Intervention by President topples conservative NATO operation
Parliamentary debate on government defence report begins Monday
Tarja Halonen
|
Jyrki Katainen
|
Alexander Stubb
|
The main opposition party, the conservative National Coalition Party, had a well thought-out plan to sow dissent within the ranks of the parties of the government when various Parliamentary committees discussed the government's report on defence and security policy.
The strategy worked almost perfectly in the Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, where the government's report came under some criticism. The committee's official statement lacked the usual assurances of maintaining Finland's non-allied status; NATO membership was seen as a real option.
Intervention by President Tarja Halonen brought the government's Parliamentary groups back into line. A report issued by the Defence Committee no longer contained a trace of the criticism expressed by the Foreign Affairs Committee.
The National Coalition Party is having trouble now. Some within the party are asking who is actually leading the party's foreign policy - party chairman Jyrki Katainen, or Member of the European Parliament Alexander Stubb.
When Parliament begins debate on the government's report on defence and security policy on Monday, the National Coalition Party will have to decide whether or not it wants to come out against the NATO policies of the President and the government.
The debate is expected to take about two days, after which Parliament is likely to give its endorsement to the main thrust of the report: that Finland will remain outside NATO.
The move is likely to close the door on Finnish NATO membership for the time being. The next time that the issue might come up will be in the spring of 2007 when a new government takes over.
If the National Coalition Party were to take an openly pro-NATO stand in the debate, it would bring to an end a decade of consensus in security policy matters; the government security and defence reports of 1995, 1997, and 2001 were all approved unanimously.
When Jyrki Katainen was chosen chairman of the National Coalition Party in June this year, he persuaded the party leadership to promote Finnish NATO membership.
The party's aim was to raise public debate and to sow dissent among the ranks of government parties in the Parliamentary committees.
The National Coalition Party had its greatest success in the Foreign Affairs Committee, which approved a statement in November in which NATO membership was seen as real option for Finland.
On December 3rd, President Halonen met with members of the Foreign Affairs Committee, expressing her disagreement with their views, and pointing out that under the constitution, foreign policy is run by the President and the government, and not by the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs. Later Halonen said the same things when she met the Parliament's Defence Committee.
The situation was somewhat awkward for the government, and especially for Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen. The government and the President had worked hard to draft the defence and security policy report, and cooperation between the President and Prime Minister had worked better than during the government of Paavo Lipponen.
After the statement that was issued by the Foreign Affairs Committee, there were suggestions that MPs of the government parties had betrayed the agreement that the government had made with the President in September.
Adding to the government's troubles was that foreign embassies in Helsinki were wondering if Finland was, after all, inching its way toward NATO, in spite of assurances to the contrary. The Security Police (SUPO) issued a memo suggesting that confidential papers were getting into the hands of diplomats stationed in Finland.
The National Coalition Party quite skilfully exploited the differences that existed between the government and President on the mandate that would be required for the deployment of EU combat forces. Vanhanen had said that Finland would not necessarily need a UN mandate for the deployment of its troops, whereas the President thought otherwise.
In early December the government parties got their act together, and the Defence Committee issued a report expressing full agreement with the government's report.
Some disagreement has been seen within the ranks of the National Coalition Party as well. There was grumbling that the enthusiastically pro-NATO MEP Alexander Stubb was usurping the role of the party's actual chairman in issues of foreign policy.
When Parliament votes on the government's report, many eyes will be on the Parliamentarians of the largest opposition party to see if they really want to break the consensus.
The strategy worked almost perfectly in the Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, where the government's report came under some criticism. The committee's official statement lacked the usual assurances of maintaining Finland's non-allied status; NATO membership was seen as a real option.
Intervention by President Tarja Halonen brought the government's Parliamentary groups back into line. A report issued by the Defence Committee no longer contained a trace of the criticism expressed by the Foreign Affairs Committee.
The National Coalition Party is having trouble now. Some within the party are asking who is actually leading the party's foreign policy - party chairman Jyrki Katainen, or Member of the European Parliament Alexander Stubb.
When Parliament begins debate on the government's report on defence and security policy on Monday, the National Coalition Party will have to decide whether or not it wants to come out against the NATO policies of the President and the government.
The debate is expected to take about two days, after which Parliament is likely to give its endorsement to the main thrust of the report: that Finland will remain outside NATO.
The move is likely to close the door on Finnish NATO membership for the time being. The next time that the issue might come up will be in the spring of 2007 when a new government takes over.
If the National Coalition Party were to take an openly pro-NATO stand in the debate, it would bring to an end a decade of consensus in security policy matters; the government security and defence reports of 1995, 1997, and 2001 were all approved unanimously.
When Jyrki Katainen was chosen chairman of the National Coalition Party in June this year, he persuaded the party leadership to promote Finnish NATO membership.
The party's aim was to raise public debate and to sow dissent among the ranks of government parties in the Parliamentary committees.
The National Coalition Party had its greatest success in the Foreign Affairs Committee, which approved a statement in November in which NATO membership was seen as real option for Finland.
On December 3rd, President Halonen met with members of the Foreign Affairs Committee, expressing her disagreement with their views, and pointing out that under the constitution, foreign policy is run by the President and the government, and not by the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs. Later Halonen said the same things when she met the Parliament's Defence Committee.
The situation was somewhat awkward for the government, and especially for Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen. The government and the President had worked hard to draft the defence and security policy report, and cooperation between the President and Prime Minister had worked better than during the government of Paavo Lipponen.
After the statement that was issued by the Foreign Affairs Committee, there were suggestions that MPs of the government parties had betrayed the agreement that the government had made with the President in September.
Adding to the government's troubles was that foreign embassies in Helsinki were wondering if Finland was, after all, inching its way toward NATO, in spite of assurances to the contrary. The Security Police (SUPO) issued a memo suggesting that confidential papers were getting into the hands of diplomats stationed in Finland.
The National Coalition Party quite skilfully exploited the differences that existed between the government and President on the mandate that would be required for the deployment of EU combat forces. Vanhanen had said that Finland would not necessarily need a UN mandate for the deployment of its troops, whereas the President thought otherwise.
In early December the government parties got their act together, and the Defence Committee issued a report expressing full agreement with the government's report.
Some disagreement has been seen within the ranks of the National Coalition Party as well. There was grumbling that the enthusiastically pro-NATO MEP Alexander Stubb was usurping the role of the party's actual chairman in issues of foreign policy.
When Parliament votes on the government's report, many eyes will be on the Parliamentarians of the largest opposition party to see if they really want to break the consensus.
Helsingin Sanomat