and with the russian borderjust two hours' drive away, it is easy to understand the strategic significance of finland joining nato. much to moscow's dismay, the baltic sea is now very much nato�*s back yard, and that long russia—finland border is a zone of rising tension. my guest today is the president of finland, alexander stubb. hasjoining nato really boosted finland's security? president alexander stubb, welcome to hardtalk. thank you.

let me begin with something you said just last month, "europe", you said, "has just a few years "to change its thinking from the la la land of post—cold war complacency". what is this la la land you're talking about? it is, i think, probably, in international relations, there is, or was, a time when a big change happens — 1918, 1945, 1989 — and 1989 was for me and many of my kin the end of history. the thought that all 200 member states in the world would revert to the best form of governance, which is democracy, market economy and globalisation. but that ended, in my mind, in february 2022, when putin attacked ukraine. all the international institutions, rules, are being challenged, so the la la land that we used to live in does not exist anymore, and we have to readjust. in the most literal sense, you seem to be saying that europe needs to learn from some

of the things that finland does, in terms of preparation and readiness for the worst—case scenario. for example, this country, although it has fewer than 6 million people, has an extraordinary number of military reservists — up to 900,000 men and women who are ready to serve. all young men go through conscription, they have to. indeed, i think your son is doing it right now. yes, he is. i think most finns have access to a bank of protection, should there be war. is your message that the rest of europe has to do this, too? no, not everyone has to do it because they don't have 1,340 kilometres of border with russia, which is double that border inside nato. what we have done is we have understood what russia is all about. it is an aggressive, imperialist state was that we have had 30 wars or skirmishes with russia since the 1300s. because we are front line states, we need to be prepared. that is why we have general

conscription, that is why we have 280,000 we can mobilise in wartime, that's why we have 62 f—18s, why we just bought 64 f—35s, and why we have long—range missiles in the air, land and sea. we don't have them because we are worried about sweden. no, itjust strikes me, are you really the same alexander stubb i spoke to ten years ago, when you were prime minister, and you are trying to persuade me that finland and europe should learn to work in partnership with russia? you said "nord stream is a great idea, we need access "to cheap russian energy". you said, "we in finland are going to build nuclear power with russian cooperation, and it's good for finland". you said, "we need to learn to trust these russians". you got it absolutely wrong yourself. and other leaders, absolutely, yes. i think, in politics, it's very important to understand that you make mistakes and learn from it. i ask myself — not every day, but quite often — why? the basic idea was very european,

that by integrating together, you actually push forward cooperation. now, did i support nord stream? yes, i was in government. did i want more nuclear power? yes, idid... and you ignored clear signs, actually. as foreign minister of finland, you were heavily involved in europe's response to russia using its forces in georgia in 2008. yes. you decided that a pragmatic deal, whereby georgia defected large swathes of territory, was the right thing to do, with no punishment for russia. then you watched the 2014 annexation of crimea, russian military in the donbass, again you decided that it was right to continue to seek cooperation with russia, you personally ignored all the signals of putin's expansionist ambitions. i think there might be some finns that would challenge that hypothesis, because after immediate peace in georgia, i came back

and said the what has changed, and we need to change the way in which we approach with russia. i was very bullish on sanctions. i wanted finland tojoin nato. in 2018, you described sergei lavrov, foreign minister of russia, and one of the great defenders of putin, you described him as "an old friend". yes, this was 2018, not 2008. yes, i think he is one of the most astute diplomats. he has been a us ambassadorfor ten years now, foreign minister of russia for 20 years. the arch defender of what russia did in ukraine in 2014, still your friend in 2018, and now you sit with me, saying, you know, "europe has to stop living in la la land". you've been in la la land. yes, i, yes, ithink, i have in many ways, and i think we have to admit that we all were, and now it is a question of how we change tacks. it is a question of learning from the past. i must admit that perhaps, in finnish terms, i've been one

of the most hawkish when it comes to russia, one of the strongest nato advocates, but at the same time, there were moments when i personally, and many others, were actually dovish with russia, and that was the wrong tack to take. it is fair to say that, for years, you argued finland would be better off in nato. now here we are, finland is inside nato, but how far do you want finland now to be a leader in nato? you talk about this 1,300 kilometres of finland is that border. i see that you have talked about the very real possibility of having nuclear weapons passed through finnish territory, which, right now, is not something that finland has ever countenanced. are you saying finland should countenance that? no, i am saying nato has three pillars of deterrence. one is its military, second one is its missiles, and the third one is the nuclear umbrella, which is provided

by the united states, and to a certain extent by the united kingdom, and i think it is a very important part of our defence. now bringing nuclear weapons to finland, no one has asked for them, no one is giving them to us, but there are many different ways in which you can be involved in nuclear deterrence. what kind of a member will we be, you asked? i say we are in the geographic margins of europe, therefore we need to be in the institutional core. 0ur nato membership has no limits. we will play our part for peace, for sure. you say the key moment that changed your mind, and many finns' minds, about nato, not so much you, most finns' minds, was the february 2022 invasion of ukraine by vladimir putin, the all—out invasion. to what extent do you think that, even today, the west's response, its assistance to ukraine, has fallen far short of what was required?

