Finnish Foreign Minister in Washington as Berlin Wall came down

Paasio debated possible upcoming events

print this

By Jaakko Lyytinen
     
      “The winds of change are blowing throughout Europe - from the Atlantic to the Urals, from the Arctic Ocean to the Mediterranean. The geo-strategic landscape is changing.”
      Finnish Foreign Minister Pertti Paasio is delivering a speech at a Finnish-American dinner. It is Wednesday, November 8th, 1989 in Washington D.C. and members of the audience want to now what the Finnish Foreign Minister has to say about the situation in Berlin and Eastern Europe, which has been followed closely in recent days.
      The day before, the East German government headed by Willi Stoph has announced its resignation. Five days earlier, the border between East Germany and Czechoslovakia was opened, after which more than 30,000 East Germans had fled to the West through Czechoslovakia.
      The East European revolution which had been smouldering since the spring is flaring up in Berlin. What will happen next?
     
Foreign Minister Paasio has honed his dinner speech with the help of his aides. For the benefit of his demanding American audience, Paasio condenses his assessment on the upheaval in Europe into three points: “One: Europe is becoming integrated, both economically, and politically. Two: The economic system in the Soviet Union and in part of Eastern Europe will change. Three: Cooperation between West and East will increase.”
      There, in between East and West is the small, neutral Finland. It is the input of countries such as these that is needed in an upheaval like this, Paasio emphasises, and mentions the legacy of the CSCE. Support for Finnish neutrality has been expressed by both former US President Ronald Reagan and the current leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, Paasio says.
     
Gorbachev had declared his recognition of Finnish neutrality during a visit to Finland just two weeks before Paasio’s trip, and he used exactly the words that his hosts wanted him to: Finland is a neutral Nordic country which does not have nuclear weapons.
      Gorbachov’s words had a great symbolic value from Finland’s point of view. During the years of President Urho Kekkonen, the policy of neutrality was Finland’s way of emphasising its distinct identity from the Soviet Union, but the Soviets did not recognise Finnish neutrality. Perestroika, Glasnost, and Gorbachev were needed for the recognition to come about. When it finally came, it was so late that it was almost embarrassing.
      Naturally, Paasio does not mention any of this at the dinner. Instead, he speaks about the difficulties of making predictions, and quotes George F. Kennan, a key American strategist of the Cold War period, who said in the early 1950s “none of us can really see very far ahead in this turbulent, changing, kaleidoscopic world of foreign affairs”. In November 1989 the kaleidoscope was spinning wildly again.
     
Paasio was in Washington to open a seminar on the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Finland and the United States. It had been a seminar fraught with hard luck. It was originally supposed to have been held in the spring, but a NATO summit interfered with that. It was moved to September, but then came Hurricane Hugo. Paasio’s delegation just sat mournfully in the embassy of the largely empty US capital.
      Finally in November the seminar came to fruition. This time the atmosphere is quite electric, thanks to the East European revolution which is being followed intensely in Washington.
      The Americans are interested to know if the countries of Eastern Europe will follow Finland’s path. The question is an awkward one for Foreign Minister Paasio, as it implicitly reveals that some Americans see Finland as part of the Soviet sphere of influence.
     
Before the dinner, Paasio has delivered the opening speech of the seminar. In it he has staunchly rejected attempts to use Finnish history as an example when explaining the democratisation process of Eastern Europe.
      Paasio emphasises the unique character of Finland’s position, which is the result of history and geography.
      It must be made clear to the Americans that Finland is not a part of the Eastern Bloc, just as Moscow constantly has to be reminded that Finland is not a part of the aggressive West. “And as everyone probably knows, the Finns do not especially appreciate the name of their country being used in a context that has little to do with Finland”, Paasio says in his opening speech. The listeners deduce that the reference is to the concept of “Finlandization”.
     
Paasio was chosen in February 1989 to replace Kalevi Sorsa, although he had no ministerial experience.
      After that, the world has changed rapidly.
      Free elections have been held in Poland and Hungary. Since Hungary opened its border with Austria, East Germans have been flowing to the West from there. Reforms have been demanded in demonstrations in East Germany.
      In January Finland became a member of the UN Security Council, and in May the country had joined the Council of Europe. This does not yet mean anything very big in the way of a more Western orientation, as Finland’s big reality in foreign policy, the Soviet Union, has not gone anywhere.
     
