Finland inadvertently excluded itself from NATO Response Force

Without standby duty, Finland cannot take part in training exercises

print this

Finland’s decision to take part in the crisis management forces of the NATO Response Force (NRF), which was reached last spring after considerable political wrangling, is proving to be unworkable.
      According to various sources, President Tarja Halonen and the government will have to draft a new decision at a session of the foreign and security policy committee, possibly in January.
     
In March, Finland decided that it will take part in the activities of the NRF, but will not take turns in the rotation on standby for possible calls for duty.
      Finland had originally hoped to take part in the NRF exercise programme, and to offer resources for NRF operations.
      Under present NATO documents, however, partner countries like Finland would be required to take turns in the rotation, if they want to participate in the exercises, the sources say.
      Finnish participation in NRF activities has been seen as an important way for the Finnish Defence Forces to learn about the NATO standards for crisis management, which are applied in EU and UN operations as well.
     
Sources in the Finnish civil service say that Finland will probably have to opt out of NRF activities for the time being, because there is not enough political support for taking part in the rotation.
      A report was drawn up in connection with the NRF decision, which was reached with some difficulty in March. The report was also approved in the Parliament’s foreign affairs committee.
      In the government, the National Coalition Party would have been especially keen to have Finland take part in the rotation, which involves being on call for periods of six months at a time.
      President Tarja Halonen took a sceptical view of the rotation.
      The largest opposition party, the Social Democratic Party, gave its approval to participation in NRF specifically without rotation. The Green League insisted on assurances that the decision would not change Finland’s relationship with NATO.
     
The wording of the decision specifically does not permanently rule out participation in the rotation. Adding to the confusion is that NATO headquarters in Brussels has put a different interpretation on the matter from that of the decision-makers in Helsinki.
      When it was stated in Helsinki, that “this is not a decision to join the rotation”, NATO interpreted this to mean that such a decision would come later.
      This might be possible theoretically. In order to take part in the Danish-led army unit in the NRF rotation in the early part of 2010, Finland would have to make a decision on participation soon after the beginning of the year.
     
Finland’s decision to participate is not a political issue in any country other than Finland. However, inside NATO, there is considerable disagreement over the NRF structures.
      The member states have not committed enough forces or matériel for the rotation.
      The basic concept, which was revamped once last year, might be changed again at the April summit of NATO.
      This in turn could also change Finland’s scope to take part in the NRF under the conditions that are now in force.


Previously in HS International Edition:
  NATO Response Force splits both government and opposition parties (12.3.2008)
  BREAKING NEWS: Finland decides to take part in NATO Response Force (7.3.2008)
  COMMENTARY: Finland´s very long engagement with NRF (18.8.2007)

Links:
  NATO website: The NATO Response Force

Helsingin Sanomat