The Russian language has once again become politically sensitive in Finland, prompting many Russophones to switch to other languages. Why, then, do many Finnish-based organisations continue utilising Russian in their everyday activities?
The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 opened up a new chapter in Finnish-Russian relations. While Finland distanced itself from its eastern neighbour, Russia revived Soviet-style measures against “unfriendly states”. Amid this, the Russian language once again became a sensitive issue in Finland, complicating the work of many Russian-speaking non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in the country that continue to use Russian in their everyday activities.
The sensitivity surrounding the Russian language largely stems from the Kremlin’s use of culture and language as a “soft power” in many European countries. Through its compatriot policy, Russia seeks to influence Russian speakers living outside the Russian Federation, encouraging them to maintain their cultural ties to the “Russian World”.
At the beginning of the full-scale invasion, Russian authorities sought to instrumentalise the grievances and fears of various communities abroad through diplomatic institutions such as Russian Houses, also known as Centres For Science and Culture. As Russia’s public-facing diplomatic activities became illegitimate, these efforts were supplemented by aggressive disinformation, trolling attacks on Russian-speaking social media and other forms of hybrid influence.
Another source of negative perceptions of the Russian language has been the Ukrainian-driven Cancel Russia -campaign. In response to Russia’s president Vladimir Putin’s denial of Ukrainian nationhood, the campaign calls for opposition to Russian colonialism and chauvinism as expressed through language and culture. Although these calls have not been translated into policy by any EU member state, they have contributed to a direct association of the Russian language with that of the aggressor and consequently, to the politicisation of Russophones.
In Finland, the widespread politicisation of the Russian language forced many Russian-speaking businesses to change the language of public communications or suspend their activities entirely. Russian-speaking schools in border areas have been closed, and attendance in Russian language classes across the country has declined.
Yet many Finnish NGOs continue to use Russian as the main language of their services to local communities. From time to time they are approached with questions about their political views and why they promote the culture of the aggressor state.
So, why do the Russian-speaking organisations in Finland continue to use Russian despite these pressures? How do they understand and employ it in their everyday work? And, after all, why do we need Russian language services in Finland?
Our research project Russian World Next Door (2023–2026) offers fruitful insights into organisational perspectives that help answer these questions. The project draws on 22 semi-structured interviews with Finnish socio-cultural NGOs that operate partially or fully in Russian. These accounts were diverse, yet they shared one common feature relevant to all, what we broadly defined as the colingual nature of these organisations.
We argue that this feature helps explain how the organisations understand the relations between language and the forms of belonging, inclusion and integration
they seek to foster.
Russian-Speaking NGOs as Colingual Communities
In research literature both bilingual and colingual refer to linguistic diversity within a community. Bilingualism involves using two languages in situations where both are equally dominant and provide different opportunities for self-identification.
Speakers may choose to use one language or another to achieve particular goals or adopt a certain status. For instance, a child from a mixed-language background may be bilingual, using different languages at school and at home or speaking different languages with each parent.
Colingualgroups are defined by their use of a common language. This language is not necessarily the mother tongue of all group members but represents a shared means of expression for individuals who use or understand it.
In Finland, one might notice that people from India and Pakistan speak Urdu with some English words to communicate with each other. Although they may not have a shared cultural background, the use of a common language brings them together as a group.
A shared language makes it quicker to explain Finnish social norms and democratic values and to discuss any differences that may initially seem strange or threatening.
In short, bilingualism is more about navigating identities related to different languages; colingualism is about the sense of belonging created through interaction in a shared linguistic environment. The colingual nature of an organisation emphasises the use of a common language as the most effective means of communication, minimising its national or historical connotations.
The Russian-speaking organisations in our study can be understood as colingual communities. They use Russian to bring together people from various countries with diverse socio-cultural, religious and political backgrounds, as well as varying levels of proficiency in Russian.
In doing so, these NGOs provide an opportunity for self-expression and connection with like-minded people. They also facilitate the integration of newcomers into the broader society. Being able to express oneself freely in a familiar linguistic environment fosters emotional security when navigating a foreign-language context.
For newcomers, receiving services in a familiar language can provide a sense of security and serve as a “bridge” towards engaging with broader Finnish society and learning Finnish. Using Russian can also help ease the “cultural shock” experienced by immigrants arriving in Finland.
