US allies on Friday reacted cautiously to reports that the Biden administration said it would supply Ukraine with cluster munitions, widespread weapons that often inflict serious injuries on civilians, especially children.

While not criticizing the United States or opposing the move, Germany and France said they would not follow suit, pointing to an international treaty they have signed that prohibits the use, stockpiling or transfer of such weapons . The United States, Russia and Ukraine have not signed the treaty known as the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

“Germany has also signed the treaty; for us this is not an option,” German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius told reporters in Bern, Switzerland.

The French Foreign Ministry also referred to the treaty, known as the Oslo Convention, saying that France “has pledged not to produce or use cluster munitions and to discourage their use”. But a spokeswoman for the ministry noted in response to a reporter’s question that neither the United States nor Ukraine were bound by the treaty.

“We understand the decision made by the United States to help Ukraine exercise its self-defense against Russia’s illegal aggression,” she said.

President Biden’s approval of supplying weapons to Ukraine, which Kiev has long sought, sharply separates him from many of the United States’ closest allies, complicating efforts by allies to show unity at a NATO summit in Lithuania next week.

While top US national security officials have reservations about supplying the weapons, they believe they have little choice but to send them to Ukraine, which risks running out of the conventional artillery rounds it needs to fight Russia. according to people familiar with the discussions.

On Friday, Jake Sullivan, the president’s national security adviser, said Russia has been using cluster munitions since the beginning of the war and Ukraine “will not use these munitions in a foreign country.”

“This is their land they’re defending,” Mr. Sullivan said. “These are their citizens they protect, and they are motivated to use whatever weapon system they have in a way that minimizes risk to those citizens.”

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said on Friday that the military alliance had no formal position on the use of cluster munitions in combat. .

“It is up to individual allies to make decisions about the supply of weapons and military supplies to Ukraine,” Stoltenberg told journalists at NATO headquarters in Brussels. “So this is for governments to decide – not for NATO as an alliance.”

Russian Ambassador to Belarus Boris Gryzlov called the delivery of cluster munitions to Ukraine an “act of desperation”.

“The ‘hawks’ in the West have realized that the much-advertised counter-offensive by the Ukrainian forces did not go according to plan, so they are trying at all costs to at least give it some impetus,” he told the paper. news agency TASS.

Cluster munitions scatter small bombs that sometimes fail to detonate when they hit the ground, only to detonate years later when disturbed by civilians. But officials have said the Biden administration now believes the ammunition is the best way to kill Russians dug into trenches and block Ukraine’s counter-offensive to retake territory. A US official said Thursday it was now clear the weapons were “100 percent necessary” to meet battlefield needs.

Mr Stoltenberg said that both Russia and Ukraine were already using cluster munitions. The New York Times has documented Russia’s extensive use of cluster munitions in Ukraine since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022. Ukraine has also used them in attempts to retake Russian-held territories, according to human rights monitors, the United Nations, and reports from The Times.

“Russia uses cluster missions in their brutal offensive war to invade another country, while Ukraine uses it to defend itself,” Stoltenberg said.

On a recent afternoon along Finland’s border with Russia, an attack from Russian military bases a few miles away seemed a distant prospect.

That’s not just because Finland, as NATO’s newest member, now enjoys the guaranteed protection of 30 countries, including the United States – a development President Biden will celebrate next week when he visits Helsinki.

It’s also because most of the Russians who were once stationed in the area went to fight in Ukraine, and many if not most of them, Finnish officials say, are dead. It may take years for Russia to pose a conventional military threat from the verdant forest of pines, spruces and birches.

But some Russians could be seen on a sunny June day at the Vaalimaa border crossing, about halfway between Helsinki and St. Petersburg. A trickle came and went, many in expensive cars: an Audi Q7, a black BMW with two sleek bikes on a rack. These Russians were likely dual passport holders, possibly en route to other European countries that they can only reach by land due to flight restrictions after the Russian invasion of Ukraine last year.

