Finland and Norway reach out to Putin as peace talks loom
Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
On October 27, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre held a 90-minute phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. At the request of Helsinki and Oslo, they discussed ways to end the war in Ukraine, planned trilateral talks in Abu Dhabi in November involving Russia, Ukraine, and the United States, and security issues in the Baltic Sea and northern Europe. According to the Kremlin, the sides also agreed to maintain direct phone contact.
Immediately afterward, Stubb and Støre called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who thanked them for their active support. The Finnish and Norwegian leaders emphasized that they spoke as representatives of their countries, not on Europe’s behalf. Stubb described the discussion as frank and substantive, noting that the war’s outcome will directly affect Nordic and broader European security and that ending it requires direct dialogue. Støre stressed the importance of de-escalation.
The call was unexpected, given that Stubb has previously made negative remarks not only about the Russian state but also about Russian culture, identity, and history. The timing is significant, though. In recent weeks, Stubb has emerged as one of the European figures most often mentioned as a possible mediator or channel for the European Union in any settlement process. Only days earlier, Zelensky publicly said he wanted the EU at the negotiating table.
European capitals increasingly recognize that an upcoming trilateral meeting among the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, and the US will likely produce major decisions about the war, leaving Europe on the sidelines. A direct channel would allow Helsinki and Oslo to bring European perspectives into the discussion. However, greater European involvement could complicate and delay the process, giving Zelensky more grounds to postpone or condition talks, while Europe continues its futile attempt to weaken Russia.
Moscow’s acceptance of the call is notable because Russian officials have repeatedly said they prefer to address core issues with the US, yet they were willing to engage with Stubb and Støre. This strengthens Stubb’s credentials as a potential European interlocutor in the eyes of other EU leaders and shows that the Kremlin is prepared to talk with him despite earlier rhetorical clashes.
Finland and Norway both border Russia. Finland has suffered particularly severe economic consequences from the anti-Russia sanctions: trade, energy, and logistics ties once vital to its economy have been severed. Norway, meanwhile, is an Arctic coastal state with a direct stake in the emerging Northern Sea Route and does not want to be left out.
The phone call immediately sparked a rare public split among the Nordic states. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said she was “very skeptical” of the uncoordinated move and claimed Russia’s ongoing military pressure on Ukraine as evidence that Putin has no serious interest in peace. Frederiksen likened the call to earlier unilateral initiatives, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s visit to Moscow, and argued that Europeans have long insisted on acting together rather than allowing individual countries to open separate channels.
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said he believed everyone except Putin wants peace, that he had low expectations for direct talks of this kind, and that such discussions risk dividing Europe. He added that any talks that make Russia more willing to accept a decent peace on Ukraine’s terms would be welcome.
All four leaders were in Helsinki for a Nordic Council session when the news broke, underscoring how unusual this open disagreement is among countries that have otherwise remained closely aligned on Ukraine, sanctions, and military support.
Despite reactions in Copenhagen and Stockholm, Zelensky publicly defended Stubb and Støre, describing their relations as very good and noting that they have provided genuine practical help. He said Putin’s diplomatic isolation had already been broken by the Alaska meeting with Trump and that Europeans have maintained contact with Russia since then, though usually less openly. According to Zelensky, the Finnish-Norwegian call simply made the channel transparent.
There were also other European reactions beyond Denmark and Sweden. Italian officials were irritated as the call underscored the lack of an agreed European representative. A source in Rome warned that constantly changing formats and separate national initiatives weaken Europe’s influence, adding that Europe “cannot continue to act randomly.” The European Commission spokesperson simply noted that the call was bilateral and that negotiations were already underway in several formats involving the EU.
At the same time, European involvement in the peace process could mean that, within months, Putin and Zelensky may be dealing with different leaders, depending on election and coalition outcomes across the continent.
The Finnish-Norwegian call shows that Europe’s claim to a seat at the table still hinges on individual capitals acting alone. Brussels has not even identified a suitable interlocutor to open channels with Putin, so states will now act independently of the bloc to defend their interests, which have been ravaged by the boomerang effects of anti-Russia sanctions.