A shared language makes it quicker to explain Finnish social norms and democratic values and to discuss any differences that may initially seem strange or threatening. For example, immigrants can learn through organisational networks that it is normal in Finland to speak openly about one’s sexuality and that discrimination or shame based on sexuality is unacceptable. Given the growing mistrust of the Finnish media and institutions among Russian speakers, becoming familiar with and accepting another culture in a colingual setting is crucial.
Meeting a Local Need
The organisations’ continued use of Russian is closely tied to demand. When interviewees spoke about the original idea behind their organisation, they often referred to their personal need to communicate with others in Russian in everyday life. They wanted to create a “safe space”: a judgement-free place where people could experience mutual understanding and emotional connection.
In many cases, this refers to a physical space that the organisations provide for community gatherings. People can meet, study or socialise there, pursuing both personal development and leisure activities.
These colingual environments provide a gentle entry point into social life. They allow people to achieve self-realisation and feel accepted by others with similar cultural or generational experiences.
These colingual environments provide a gentle entry point into social life. They allow people to achieve self-realisation and feel accepted by others with similar cultural or generational experiences.
This is particularly important for children who may be shy in unfamiliar settings and for older people who may find it increasingly difficult to communicate in other languages. As it was noted, teenagers and pensioners come specifically to speak Russian and spend time together. A hobby club is only a background.
A People-centred Approach
The organisations’ work reflects what we describe as a people-centred approach to culture. Firstly, they respond directly to demand. Rather than offering projects according to a state agenda or institutional priority, they develop activities and services that participants are willing to join and support.
Secondly, cultural work within NGOs can be a means of restoring human dignity. Many migrants experience reduced confidence and self-esteem due to stress, displacement or social marginalisation.
Participation in the arts can act as a “natural form of psychotherapy for everyone”. It challenges the political labels and social media stereotypes by grounding people in real relationships in the here and now. Such small but regular “vaccinations of humanity” might help people move beyond black-and-white thinking and regain a sense of stability.
Cultural work within NGOs can be a means of restoring human dignity. Many migrants experience reduced confidence and self-esteem due to stress, displacement or social marginalisation.
Volunteering and active participation can further strengthen this sense of self-worth. This especially comes to people who find it difficult to transfer their education, professional experience or cultural knowledge to the new country. As one interviewee observed, most migrants had established careers before arriving in Finland, yet now work in cleaning services or are unemployed.
By contributing to the services of colingual local NGOs, immigrants take first steps in rebuilding their cultural and symbolic capital in Finland. When their knowledge is appreciated by other participants, a former history teacher, for example, can feel valued and professionally fulfilled once again. For elderly people, this restoration of personhood is often tied to overcoming isolation, reclaiming a sense of public presence and embracing active aging in supportive colingual settings.
Russian Language as a Utilitarian Tool
In many respects, the Russian language is used as a practical tool to work with anyone, who is comfortable speaking Russian, regardless of their background. The Russian language is not viewed as an idealistic end in itself. Rather, it is a means of bridging ethnic, political or national divides within the NGOs’ online and offline community-based platforms.
This pragmatic or functional approach to language underlines another important aspect of the day-to-day work of Russian-speaking organisations. They see their role as mitigating psychological and social fragmentation among immigrants by acting as mediators. They seek to foster inter-community connections, serving as bridges to the wider Finnish society.
The colingual NGOs we examined prioritise meeting the psychological, social and cultural needs of local communities, which, in their view, eventually will enhance integration to Finnish society.
Organisations also recognise the potential risks associated with adopting explicit political positions. The general emphasis is not to discourage individuals, regardless of their political views, from seeking support. Rather, they aim to prevent individuals from becoming isolated and having only television for company.
This person-centred approach ultimately stands in stark contrast to the focus on linguistic purity and national superiority often promoted by Russian diplomatic missions abroad. Instead, the colingual NGOs we examined prioritise meeting the psychological, social and cultural needs of local communities, which, in their view, eventually will enhance integration to Finnish society.
PhD Tatiana Romashko is the Kone Foundation-funded researcher at the Department of Language and Communication Studies, University of Jyväskylä.
Rasa Žakevičiūtė is a Doctoral researcher at the Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of Jyväskylä. Žakevičiūtė contributed to the Kone Foundation-funded project in 2022–25.
Article image: Markus Winkler / Unsplash