For anyone trying to cross the border illegally, Border Guard patrols run through the woods. But their sniffing dogs encounter few Russians trying to sneak into Finland.

“We do have a few Finns trying to sneak that way,” said Matti Pitkäniitty, a Finnish Border Guard officer who showed a visitor around the site, “but normally they are mentally ill.” Perhaps the biggest concern this afternoon was a black bear prowling the area.

The peaceful scene dispels many Finns’ fears that, despite Russia’s weakened state, this transit point and their country could one day become a Russian target. That fear led Finland last year to seek membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a process completed in April when Finland became its 31st member in what Mr. Biden calls a strategic blow to Russia’s President Vladimir V. Putin.

That move brought a long, peaceful relationship between Moscow and Helsinki with sharp new tensions. In January, the Russian army announced plans to add a new army corps to the border region of Karelia.

And on Thursday, Russia’s foreign ministry said it would expel nine Finnish diplomats — revenge for Finland’s expulsion last month of nine Russian diplomats accused of being intelligence agents — and that it would close the Finnish consulate in St. Petersburg this fall. Close. A statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Finland’s membership of NATO and its support for Ukraine “represent a threat to the security of the Russian Federation” and amount to “clearly hostile actions”.

But Finnish officials say the only threat is Russia.

“The Finns think we could easily find ourselves in the position the Ukrainians are in,” said Pitkäniitty. He gestured to a road crossing the border through the woods and added: “If a Russian division wants to attack Helsinki, they have to go through this. You would see ruins and smoke here.

Such an attack would have far greater consequences now that Finland’s border – an 830-mile border running roughly north-south from the Barents Sea to the Gulf of Finland – has become a NATO border, more than doubling the existing borders of Russia with NATO countries. . According to the alliance’s charter, a Russian attack on Finland would be treated as an attack on all NATO members.

No one expects such an invasion anytime soon. But history understandably leaves Finland wary.

Engraved in the national memory of the country is the invasion of Joseph Stalin in 1939 and the conquest of thousands of square kilometers of Finnish territory that Russia still holds today. The Soviet leader felt that St. Petersburg needed a larger buffer area in the west for protection, so he forcibly created one, at the cost of many thousands of lives.

After Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, many Finns returned to that dark chapter of their history.

“It was not difficult for Finns to put themselves in the shoes of the Ukrainians. They had walked in,” said Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken during a visit to Helsinki in early June. “For many Finns, the parallels between 1939 and 2022 were striking.”

For now, the NATO alliance has no plans to install infrastructure or station troops at the border, though its members are eager to learn more: US and European officials have visited to assess vulnerabilities and Finnish preparations.

The Finns say not to worry. On the one hand, they remember with pride the massive losses they inflicted on the invading Soviet forces in 1939—using insurgent ambush tactics against a poorly led and equipped enemy, just as the Ukrainians would do almost a century later. Stalin’s successor, Nikita Khrushchev, later said that while the Soviets had prevailed against the vastly outnumbered Finns, they had in fact been defeated, because “it encouraged the belief of our enemies that the Soviet Union was a behemoth was on feet of clay.”

Partly due to bitter memories of that conflict, the Finnish Border Guard also acts as a branch of its army. Members receive full military training and units are equipped with body armor and semi-automatic rifles, although a squad of three recently patrolling around Vaalimaa stowed away that equipment; the only visible enemies were constant swarms of mosquitoes.

However, in their current numbers, the border guards would be of little use against a Russian military attack. It’s one that Finland has almost literally paved the way for: a few years ago, Finland upgraded the highway between Helsinki and Vaalimaa to enable trade and travel between Finland and Russia, which has boomed over the past decade. to make.

But border traffic today is less than a third of prepandemic levels and the road is lightly traveled.

The strength of the NATO alliance and the Article 5 treaty mandating collective self-defense reduces fear of attack. “That’s the main reason we joined – to get the Article 5 coverage,” Brig. So said General Sami Nurmi, a Finnish defense policy official, in an interview in April. “And of course also that deterrent aspect.”

