COMMENTARY: Small countries cannot afford to be difficult in EU

Disappointed with sugar decision, Finland has few options to react

print this

By Annamari Sipilä
     
      The Finnish government is angry with the European Union.
      Last month's decision on sugar is unfair, in the view of many Finns.
      Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen thundered that Finns will certainly remember the proposal on cutting the production of sugar. Foreign Minister Ilkka Kanerva cancelled his Europe speech in Belgium, because Finland's policy line for the EU was being reassessed.
      But what can Finland do? Can Finland, which has been so well-behaved in the EU so far, really become a difficult country?
     
No it cannot. ask any mainstream politician or civil servant, the answer is always the same. There is no point in a small country becoming difficult.
      There is no point protesting, because protests would not have any real influence on other member states, or the European Commission, for instance.
      In practice, the opinion of a small country is not as important as that of a large one. For that reason, a small country will easily be left alone to sulk in a corner.
      What is offered as a medicine is increased activity. The more active a country is in decision-making in the EU, the more easily its points of view are heard.
      It is always best to express differing opinions and disappointments clearly.
     
In EU decision-making there is often talk about trust as capital. It means looking ahead to the future by being constantly worthy of trust.
      For instance, if Finland is willing to compromise, and systematically promotes the common interest of the EU, Finland has the right to expect that it will really be heard in these important matters.
      One of these important matters might be agricultural subsidies in Southern Finland.
      It remains to be seen if the European Commission will remember the compromises that Finland has made when decisions are made later on the subsidies - at least this is what Commission President José Manuel Barroso hinted to Kanerva on Tuesday.
      The large EU countries do not have to worry as much about their reputation as small countries do. However, there are differences in their behaviour - that is, in their level of difficulty.
      Poland is at present a genuinely difficult country. Most other countries feel that the unpredictability of Poland endangers the EU's common goals.
      Britain also often has special demands, but it is not considered quite as cantankerous as Poland.
      Differences include the fact that Britain's demands are always prepared in good time and very well founded.
      "I often get the feeling that the Brits are doing us a favour, when others agree to their demands", says one source who has observed EU negotiations.
      Much also depends on the leaders of the various countries.
      Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair took a positive view of the EU, and was a skilful negotiator. For that reason, other EU leaders showed him support and understanding.
      His successor Gordon Brown, for his part, considers the EU a necessary evil. For that reason, he is not viewed as favourably as Blair was.
      In a similar manner, when he was the Prime Minister of Finland, Paavo Lipponen actively sought to enter the central playing fields of the EU. Vanhanen has not been as ambitious - certainly not in advance of the recent sugar decision.
     
The main rule is that it is not in anyone's interests to become difficult, unless the national interest really calls for it. A willingness to compromise is required all the more, the greater number of members the EU has.
      It is always wiser to join forces with other countries than to make noise alone.
      Finland's allies vary, depending on the matters to be dealt with. The Nordic bloc alone will not bring us far.
      Sometimes Finland's partners come from the Nordic Countries, sometimes from the Baltic Countries, Britain, and The Netherlands, or Central Europe, but rarely from the very south of the continent.
      Making alliances is made more difficult for a small country by the increase in qualified majority voting. Small allies are no longer needed, if the large ones have found each other.
      There is no point in becoming belligerent. It is useless to grumble about voting rules that have been jointly agreed upon.
     
Helsingin Sanomat / First published in print 4.5.2007


Previously in HS International Edition:
  Finnish sugar production gets no support from European Union (26.9.2007)
  EU sugar policies partially behind cancellation of Foreign Minister´s speech in Belgium (3.10.2007)
  Fate of Finnish sugar factory to be decided in spring (28.9.2007)

ANNAMARI SIPILÄ / Helsingin Sanomat
annamari.sipila@hs.fi