A phone call with Vladimir Putin has exposed differences among Nordic leaders over how Europe should engage with Russia, after Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store held a 90-minute conversation with the Russian president on Tuesday, October 27, 2026.
The talks prompted public criticism from Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, who questioned whether direct engagement with Moscow could achieve meaningful progress towards peace in Ukraine without weakening Europe’s united position.
Stubb and Store initiated the call to urge Putin to end Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and take part in serious negotiations aimed at securing a lasting and peaceful settlement. The conversation followed recent peace talks hosted in Oslo, although the source material does not establish that the phone call was formally connected to those discussions.
“The discussion was frank and substantive,” Stubb said, explaining that the outcome of the war would have direct consequences for Finland’s security and that of Europe more broadly. He argued that ending the conflict required direct discussions with Russia.
Store said the two leaders had also stressed the need for de-escalation. Their statement made clear that they were speaking as national leaders, rather than representing Europe as a whole or acting on behalf of other European governments.
Following the conversation, Stubb and Store contacted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Zelenskyy thanked them for their active support, as the Finnish and Norwegian leaders sought to maintain communication with Kyiv alongside their direct engagement with Moscow.
However, the initiative quickly drew criticism from Copenhagen. Frederiksen said she was highly sceptical of the decision to contact Putin without first coordinating with other European leaders. She pointed to Russia’s continued military actions in Ukraine and what she described as ongoing hybrid warfare against European countries as reasons to doubt Moscow’s willingness to pursue peace.
“I don’t see any signs that Russia desires peace with Europe, neither in the hybrid warfare taking place every single day, nor in Ukraine,” Frederiksen said.
She also questioned what Finland and Norway expected to achieve through the conversation, comparing their approach with previous attempts by individual European leaders to pursue separate diplomatic initiatives with the Kremlin.
Frederiksen referred to former Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s visit to Moscow, which had raised similar concerns about European coordination. She argued that Europe needed to maintain a common position when dealing with Russia, particularly while the war continued.
Her criticism reflected a broader concern that separate diplomatic contacts could complicate efforts to present a consistent European position on the conflict. For governments that have supported Ukraine through financial and military assistance, as well as sanctions against Moscow, maintaining coordination has been a central part of their response to Russia’s invasion.
Swedish Prime Minister Kristersson expressed reservations about the call but adopted a more cautious tone. He said he believed Putin was the main obstacle to peace and questioned how much could be achieved through direct talks under the current circumstances.
“Holding talks that risk splitting the European voice is risky,” Kristersson said, while adding that he did not yet know enough about the conversation to conclude that Stubb and Store had undermined European unity.
He left open the possibility that direct discussions could be useful if they persuaded Russia to accept a fair settlement on Ukraine’s terms. His comments highlighted the distinction between opposing diplomatic engagement altogether and questioning whether a particular initiative is likely to produce results.
Store defended the decision to speak with Putin, arguing that European leaders should be willing to communicate directly with Russia. He said such contacts could complement messages delivered by the United States, whose approach to the war differs from that of European governments.
The disagreement unfolded in Helsinki, where Stubb, Store, Frederiksen and Kristersson were attending a leaders-level session of the Nordic Council. The timing made the exchange particularly notable, bringing competing views on Russia policy into public view during a meeting intended to strengthen cooperation among Nordic countries.
Finland, Norway, Denmark and Sweden have generally taken strong positions against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and have supported efforts to sustain pressure on Moscow. They have also backed Ukraine through bilateral assistance and diplomatic support. The public disagreement did not establish a change in those commitments, but it revealed different views on how diplomatic engagement should be conducted.
At the centre of the dispute is a question facing European governments as they consider possible paths towards ending the war: whether direct talks with Putin can help advance negotiations, or whether separate initiatives risk weakening the collective pressure Europe has sought to maintain.
For Stubb and Store, the call was presented as an attempt to encourage de-escalation and renewed negotiations. Frederiksen’s response focused on the risks of acting without coordination, while Kristersson questioned the likely benefits without ruling out diplomacy that could deliver a settlement on Ukraine’s terms. Their exchange exposed a difference in diplomatic approach among four governments that have otherwise shared substantial common ground over Russia’s war.