But the Soviet Union is also undergoing an upheaval.
      Watching it especially closely is President Mauno Koivisto, who gives advice to Foreign Minister Paasio in their weekly meetings.
      Koivisto, who is solidly in charge of foreign policy, wants to hold on to all the strings, and with Paasio he is able to do it, because Finland’s new foreign minister is conspicuously cautious in his comments.
      In spite of the difficult situation, Paasio sticks to Finland’s official line in Washington as well.
     
On Thursday, November 9th, the Finnish Ambassador to Washington Jukka Valtasaari hosts a luncheon at his official residence, with an exceptionally prestigious array of American guests, including Brent Scowcroft, the security policy advisor of President George Bush, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, security policy advisor to former President Jimmy Carter.
      Scowcroft wants to hear what Paasio feels about the thoughts of Gorbachev, who had just visited Finland.
      The Bush administration is preparing for a summit, but the attitude of the Soviet leader is an enigma. The discussion moves to the events in Berlin.
      “The Russians cannot let the GDR go, because their whole empire would collapse if they did”, Brzezinski says, and puts forward a grim forecast: “Within a week, Soviet tanks will open fire on people in East Berlin” says the Polish-born Brzezinski, referring to 1953, when Soviet forces toppled an East German uprising.
      “I don’t think so”, responds Paasio. In his view, the world has changed, and it is not possible to extrapolate from the past how things will develop. “Intervention has its price, and Moscow is not ready to pay it.”
     
Brzezinski takes an almost pitying attitude toward Paasio’s comment.
      He gives the impression that the Finnish Foreign Minister does not quite grasp what is going on.
      “I know these things. I am from Eastern Europe”, Brzezinski says.
      “So am I. Helsinki is further to the east than Warsaw”, Paasio retorts.
      Scowcroft, the security policy advisor to President Bush, agrees with Paasio. There will be no massacre in Berlin, he predicts.
      An argument breaks out between the advisors of the former and current presidents, which Ambassador Valtasaari follows in the way that someone might watch an exciting tennis singles match.
     
Also sitting at the table are two influential journalists, Rowland Evans of the Washington Post newspaper, and Jim Anderson of United Press International, who now bitterly regret that they will not be allowed to write anything about the intense debate, as they agreed not to report on what was discussed around the table.
      However, Evans does include one sentence from the lunchtime discussion in his column the next day: there were no reports from Gorbachev’s visit to Finland that he does not plan to intervene in events in Berlin.
     
Although Paasio does not say it out loud at the lunch table, the passive stance of the Soviet Union could have selfish reasons behind it.
      The country’s economy is in such dismal shape that forces and defence funding have been cut in the countries of the Warsaw Pact, such as the GDR.
      A virtue has grown out of necessity. The words stated by Gorbachev at the 40th anniversary celebrations of the GDR are fresh in the memory: “Life punishes those who come too late.”
      The words were directed at Erich Honecker, the leader of the GDR, who had opposed perestroika.
     
After the lunch, Paasio’s delegation hurried to meet US Secretary of State James Baker.
      The Finns were waiting for Baker when an embarrassed aide to the Secretary of State comes to announce that the meeting must be cancelled.
      Baker has gone to an emergency meeting of the National Security Council in the White House.
      The aide gives the reason to the perplexed Finns: “The gates of the Berlin Wall have just been opened.”
     
     
Helsingin Sanomat / First published in print 8.11.2009


Previously in HS International Edition:
  1989: Finland stood in background as Europe freed itself (2.8.2009)
  Secret lives in the old East Germany (17.9.2000)
  Home in an East German suburb (15.3.2005)
  Finnish communist volunteers travel to East Germany 40 years ago to help build Berlin Wall (12.8.2001)
  TV-programme reveals: Finnish MP worked for East German intelligence during student years (16.1.2001)

JAAKKO LYYTINEN / Helsingin Sanomat
jaakko.lyytinen@hs.fi