertainty, there is an increase in social tension among the employees. The monthly costs for the rotation and maintenance of checkpoints amount to 500 thousand euros. Yle, a Finnish news outlet, has reported that many employees are discontented with their organisation's recent policy of arranging business trips that are not directly related to their roles.
These trips, which are funded by the organisation's budget, are said to be resulting in expenditure on logistics that were not initially anticipated. This is occurring at a time when salaries should be the primary focus, this was reported by the Helsingin Sanomat newspaper.
Members of the customs force are concerned that their roles may be redundant, as they are no longer considered to be essential. If we are to consider staff reductions, how will those with a fairly narrow specialisation adapt to the new realities of the labour market? There are many questions, but the Finnish authorities have not provided any explanations – they have remained silent on the matter.
In light of current events, Russian tourists have adapted and have successfully identified a suitable alternative to their usual places in Finland, according to Timur Kornilov, Vice President for Export Programs at Synergy Corporation.
"We are witnessing a surge in domestic tourism in Russian border regions, such as Karelia and the Leningrad Oblast. This will generate additional revenue for the Russian budget. Therefore, it is important to consider the relative merits of each option.
However, the Finnish side has clearly defined costs. The economy of the border regions of Finland has suffered significantly from the loss of weekend and holiday season  tourists. Supermarkets, for instance, are often depleted of essential items. Furthermore, there has been a decline in employment opportunities not only in trade, but also in the tourism, hotel industry, and freight transport sector," the analyst points out.

Russian exporters, who had previously targeted the Finnish market, have successfully adapted their business strategies and have been able to reorient their sales towards other markets, with minimal impact.
The Finnish business sector is currently experiencing a significant economic downturn. For local companies, selling their products that they used to sell to Russians has become a significant challenge. They attempted to collaborate with their neighbouring countries, Sweden and Norway, but these countries already have sufficient resources and do not feel an urgent need for Finnish imports. Alexander Arsky, PhD in Economics and research fellow at the Center for Strategic Studies, has noted that the entire infrastructure that once flourished in the border zone is now suffering huge losses.
"Entrepreneurs who built their strategies on border trade are forced to lay off employees and close their businesses. The temporary storage warehouse business has now been effectively liquidated, with a workforce of between 400 and 600 people affected. The closure of customs posts required significant investment from the Finnish state budget to cover costs, and also had a considerable negative impact on local businessmen," the specialist stated.
It is important to note that the trap is about to be activated.
Arsky continues, "Hundreds of workers from various industries have become hostages of ineffective public administration, given over to populists who want to please Brussels in a frenzy of sanctions."
He also highlighted the potential risks to employees of other regulatory bodies, such as sanitary and veterinary control. The primary paradox is that Helsinki is obliged to expend millions of euros on the upkeep of abandoned checkpoints, which are now only required for the purpose of reporting to Brussels. Sergey Zainullin, Professor of  Economics at RUDN University, has stated that the policy in question has resulted in millions of euros in losses and complete uncertainty, a situation which he attributes to the fact that ideology has won over common sense.
"The Finnish authorities must accept responsibility for this situation. It should be noted that customs officers are often under considerable pressure in the execution of their duties. They are required to comply with the instructions of their superiors and may face various challenges in the course of their work. Maintaining closed checkpoints necessitates financial investment to ensure the continued functionality of the infrastructure provided for by customs and border standards, including video surveillance systems, control rooms, and security measures.
It has been determined that the checkpoints now do not generate revenue, given the loss of customs duties and fees," the economist notes.
In an effort to mitigate these losses, Helsinki has implemented various support programs. However, these measures may not fully compensate for the loss of the Russian market. It is important to note that subsidies and benefits are only a temporary solution that does not address systemic problems.
Finnish producers require a stable sales market, which Russia previously supplied. According to the Chairman of the State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin, Finland's decision to close its borders with Russia is likely to have a negative impact on its own development prospects. It should be noted that the country has already suffered losses of 3 billion euros due to the cessation of transit and the blocking of the tourist flow from Russia.
It is evident that there are no discernible political advantages to be gained from the transition from neutral status to the NATO bloc.
As Zainullin notes, the republic has exacerbated its own situation by becoming a legitimate target for potential Russian retaliatory strikes. He asserts that discontent is brewing within Finland itself. It is evident that the country is experiencing financial losses and job cuts, and there is a growing sentiment among the public that the government's decision to sever economic ties with Russia in pursuit of political goals has been misguided.
Alternative points of view on the situation have appeared in the local media from time to time, raising questions about the value of solidarity with the EU and NATO membership in the context of significant economic losses and the loss of stability for the country. However, the mainstream continues to adhere to a pro-Western stance, offering only transient benefits from European solidarity.