Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Asen View Post
1) In the Winter War there was an attempt by USSR to annex Finland (like the Baltic states), it failed. However, after the World War II the situation was slightly different. Did the Soviet leadership still want to annex (or puppeteer) Finland? Did they have the opportunity(was Finland in the Russian sphere of influence)? Or they have the opportunity but simply did not want to complicate their relations with the other Scandinavian states. Or was there anything else?
Finland is not a Scandinavian state.

Anyway, before 1947 Finland seemed to be doomed to have the same fate as the Easter European states. Any violation of terms of Moscow Armistice was seem to give Soviet Union a reason to annex Finland. After the Yya Treaty and the death of Stalin this situation changed.

In 50's, Soviet Union didn't need to worry as much about the conventional amies of west as their nuclear arsenal anymore, Finnish territory lost much of its importance. As a sign of this the soviets returned Porkkala.

Most of the time Soviet Union didn't try to annex or puppeteer Finland. Keeping it neutral was enough.
Trade with Finland was also a great way for the Soviets to acquire western technology.

2)De facto Finland is neutral with Soviet Union as a guarantee for this neutrality. Is this so (to the exception of 1961 "Note crisis" that was more like a test). Is this right?
This is true. Soviet Union wanted to make sure that NATO coulnd't use Finnish territory against it. And Yya Treaty worked: in war NATO would have treated Finland as an ally of Soviet Union.