Then, when the reconstruction truly begins, basically “everything” will be needed, so my guess is Wärtsilä, Valmet, Outokumpu, Cargotec, Konecranes, Kone, and perhaps to a lesser extent Qt, Tieto (which had an office there), Nokian Tyres, Nokia.
The thesis is that at least a few major cities need to be rebuilt there. The population was 40 million, so a few new Helsinkis there, and quickly all companies will be needed.
From the EU, Japan, and if I recall correctly, both South Korea and Canada, at least quite significant sums have been promised for reconstruction.
The entire post-Soviet Eastern Europe has been under reconstruction for over 30 years, and many countries there still need “a bit of everything,” but it hasn’t generated significant revenues for Finnish companies, except for NRE. Why would Ukraine be any better?
Roughly speaking, have Eastern European countries been promised reconstruction and support, and have they been able to afford it? Support has already been promised to Ukraine in advance.
Paywall, but the title shows the magnitude. As Finland’s total exports are already over 100 billion, reconstruction is thus expected to bring about one percent growth in the turnover of export companies.
Overall, the cost of reconstruction is estimated at 1000 billion, of which Finland would only receive 0.1-0.2%. I believe that, for example, YIT, a significant part of whose business comes from Eastern Europe, would be actively involved. Finland has also been involved from the beginning in the EU group coordinating Ukraine’s reconstruction, which has met several times. Finland’s support for Ukraine has also been more significant than its size, and it could be assumed that Ukraine would be favorably disposed. YIT does not separately publish the revenue for its CEE segment, but in Q2/2025, the segment sold more than twice the number of apartments to consumers than in Finland. For example, in Poland, there is a multi-year project underway to build a thousand apartments, so the position is at least favorable in the direction of Ukraine. The reconstruction investment surge would kickstart an economic boom in Europe.
Support providers may have their own national conditions, but generally speaking, Zelensky has mentioned that those countries that have been supporting Ukraine will compete for future contracts. And while many have provided some support, this likely refers to the core group: Poland, Germany, Britain, etc., to which Finland also probably belongs. Well, there is certainly a large group involved, and Poland definitely has a significant advantage in terms of location and workforce.
Of course, reconstruction will not begin unless there is a guaranteed peace ahead.
There is certainly enough money in the world and in Europe. The EU has very generously supported other Eastern European members to keep them out of Russia’s sphere of influence. Even Estonia’s budget was paid for over 10 years, about 40% with EU subsidies for the aforementioned reason; Poland alone has cumulatively received about 200 billion in net subsidies from the EU. So the amount of money Ukraine needs is not actually insurmountable.
And the amount of reconstruction aid will surely increase significantly once the war ends. Especially if Ukraine is genuinely intended to be brought into EU membership.
That total sum is now just some number, a bit like how we always talk about the ‘repair debt’ (korjausvelasta). It’s just an imaginary figure that will never be reached, and no one even tries to.
Reconstruction, of course, requires money, but it’s a long-term undertaking. A good start would be Russia’s frozen central bank assets + 200 billion, but it’s possible that these will have to be negotiated in a peace treaty.
And raw materials; processing them for Western markets has been one of the cornerstones of our industry. On the other hand, when, for example, the forest industry is now being shut down here due to increased raw material costs, and if the border ever opens, will new production facilities be built in Finland or in some neighboring country with cheaper labor, or even in Russia with Chinese money?
Even if the border ever opens, it will take a long time for an ordinary citizen from there to go on holiday anywhere; there’s no money for international travel, and when there is money someday, will a dilapidated Finland still be an interesting destination?
A third doubt concerns the return of Russians to boost the real estate market in Eastern Finland. Will there be enough trust in the border remaining open for them to dare to buy any fixed property on this side?
I argue that the old times will never return, even if the border ever opens.
That’s how it is. Consumer confidence is already rising to such an extent that many who hesitate to borrow, make purchases, etc., will surely get more impetus to spend. This will set various chains in motion that support the economy and enable investments.
I could argue that peace would not yield anything in the short term. If Russia were to change internally, that would be a different matter. Europe cannot trust Russia any more, even if the war ends. Rather, the threat would be where Russia fights next.
How on earth do people think that Russia’s will has immediately changed once peace is finally achieved in Ukraine? After that, Russia will tighten its grip on the people, and propaganda will take an even harder step. Otherwise, the emperor could be demanded to be replaced.
How on earth do people think that the end of the war would open borders for tourists and goods? How many companies would still want to invest in Russia under the current regime when a factory might be nationalized or similar, as has just happened? It’s a long road to regain trust. Not until the emperor has changed, or much water has flowed under the bridge.
And the reconstruction. There’s plenty of rhetoric, but will there still be the will once the war is over? No one will repair those ruined cities on the front line anymore. No one will want to move there either if they remain close to the enemy’s border. And it seems no one will want to repair the areas remaining on the Russian side. Not even the Russians. Post-WW2 Germany was a very different situation. The West wanted a shining example for its part, as did the Soviet Union.
Nothing like that is needed here. It is enough that the economic sanctions against Russia are lifted, as will be the case in the peace agreement - both by the EU and the USA.