i am actually quite surprised at how firm, how effective and how quickly support has been. i have been dealing with eu affairs for the better part of 30 years, i have never seen the european union more united, and actually faster. whether the support will last forever, i don't know. i'm just back from ukraine. my message is clear. we need to support ukraine for as long as it takes. you have to remember that things such as the peace facility has been turned into an instrument of financing the war in ukraine. the material help from a country like finland, 23 packages, 3 billion euros, a huge amount, if you compare it to gdp per capita, so i'm quite convinced and hopeful we'll continue to support. i'm frankly surprised you say that. what we see, in terms of the momentum on the front line in the east of ukraine, a new front line, it seems, the russians are opening up in the north, very close to the city of kharkiv, what we see right now

is that momentum appears to sit with the russians. zelensky and the ukrainians are desperate for more long—range missiles, more air defences, more of the weaponry that they say they could effectively neutralise the russian threat, if only they had been given them in timely fashion. i agree, that's why finland has been very front—heavy on this. we just came out with a package, when i visited zelensky in early april, with a security agreement, and, actually, with air defences and heavy ammunition, and everyone needs to do this, we need to continue to do it. but you must listen to the americans, for example, when they say to the ukrainians, "you must not hit russia's oil infrastructure, it is an escalator react which is not in your, and indeed the wider world's, interest".

do you think that is a fundamental mistake, that message? my main worry right now is not the price of oil. my main worry is that ukraine must win this war, and in that sense, i think ukraine has fairly free hands in what it can do. remember, it is facing a huge aggressor, which is violating all rules of war and all international law, and it must win, no matter what. you have changed your tune a little bit, because in 2023, at davos, you said, you said this with great passion, "i wish western leaders would say �*whatever it takes' when it comes to assisting ukraine. they should provide all equipment possible". well, it is more than a year later, and they are still not doing it, and yet you are trying to tell me, "oh, yes, i'm very satisfied". a balance has to be found. i have to also say there is a slight difference of what a professor at the university institute in florence versus the president of finland can say... ah, you mean you are giving me a message which is much more

politik, much more tactful, and you're not really telling me the truth... i am telling the truth, but there's a difference in office what you can say and what you cannot say. but the bottom line is that we need to continue their help. i think a lot of help is going through, but of course more can be done and should be done. one more interesting thought that actually comes to me, because i'm in finland, which has a long, and pretty dark, history with russia in the 20th century — you fought a bitter war with russia. finland fought very bravely, but at the end of that war, you, in pursuit of peace, ceded territory, quite significant territory — about 10% of your landmass was ceded to russia. your message in this ukrainian conflict seems to be that ukraine should not contemplate ceding any territory. you are one of the maximalists in europe, who says that every inch, including crimea, has to be returned to ukraine.

isn't there a lesson from finland that sometimes you have to make difficult compromises for peace? the lesson is that we cannot give advice to the ukrainians what they should do, and i should tell you that the 10% you are talking about is karelia, including the area where my grandparents were born, and where my father was born. the feeling that we have for that area is still very strong, and that is why i think it would be over the top of me to tell zelensky what he needs to do. i do think, however, that there are four roads to peace that he needs to guarantee. one is the question of territory. the second one is security guarantees, the third one isjustice — in other words, war criminals — and the fourth one is the reconstruction of ukraine. we are not there yet, but we should not be giving any advice to zelensky what he should or should not do with his territory. i've got one last thought — finland prospered after world war ii

as a neutral nation, a non—aligned nation. very specifically, the finnish people did not want, for a long time, tojoin nato. the ukrainians, for very understandable reasons, many of them absolutely want to join nato as soon as possible, but could it be that the only practical, pragmatic outcome, at least in the foreseeable future, will be ukraine not in nato? the short answer is no, the long answer is absolutely no. i think what needs to happen is that ukraine needs to, number one, join the european union, number two, join nato. there is no finnish pathway. you have to remember, for countries like us, and countries like ukraine, foreign policy is existential. when you are living next to an aggressive neighbour, whose whole raison d'etre is basically acquiring territory, you need to get all the security you can get. ukraine's place is in nato. you now are one head of state

