Finland keeping the same company

COLUMN

print this

By Unto Hämäläinen
     
      Finland, Sweden and Austria are coloured in on the political map of Europe using the same crayon. In days of yore they used to be non-aligned countries, who all upped and joined the European Union on the same day.
      They have not sought membership in NATO. Good cooperation with the military alliance has been sufficient, at least thus far.
      In the coming months we shall see if the trio of countries hold to their previous course. Parliamentary elections were held in Sweden and Austria in September. The new Swedish administration has already been formed, and government negotations are ongoing in Vienna.
     
According to the programme outlined by the government of Fredrik Reinfeldt, Sweden is not considering NATO membership. In Austria, what looks like appearing is a grand coalition of the Social Democrats and the centre-right People's Party. There is no mention of NATO membership in the coalition's programme.
      These are very important signals for Finland. EU member-countries in the same position are not seeking admission to NATO.
     
In Finland itself, NATO membership will be up for debate next time after the parliamentary elections of March 2007. The incoming government will have to write into its prospective programme its own stance on NATO. Membership will be considered again in depth in 2008, when Parliament deals with the government's next report on defence and security matters.
      Will the negative stand on membership shown by Austria and Sweden tie Finnish hands on the NATO question in advance? Formally, the answer is no. Finland is an independent EU country that can if it wishes join NATO, if it wishes.
      In practice, the situation is different.
     
Were Austria and Sweden seeking entry, Finland would find it easy to go along as the third member of the trio. The decision would be a natural continuation of the entire post-war integration policy. In the history of their "Westernisation", these three countries have marched more or less in step: Austria or Sweden slightly ahead, and Finland close up behind them.
      The choices made in Austria and Sweden make Finnish entry to NATO difficult, even impossible. The much-discussed NATO option loses a good deal of its worth.
     
And what significance does this write-down in the value of the NATO option have?
      Although Finland, Sweden, and Austria are in the same position on the European political map, in the traditional geographical atlas the countries occupy different pages.
      Austria and Sweden are surrounded, wholly or in part, by EU and NATO member countries. Finland has a long common border with Russia. Austria and Sweden are protected, buffered zones, while Finland is a country under threat if things go bad in Russia.
     
After the March elections, the President and the new government will have to ponder whether anything has happened since the 2004 report on security and defence policy that would force Finland to adjust its NATO line.
      Two things have changed. In the fall of 2004 it was believed that the EU's new constitution would come into force from the beginning of 2007. Now we know that the document is not going to be ratified for years to come. Does Finland have those security guarantees that were so much talked about in the closing months of 2004?
      The Russian situation has also shifted. In the autumn of 2004 Parliament made two slightly differing assessments of the development in Russia. The Defence Committee took a nuanced and hopeful view, while the Foreign Affairs Committee was pessimistic in its outlook.
      Parliament approved the Defence Committee's analysis On the basis of the information we have had this autumn, the more critical appraisal by the members of the Foreign Affairs Committee looks to have been on the money. The development of democracy and freedom of speech in Russia has gone downhill. The economic progress has been better than anticipated and has had a positive impact here, too. Trade with Russia is growing.
     
The changes are not so great that they would lead to a shift in the Finnish stance on NATO membership during the next parliamentary and government term. NATO membership is a permanent subject of debate, but talking about it is as far as it goes.
      Actually seeking to join the alliance would be a major political decision. It could succeed if the three large parties were of one mind and if a broad majority of the people were in support of the idea.
      A common approach from the three big parties is dependent to a very great extent on the opinions of the Social Democrats. If the SDP holds to its former course, so will the National Coalition conservatives and the Centre Party. If the SDP were prepared to consider joining, the Centrists and the conservatives would take their cue from them.
      This is also true, by the way, in Sweden and in Austria.
     
Former President Martti Ahtisaari has spoken openly in favour of membership. The Speaker of Parliament Paavo Lipponen has implied that the idea should at least be given some thought.
      "The moment of truth is going to be ahead of us already in the next decade", wrote Lipponen in a column carried on Monday last in Turun Sanomat and Hämeen Sanomat, and he went on: "Finland must seek cooperation in order to gurantee its security.".
      Lipponen found a good deal of justification for NATO membership. The control of our airspace, and the maintenance of the Defence Forces' readiness and weaponry will require considerable investments in the next ten years, investments that Finland alone can no longer afford. We should be looking for partners.
     
It is probable that Ahtisaari, a former President on the SDP ticket, and Lipponen, a former PM and party chairman, are voices that are listened to within the Social Democrat ranks, but they do not wield power.
      The NATO stances of President Tarja Halonen and Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja have not changed materially, and their words have a lot of weight.
      Eero Heinäluoma, who took over the helm from Lipponen, is only at the beginning of his term as party chairman and he will be cautious about new initiatives. It is hard to imagine that he would want to be the person to turn around the SDP position on NATO.
     
Two NATO polls have been published in the course of this week. On the basis of surveys commissioned by Ilta-Sanomat and the commercial channel MTV3, the attitude of the Finnish public remains largely unchanged. A clear majority do not want to join.
      The will of the Finns is so self-evident that there really is no room for interpretation. In a democracy, the political leadership cannot stand in defiance of that will.
      It looks a though Finland will remain in the familiar company of Sweden and Austria - outside NATO.
     
Helsingin Sanomat / First published in print 28.10.2006
     
The writer is a journalist with the Helsingin Sanomat monthly supplement Kuukausiliite


Previously in HS International Edition:
  TV news: Editors of largest newspapers support NATO membership (12.10.2006)
  Rising political stars reject NATO membership and expanding nuclear energy (9.8.2006)
  Support for joining NATO appears to have slightly increased (9.11.2005)

UNTO HÄMÄLÄINEN / Helsingin Sanomat
unto.hamalainen@hs.fi