Minna Arve: From trade to cooperation in times of geopolitics

When the speeches end, the laser finally cuts into the first sheet of steel at a shipyard in Pori, Finland. The applause almost drowns out the sound of the machine. Finnish and American flags hang side by side above the steel. Government representatives, shipbuilders and representatives of the United States Coast Guard have gathered to mark the beginning of construction of a new Arctic Security Cutter. I can feel the exitment in the air.

It was a ceremonial moment, but also a remarkably concrete picture of the changing transatlantic relationship. American demand, Finnish maritime expertise and our shared security interests are becoming increasingly intertwined. The transatlantic relationship of the Turku region – and, indeed, much of southwestern Finland – is also changing. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that a new kind of relationship is only now beginning to emerge.

When the speeches end, the laser finally cuts into the first sheet of steel at a shipyard in Pori, Finland. The applause almost drowns out the sound of the machine. Finnish and American flags hang side by side above the steel. Government representatives, shipbuilders and representatives of the United States Coast Guard have gathered to mark the beginning of construction of a new Arctic Security Cutter. I can feel the exitment in the air.

It was a ceremonial moment, but also a remarkably concrete picture of the changing transatlantic relationship. American demand, Finnish maritime expertise and our shared security interests are becoming increasingly intertwined. The transatlantic relationship of the Turku region – and, indeed, much of southwestern Finland – is also changing. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that a new kind of relationship is only now beginning to emerge.

We have long had American-owned companies in the region, creating high value added and employment. Today, however, the transatlantic connection is increasingly built around Finland’s Arctic expertise, our shipbuilding capabilities and the close relationship between Finland and the United States.

This connection is mutually important. At the same time, southwestern Finland is highly exposed to decisions made across the Atlantic – from the choices of American consumers to the trade policies of the US administration.

And this exposure extends far beyond the shipyards of Turku, Rauma and Pori. Behind every magnificent cruise ship and powerful icebreaker is a vast industrial ecosystem that takes a vessel from the drawing board to its maiden voyage. It includes hundreds of suppliers and technology companies, universities educating the next generation of experts, service companies benefiting from the employment and purchasing power generated by strong order books, municipalities receiving tax revenues and, ultimately, the entire Finnish economy.

The value of a single large cruise ship can approach nearly EUR 2 billion. One vessel alone can therefore make a visible contribution to Finland’s export figures and account for a significant share of Finnish exports to the United States.

Finnish Customs statistics for 2025 show that the United States was Finland’s second-largest export market for goods. It accounted for 10.4 per cent of Finnish goods exports, worth almost EUR 7.7 billion. Cruise ship exports alone represented EUR 1.8 billion, or 24.3 per cent of Finland’s goods exports to the United States. Without them, Finnish exports to the US would have fallen by approximately 15 per cent.

Cruise ships have – at least so far – not been subject to tariffs. This means that their future depends more directly on the American consumer. Those of us who have followed the industry for a long time know that consumer demand inevitably goes through cycles. For Finland’s maritime industry, this makes the present moment particularly important. The ecosystem has an opportunity to build new pillars of growth alongside cruise ships, including through the development of dual-use technologies. Potential customers can be found both in our domestic as well as EU markets and across North America, in the United States and Canada.

Icebreakers are a different business, even though building them draws on much of the same industrial expertise. The customer is a government. Financing depends on political priorities and circumstances, and protectionism is structurally embedded in the market. A decision taken in Washington can have consequences simultaneously in Rauma, Pori and Helsinki, as well as in dozens of communities across Finland where companies in the maritime supply chain are located.

This brings me to the question can industrial cooperation remain successful for both sides when international economic relations are becoming increasingly transactional?

The current US administration’s trade and industrial policy is explicitly based on an “America First” approach. Its objective is to increase American production, expertise and employment, and to bring industrial capacity back to the United States. The same logic applies to the icebreaker programme. Finnish expertise is being used to meet an urgent American need, but the cooperation is also expected to generate investment, expertise and production in the United States. As America strengthens its national security by acquiring icebreakers from Finland, it is also acquiring the capability to build more of them itself.

I believe this model can work – and can benefit both sides.

Finland has capabilities that the United States needs today: the ability to design and build highly demanding vessels, world-class Arctic expertise, an established supplier network and the ability to deliver. The United States, in turn, offers Finland’s maritime industry an enormous market and an opportunity for Finnish companies to become part of American value chains.

We should not be afraid of expertise moving to the United States. Our task is to remain relevant by continuously strengthening and renewing our own capabilities across the entire maritime ecosystem.

I have often said that the competitiveness of a shipyard is also built outside the shipyard gates. This is where cities, universities and regions have an important role. Skills, research, infrastructure, new companies and innovation do not emerge inside a single industrial facility. They are created within the ecosystem surrounding it.

Our competitive advantage cannot depend on Americans not learning how to build icebreakers. Of course they will – that is one of the objectives of the current arrangement. Finland’s competitive advantage must come from ensuring that by the time today’s technologies have moved into production in Texas or Louisiana, we are already developing the next generation: autonomous systems, new propulsion technologies, advanced sensors, cybersecurity, Arctic navigation, resilient maritime logistics and dual-use technologies.

This is also why we at Business Turku are building a new regional maritime security cluster based on our existing maritime expertise and capabilities in autonomous systems, working together with public authorities, companies and universities.

The geopolitical environment is pushing us to become better, more innovative and more efficient. Autonomous systems, sensors and situational awareness, cybersecurity, port security, resilient logistics, Arctic technologies, energy systems, dual-use solutions and shipbuilding together constitute a major emerging market. Southwestern Finland has an exceptionally strong foundation from which to compete in it.

Our task is to help companies in our region turn existing expertise into next-generation products, new innovations and international business. This creates opportunities for established maritime companies, but equally for startups capable of bringing entirely new technologies into the sector.

Mutual dependence can therefore provide the foundation for a new form of transatlantic industrial cooperation – perhaps even a new kind of partnership.

Finland can be more than the country that knows how to build icebreakers. We can help create a new model of industrial cooperation in which we collaborate and compete at the same time – in an era of growing security needs, intensifying competition for markets and a resurgence of economic protectionism and nationalism.

The ambition should go beyond building Finnish-designed ships for American customers. We should build a transatlantic maritime innovation ecosystem in which Finnish and American companies develop technologies together, invest in each other’s markets and strengthen the industrial capacity of both countries.

My thoughts return to the shipyard in Pori.

As the first steel was cut, we were celebrating the beginning of a new ship. Perhaps we were also witnessing the beginning of something larger: a new kind of transatlantic industrial partnership.