amongst many in europe. a fellow head of state, president macron of france, has said that europe has to learn a fundamental lesson. it needs to develop strategic autonomy, to invest in its own defence and security capability to the point where it is no longer dependent on the united states. do you agree with him? i think we're quite far away from that. i think strategic autonomy is not necessarily a bad thing but it's not realistic. remember, for instance, that finnish defence is based very much on american material. we just bought fa — 64 f—35 fighter jets. we have jassms, we have gabriels and we have gmlrs, which are all of american background. what europe needs to understand is that we need to be a little bit more self—reliant, we need to hike up our defence industry. we need to stand a bit stronger

on our own foot but to detach ourselves from america, i do not think so. what do you make of countries like germany, italy, spain falling very far short of that 2% of gdp to be spent on defence, which is the nato threshold in which they signally fail to meet and it seems respect? i think we are seeing a "zeitenwende", or a turn of tide, and actually germany is going to get it up to about 2% as well, and as we go towards the washington—nato summit injuly, the latest is that 21 out of 32 nato countries will meet the 2%, more important that the 2% based on article three of nato is what kind of material you actually have. it is again coming back to where we started from, this is waking up from la la land and taking defence a little bit more seriously, which i think is a good and welcome thing. is part of your thinking on taking defence seriously there will be a new frontier of competition, involving superpower rivalries

in the far north and arctic which of course finland is deeply invested in, and we see russia and china, in particular, showing a very great deal of strategic interest right now? one of the few international institutions which i still give a little bit of hope to is actually the arctic council. are you serious? ijust spoke to the defence minister of canada who acknowledged to me that right now the arctic council, i'm paraphrasing, is dead in the water? exactly. but that's why i think we should try to keep it alive and resuscitate it because it is one of the few places where the americans, the canadians and the russians, including us here in the arctic are still involved. whether it's realistic in the long run, i don't know, but it's an inoffensive place. and the arctic is about so many things, the environment, the economy and security. is it a new frontier? i don't think so but i do think it's part and parcel of a larger geopolitical game.

you have a role as president in your country, notjust when it comes to foreign policy and security policy, you're supposed to be some kind of values leader for finland. i just wonder how you fulfil that role when it comes to some deeply controversial things that the finnish government is currently doing? having closed the border, effectively, with russia as a result of the fallout from february 2022 and the invasion of ukraine, we now see that finland is being accused by the united nations, by a host of different ngos of fundamentally violating international law by saying to incomers who are attempting to cross into finland along that border, "if you try to get in, we'lljust chuck you straight out." we won't give you any right to file an asylum claim, we won't recognise your international rights, we're simply going to throw you out? two points on that. we haven't closed the border

because of the war, we have closed the border because russia is instrumentalising, cynically, human beings, in other words, asylum seekers. but they're still human beings with rights? bringing them from two places, one is outside of saint petersburg, second is flying them in from syria, from iraq, from yemen. whatever their tragic story, they have rights? they have rights, absolutely. and finland isn't recognising them? yes, we are. what we are doing right now is basically an emergency law which is being discussed also by the way at the european court of human rights, it has been opened up for something called a intake, which basically means you have to look at asylum seekers also from another perspective. if someone is using them as a weapon, then you have to find ways in which they are secured, they're guaranteed and russia stops it. and of course russia has stopped its action, it has not been pushing over any asylum seekers for a few months.

to be clear, they start to do the things you claim they are doing again, you will simply push these people back over the border, will you? we have four conditions, then there is prerogative of the border guards to deal with the issue. that law is right now with the government, and in parliament and we will see what comes out of it. again, in terms of values which you say are so important to your position, how do you justify finland's long—running treatment of your own indigenous sami minority people? the united nations again, human rights groups of different descriptions all talk about discrimination and racism practised against the sami people. not just for years but for decades and decades? very political issue in finland, and there are some laws which are right now being dealt with by the government and in the parliament, and i am actually personally flying up to northern finland to lapland

to understand better what the actual issues are. understand better what the issues are? these issues have been around for decades. people have been telling you what the issues are for decades, you were prime minister 10 years ago. you know full well what the issues are. and we have been trying to push those laws through but they're actually quite complicated. let me ask you about the environment in this country in which you have to work. you are the head of state, but you work with a prime minister and a government elected by the people. right now, it is a right—wing government which has a key coalition member, the finns party which in many corners of europe would be described as extreme or ultra right wing. there are members of the coalition government who the finnish media, having dug through years of social media output have found evidence of racist sometimes seemingly violent commentary in social media from these members of government.

