Island precedent

The experience of the autonomy of the Åland Islands would help resolve the Crimean crisis

The situation in Crimea, the intermediate result of which was the annexation of the peninsula by Russia, could be resolved on the basis of the Aland model that has already worked

The vast majority of the inhabitants of the Åland Islands speak Swedish and consider Sweden their mother state, although the Åland has been an autonomy within Finland for almost 100 years. The only attempt by the Ålanders to join their native Sweden and separate from Finland, which became independent in 1917, led to a crisis that was resolved as a result of peace negotiations that lasted four years and was fixed by the League of Nations (now the UN) at the international level.

“Finland and Sweden made a decision that, to varying degrees, did not suit all parties, including the Alanders themselves. However, this was the only way out of the conflict peacefully,” said Sia Spiliopoulou-Akermak, director of the Åland Peace Institute.

We are talking about obtaining the status of extended autonomy for the Åland Islands, which the Finnish parliament decided only in 1920, three years after the start of the conflict, not wanting to lose a strategically important point in the Baltic Sea. However, the islanders decided to play it safe and demanded not only guarantees at the national level, but also at the international level, turning to the newly formed League of Nations.

In 1921, the League recognized the islands as Finland, obliging Helsinki to respect the right of the inhabitants of the autonomy to have their own self-government bodies and use Swedish as the only official language. Later, a decision was made to demilitarize and neutralize the islands on which the Russians had to destroy their military forts after the defeat in the Crimean War in 1856 as part of the Paris Peace Treaty.

The situation in Crimea, the intermediate result of which was the annexation of the peninsula by Russia, could be resolved on the basis of the Aland model that has already worked and is successfully operating to this day, since both crises are very similar.

“Aland gained independence in 1921. The absolute majority of the inhabitants of the Åland Islands, approximately 96% of the inhabitants, wanted to join Sweden, as, for example, in the Crimea, ”said Elisabeth Knockler, member of the Finnish Parliament from the Åland Islands.

The decision of the League of Nations to leave the Alands to Finland, according to Knockler, was made against the will of the Alanders, who wanted to become part of Sweden.

“The first generation of Alanders flatly refused to recognize the decision made by the diplomats in Geneva. Only by the 1950s and 1960s did the Alanders begin to make attempts to develop autonomy. The flag and anthem of the islands, for example, were adopted much later than the Alands received the status of extended autonomy, ”says the Finnish deputy.

“As a researcher and a person who has lived on the islands for many years, I can say that it was not the actions of the international community that resolved the Åland conflict. The negotiation process began long before 1921. These complicated negotiations took place between Helsinki, Stockholm and Mariehamn, the capital of the islands. Despite significant differences, the parties treated each other with respect. Thus, a certain golden mean was found, ”says Spiliopoulou-Akermak.

One of the main differences between the Crimean and Åland crises is that Sweden, the parent state, never sent its troops to the islands. “The main focus was on negotiations,” Knockler says.

“The success of the negotiations, in my opinion, lies in the fact that all parties to the conflict agreed that the ideal solution cannot be reached,” says the director of the Peace Institute. - For the newly independent Finland, which was in the process of forming state institutions, it was important to follow the accepted principle of the rule of law. Therefore, the agreement of 1921 is still respected by the Finns and supported by legislation.

Knockler, who has experience in diplomacy at the UN and on the Balkan crisis, does not consider the decision to incorporate Crimea into Russia a wise one. In her opinion, the model of the “mother state”, which, in fact, is Aland and which Russia could become, is more advantageous for the Crimeans.

“Sweden supports Åland in areas such as culture and language, education and social programs, as well as the media, television and even medicine. But Sweden will never support Åland politically if the islands demand independence from Finland,” Knockler said.

The authorities of Ukraine and Crimea, including the previous ones, the Finnish parliamentarian and diplomat believes, made a mistake by not studying the experience of other autonomies in the world, including Aland.