In the short term, the Finns are more concerned about a completely different form of warfare: armed migration. About 60 miles north of Vaalimaa, Finland has begun erecting its first border fence.

In late 2015 and early 2016, Finland experienced a wave of asylum seekers crossing the Russian border, most of them from third countries. Finnish officials saw the hand of Moscow, which has repeatedly diverted migrants to European countries in an apparent attempt to destabilize their politics.

“The impression that someone on the Russian side is organizing and arranging things is probably true,” Finland’s foreign minister, Timo Soini, told the country’s state broadcaster at the time. “It’s pretty clear that an activity like this is a managed effort.”

The Finns were taken by surprise. “Never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined, for example, that we would see Bangladeshis on bicycles coming to a high northern border crossing when the sun doesn’t rise at all and it is minus 20-25 degrees Celsius,” says Pitkäniitty. said, or minus 4 to minus 13 degrees Fahrenheit.

Despite that experience, Mr. Pitkäniitty said he and his colleagues maintain cordial and professional relations with their Russian counterparts across the border. The two sides communicate regularly, he said.

“When we talk to the Russians, we try to avoid politics,” said Pitkäniitty. “There is no point in arguing. You just end up in a dispute for which there are no solutions.”

For years, he said, fishing, hunting and sports were acceptable topics of conversation with the Russians. “Now we have to exclude sports, because they no longer participate in international sports,” said Pitkäniitty. “So it’s fishing and hunting that you can safely talk about with the Russian officers.”

At the same time, “I know they won’t hesitate to shoot me in the back if ordered to,” he added. “Just like I would do the same to them.”

John Ismay contributed reporting from Washington, DC

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken took the stage in Finland, NATO’s newest member, on Friday to say that further strengthening Ukraine’s defenses against Russia was a “precondition” for diplomacy to end the war in Ukraine and to warning of a short-term ceasefire. fires that could play in Moscow’s favour.

In a powerfully symbolic speech at City Hall in Helsinki, Finland’s capital, Mr Blinken took stock of the many ways Russia’s President Vladimir V. Putin’s war had backfired since Moscow launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 .

He noted, among other things, Finland’s decision last year to break with decades of strict neutrality and join the NATO alliance, a major strategic blow to Mr Putin, who sees NATO expansion as a serious threat. for Russian security.

Mr Putin’s war “has been a strategic failure – it has significantly reduced Russia’s power, interests and influence for years to come,” Mr Blinken said. “If you look at President Putin’s long-term strategic goals and objectives, there is no doubt: Russia today is significantly worse off than before the full-scale invasion – militarily, economically, geopolitically,” he added.

“Where Putin wanted to radiate strength, he has revealed weakness,” he said. “Where he tried to divide, he united. What he tried to prevent, he knocked down.”

While Mr Blinken’s speech broke few new ground, the speech from a country that shares an 832-mile border with Russia and which the NATO alliance now wants to defend amounted to a victory lap that would likely embarrass Mr Putin , if not enraged. .

Finland’s official entry into NATO in April, Mr Blinken said, was “a major change that would have been unthinkable” before the war in Ukraine – and one Mr Putin brought upon himself by invading his neighbour.

Mr Blinken spoke at the end of a week-long trip to Norway, Sweden and Finland, which included meetings with NATO officials designed to highlight Western resolve against Russia and to discuss the alliance’s long-term relationship with Ukraine , which seeks NATO membership and security guarantees.

Speaking to European leaders on Thursday, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine called for his country’s membership in NATO, saying “a clear invitation from members of Ukraine is needed” this year. But in comments on Friday he also acknowledged that Ukraine could not join the alliance as long as it was at war with Russia.

Both the President of France and the British Defense Secretary have made a similar point in recent dayssaying they support Ukraine, but full NATO membership was out of reach for now.