as president, do you want to see those people removed from government? it's actually not my business. in other words... but you're the values leader? yes, but i don't have the instruments to actually move or remove or take in people in the government. there's a very clear constitutional. . .. so the values leader is a meaningless term? not at all. when you are value leader you do not declare and you do it by action. an example i have been in office two months, last summer there was a serious discussion about the issues that you just mentioned. the value leader at the time, sanna marin, the president of finland said enough is enough. racism is a very serious problem i would argue in many countries in the western world and in liberal democracies. and every country has to go through these type of difficult issues. and finland is part of it with the sami, hopefully we can settle things. were these types of issues to emerge again, of course i will intervene.

the leader of the socialists and democrats, a spanish politician in the european parliament addressed directly your prime minister. "your alliance with the far right "is a real threat to democracy and to the european project." "mr 0rpo", that is your prime minister, "please put an end to your alliance with those who want to destroy europe." can you at least tell me if you agree to those sentiments? no, i don't. two observations on that. as a former member of the european parliament when a prime minister from another party is in the chambers, there is usually a heart attack, that was an example thereof. the second, i think in today's world we simplify things too much. the finns party is right now in government and has been democratically elected, it is working based on a mandate from the peoples within the framework of the european constitution. in my experience and i was in government with the finns in 2015,

when you are given power, responsibility is taken, then whether you like the way in which it is done or not is a completely different thing. for me, this is not about ideology but respecting the rule of law and democracy and the finnish government is doing so. but, ultimately, it is about whether finland is a country of basic, shared and unifying values. and i would suggest to you that, right now, today if one looks at finland, it looks like it is going through the same process of toxic polarisation that we see in many other democracies, perhaps most visibly in the united states? i think that's a simplification, to be very frank with you. if you look at all kinds of measurements, whether it's freedom of press, whether it's rule of law or different type of freedoms, finland is always top three in the world. so i would not come and point the finger at a country which is one of the vibrant democracies in the world.

president alexander stubb, thank you very much forjoining me on hardtalk. my pleasure, thank you. hello there. thursday brought us a real mixture of weather across the uk. it was scotland and, to a degree, the far north of england that had the best of the day's weather, with plenty of sunshine. and very warm in the highlands, temperatures reached 25 celsius in altnaharra — that was the warmest place in the whole of the uk, confirmation of the rather beautiful weather we had here. wasn't like that everywhere, though — for northern ireland, england, and wales, we had rain or some thundery showers around, and across berkshire and also pembrokeshire,

we had photographs sent to us of some funnel clouds there — tornadoes that don't quite make it all the way down to the ground. it was very wet for some — in nantwich, in cheshire, we had 25 millimetres of rain. now on into friday's forecast, the tail end of the weather front will continue to feed in quite a lot of cloud across northern england, and we start off certainly with some mist and fog patches around some of our north sea coast. aside from northern england, though, i suspect overall, we're looking at a brighter day on friday with more in the way of sunshine. there will, though, be 1—2 showers popping up into the afternoon, 1—2 thunderstorms, but big gaps between those showers — that means probably for most of you, we're looking at a dry day with temperatures widely high teens, to the low 20s. it will feel warm in the sunshine, highest temperatures, probably west scotland, where i think we'll probably get to 24 — outside chance of a 25. 0n into the weekend, we've got a low pressure system threatening some heavier bursts of rain across southeast england, certainly more cloud around here as we head into the morning. 0therwise, again, we're looking at a few mist and fog patches —

clearing and lifting away, sunny spells, breaking through, and then, into the afternoon, 1—2 showers and thunderstorms p°pping up- temperatures still on the warm side — we're looking at highs well into the teens, 23—24 celsius in the very warmest areas. given the light winds and the may sunshine, that will feel very pleasant. for sunday, though, there is a slight change in the weather picture across scotland and northern ireland, in that there'll be a bit more in the way of cloud pushing in here — it could be thick enough to give us an odd patch of rain. england and wales mainly dry with some sunshine, but you will notice the temperatures just dropping a little bit across scotland and northern ireland, given that cloudier weather. now beyond that, into next week, looks like the start of the week should be ok — many of us will have drier weather with sunny spells — but there's a tendency for the cloud to thicken, with rain arriving towards the second half of the week.

you're with newsday, live from singapore. the headlines: phone calls and the ethics of secret recordings — donald trump's hush money trial hears more evidence from his former lawyer michael cohen.

police charge a man with the attempted murder of the slovakian prime minister, who is still in a serious condition after being shot. two presidents and one vision — putin and xi say they will work together to combat "destructive and hostile" us policies. we'll bring you up to date with the latest in the wars in gaza and ukraine as well. also ahead... we report from taiwan — where the president tells the bbc she doesn't believe an attack from china is imminent. the most important thing is that we are on our own, and we are a democracy, and we enjoy freedom and democracy and progressive values.