quick to report a decline in German political influence, the German minister qualified the meaning of the political change in Finland by questioning the stability of the Centre-Left government and Holsti's position therein. The Germans readily acknowledged the weight of Finnish-British notably economic relations. Beyond that acknowledgement there was German frustration with the new Finnish foreign policy that did not always find its way into official reporting. In looking for the information opportune to their interests both legations had no difficulties finding influential Finns that provided the desired assessments of Finland’s affairs.

Central in the concern of the big powers about Finland was Finnish foreign policy. In spite of an official assertion of an unchanged foreign policy the Finnish prime minister speaking in private labelled the United Kingdom ahigh-level contacts that tried to alleviate stress in the relations.

In observing closely and trying to influence by various means the opinion of ordinary Finns and the capital’s elite a rivalry between German and British influence manifested itself. The reports about the official celebrations of the birthday of Finland’s revered Mannerheim are an example of the diplomat’s scrutiny. Their contrasting depictions and interpretations reveal conscious and unconscious whitewashing stemming sometimes from biased informants.

Germany’s perversion in the 1930s was initially perceived through the lenses of the inner-Finnish split between conservatives and social-democrats with the latter criticising fascism across Europe vigorously. As German policy became more radical – especially with the endangerment of peace in Europe during the Sudeten-Crisis, the pogroms of 1938 and the occupation of Prague – the conservative