Mr Putin has cited NATO’s eastward expansion as one of his justifications for the invasion. On Friday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry S. Peskov said Russia would continue to act in its national security interests, according to the state news agency. Bag.

“This means preventing the expansion of the alliance, as well as the clear advance to our borders and Ukraine’s possible NATO membership,” he said.

In his 40-minute speech on Friday, Mr Blinken argued for the Biden administration’s thinking on the war, saying that Mr Putin had unwittingly exposed and exacerbated the weakness of the Russian military, hindered its economy, had cost, and inspired NATO to become better funded, more united – and bigger.

The speech had a triumphant tone at times: at one point Mr. Blinken joked that the Russian army, once heralded as the second strongest in the world, was now “the second strongest in Ukraine”. But it also contained cautionary notes about the long and difficult road ahead for Ukraine, especially amid what Mr Blinken predicted would be fresh calls to stop the fighting.

US officials believe that if, as expected, a forthcoming Ukrainian counter-offensive fails to produce dramatic gains, pressure will mount from around the world to find a way to at least suspend the fighting.

“In the coming months, some countries will call for a ceasefire,” Blinken said. At first glance, that sounds sensible—appealing, even. After all, who would not want warring parties to lay down their arms? Who doesn’t want the killing to stop?”

But a ceasefire that freezes current lines, with Russia controlling large swathes of Ukrainian territory, he added, “is not a just and lasting peace. It’s a Potemkin peace. It would legitimize Russia’s land grab. It would reward the aggressor and punish the victim.”

While insisting that the United States and Ukraine would like to see an end to the war, Mr Blinken warned that Mr Putin does not seem ready for good faith negotiations. The Russian leader has insisted that talks cannot take place until Ukraine accepts Russia’s claims that it has annexed four of its eastern regions.

Samuel Charap, a former State Department official in the Obama administration and a Russia analyst with the RAND Corporation, said Mr Blinken may be setting the bar too high.

“If serious talks mean a willingness to make pre-emptive concessions on territory, Putin will never meet that bar,” Charap said.

Many US officials believe that Putin is aiming to gain far more control over Ukraine than he currently has, something he needs time to do.

The Russian leader is “convinced that he can survive Ukraine and its supporters simply by sending more and more Russians to their deaths and making Ukrainian citizens suffer more and more,” Blinken said. “He thinks that even if he loses the short game, he can still win the long game.”

Still, Mr Blinken added, the United States would support any peace initiative “that helps President Putin to engage in meaningful diplomacy at the table,” the foreign minister said. He added that such efforts should include Russian accountability for wartime atrocities and payments for the reconstruction of Ukraine.

Mr Blinken said, as he did before, that a peace agreement must “affirm the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence”. But, as before, he did not specify whether the US believes Russia should withdraw from all of Ukraine’s territory — including the strategic Crimean peninsula, which Russia annexed in 2014 and which many analysts believe Putin will never surrender.

Mr Blinken also said a genuine peace deal could open the door to lifting Western sanctions against Russia “related to concrete actions, especially military withdrawal”. And he reiterated that “the US is not trying to overthrow the Russian government”.

Earlier on Friday, Mr Blinken met with Finland’s outgoing prime minister, Sanna Marin, and the country’s foreign minister, Pekka Haavisto.

Mr Blinken marveled at Finland’s entry into NATO, suggesting that it amounted to a colossal blunder by Mr Putin, who previously had relatively friendly relations with Helsinki. Before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, he noted, only one in four Finns supported the country’s entry into NATO. After the invasion, three out of four Finns supported NATO membership, he said.

Mr Blinken’s performance in Helsinki was all the more striking compared to the last time a visit by an important US official made headlines here. Five years ago, President Donald J. Trump traveled to the Finnish capital to meet with Mr. Putin – a trip notorious for Mr Trump’s suggestion, at a press conference along with the Russian leader, that he relied on the denial of Mr Putin to interfere in the Finnish capital. the 2016 election on the conclusions of US intelligence agencies.

Earlier this week, Blinken visited Sweden, whose bid to join the Atlantic alliance was thwarted by Turkey, and on Thursday met with allied foreign ministers in Oslo to address concerns about Ukraine’s security in the discuss long term.

Helsinki was expected to be Mr Blinken’s last stop on a Nordic tour, as Russia, China and NATO nations battle for stronger positions in the Arctic. Later this year, the United States will open a mission with a single diplomat in the city of Tromso, Norway – the only such facility above the Arctic Circle – Mr Blinken said at a news conference on Thursday.

Speaking Friday in the capital of NATO’s newest member, Finland, Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken called for continued Western aid to Ukraine and warned of the appeal of a ceasefire that could play into Russia’s hands .

In a speech at Helsinki City Hall billed as a major review of Washington’s thinking on the war in Ukraine, Mr Blinken also took stock of what he called the many “strategic failures” that Russia’s President Vladimir V. Putin has since he launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

He said that Mr Putin had unknowingly exposed and exacerbated the weakness of the Russian military, hindered its economy and inspired NATO to become more united and even bigger – as evidenced by Mr Blinken’s actions in Finland, which joined the alliance of 31 countries in April. after decades of firm neutrality.

Mr Putin’s war “has been a strategic failure – it has significantly reduced Russia’s power, interests and influence for years to come,” Mr Blinken said.

While the speech served as a victory lap of sorts to celebrate an unexpected degree of Western unity and Ukrainian resolve, it also contained cautionary remarks about what Mr Blinken suggested would be a long and difficult road for Kiev, especially amidst what he predicted. are new global calls for an end to the fighting.

“In the coming months, some countries will call for a ceasefire,” Blinken said. At first glance, that sounds sensible—appealing, even. After all, who would not want warring parties to lay down their arms? Who doesn’t want the killing to stop?”

But a ceasefire that freezes current lines, with Russia controlling large swathes of Ukrainian territory, he added, “is not a just and lasting peace. It’s a Potemkin peace. It would legitimize Russia’s land grab. It would reward the aggressor and punish the victim.”

While saying that the United States and Ukraine would like to see an end to the war, Mr Blinken warned that Mr Putin seemed to have little interest in negotiating an end to the fighting.

The Russian leader is “convinced that he can survive Ukraine and its supporters simply by sending more and more Russians to their deaths and making Ukrainian citizens suffer more and more,” Blinken said. “He thinks that even if he loses the short game, he can still win the long game.”

The United States would support any peace initiative “that helps bring President Putin to the table to conduct meaningful diplomacy,” the secretary of state said, adding that such efforts should hold Russia accountable for atrocities and help pay for Ukraine’s reconstruction.

While Mr Blinken said a peace deal should “affirm the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence”, he did not specify whether Russia would have to withdraw from all of Ukraine’s territory – including the strategic Crimean peninsula, which Russia ceded in 2014 and which many analysts believe Mr. Putin will never surrender.

Mr Blinken visited Helsinki in part to commemorate Finland’s recent entry into NATO, a defeat for Mr Putin, who has tried to block the alliance’s expansion eastward. Earlier in the day, Mr Blinken met with his outgoing Prime Minister, Sanna Marin, and Foreign Minister, Pekka Haavisto.

Mr Blinken called Finland’s NATO membership “a major change that would have been unthinkable just over a year earlier”. Before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, he said, only one in four Finns supported the country’s entry into NATO. After the invasion, three out of four Finns supported NATO membership.

Earlier this week, Blinken visited Sweden, whose bid to join the Atlantic alliance was thwarted by Turkey, and on Thursday met with allied foreign ministers in Oslo to address concerns about Ukraine’s security in the discuss long term.

Helsinki was expected to be Mr Blinken’s last stop on a Nordic tour, as Russia, China and NATO nations battle for stronger positions in the Arctic. Later this year, the United States will open a mission with a single diplomat in the city of Tromso, Norway – the only such facility above the Arctic Circle – Mr Blinken said at a news conference on Thursday.