Finnish analyst views proposed Nordic defence cooperation
Wednesday, January 23, 2008 at 21:29 Text of report by Finish popular conservative newspaper Helsingin Sanomat website, on 22 January
[Column by Olli Kivinen: "Nordic is in Demand Again"]
The author is a special, independent columnist for Helsingin Sanomat.
The events of the last few weeks have proven that the attraction of Nordic military cooperation continues to increase. Nordic cooperation is an important and generally approvable value. It is easy to trust in it when Sweden and Finland seek their paths through the gauntlet of increasing defence costs, military non-alignment, and the credibility of their security policies. Norway will take part in the cooperation, and there are hopes that Denmark would join the effort too. The situation is put into proper perspective by the fact that both Defence Minister Jyri Hakamies and Armed Forces Commander Juhani Kaskeala concentrated their speeches of yesterday [21 Jan] to the National Defence Course students on Nordic cooperation.
Over the years Nordic cooperation has brought lots and lots of benefits in many different fields. This basic fact needs always be remembered and there is reason to genuinely value it. Finland has nothing to lose through the defence cooperation, and it is easy to describe the entire effort in such a way that all parties win. An added benefit, although it is non-material, comes from working together. The closeness of the countries and persons who participate is enhanced, and they also learn to appreciate the strengths of each other. Better cooperation with NATO member Norway will weaken the reservations that the Swedes and Finns have on the defence alliance of democratic, industrial countries, NATO.
But it is equally important to remember what the cooperation on defence is not. Closeness has not changed what the participating countries were to begin with in a basic sense. Each one will pursue its own interests and the others will be taken notice of when it benefits ones own self too. You do not have to seek a practical example from anything more remote than the furore that met the agricultural 141 subsidies, which the Nordic EU countries Denmark and Sweden were prepared to defend right down to their last piggy.
The uniqueness of each of the Nordic countries also applies to security and defence policy. Norway is a member of NATO. Time and again it has made it clear that it has confidence in its NATO allies. Norway also acutely feels the money pinch, and is ready to get together with its neighbours on the three-country basis to take care of things that have no connection with the greater security issues. Sweden is quickly dismantling its national defence for which it does not have a need anymore, according to its most recent doctrine. Instead Sweden will concentrate on international missions. Defending the near neighbourhood will be left to the others: to NATO in the north, west, south and southeast and to Finland on the east. Finland sticks tenaciously to maintaining its regional defence scheme.
Because of overeager news hounds and misunderstanding a misleading peculiarity of an expression has emerged: "Nordic security guarantees". What is that supposed to mean? Nothing but a swishing of whiskers. The little Nordic countries cannot give anyone any security guarantees; they are doing well to take care of their own credibility. The government of the biggest Nordic country, Sweden, says that Sweden cannot remain apathetic if some EU country becomes a victim of a natural catastrophe or an invasion. That might come as a shock to strictest of Sweden's neutrality priests, but what do the words mean anyway when the military is pretty much being done away with.
Even otherwise, Sweden's defence policy is confused. The armed forces are being eliminated because there are no more threats. At the same time the country is loudly screaming about the danger created by the Baltic Sea natural gas pipeline, because Russia can use the pressure boosting facility it is planning to put just outside of Gotland as an espionage station. Sweden spends twice as much on its defence budget as Finland does, but the money vanishes as though it were into a black hole. In place of national defence forces Sweden is developing an intervention force, which is entirely different from the crisis control focused solutions that Finland has adopted.
Problems for Finland and Sweden are made worse by the fact that even the last remnants of air will vanish from under the wings of the "EU security guarantees" as the EU and NATO develop closer ties. The alternatives will be scarce when NATO membership will not be accepted, and at the end of that road sit six nonaligned EU countries that hope, with the hope of a stowaway passenger, that NATO security guarantees actually extend to them also.
The deck of the nonaligned is now being reshuffled by France's new attitude towards NATO. President Nicolas Sarkozy is taking his country back to full cooperation with NATO, which will significantly change the European settings -for France has for decades been precisely the country to promote a European (EU) arrangement for defence.
Special researcher at the National Defence Academy strategic department Tommi Koivula says that this change would "seal the unanimity being reached by the bigger EU countries that NATO would be used to take care of the EU security guarantees. In the light of these changes that are about to take place, any talk about a choice between the EU and NATO are, according to Koivula, starting to get misleading. "If France becomes a full-fledged member of NATO, we can, at least in theory, erase the choice on whether to choose the EU or NATO," he writes. (Helsingin Sanomat 7 Dec 2007).
This situation creates many problems for the nonaligned. They will unavoidably drift outside the inner circle and the crucial decision making, and to what may be considered second class membership. To the EU countries that are also members of NATO the NATO guarantees are automatic. A member is always a member and a partner is always a partner, be it during everyday cooperation or actions taken during a crisis threat.
According to Jim Hoagland, a highly-respected columnist for The Washington Post, France has already made it decision and there will be a ceremonial treaty to commemorate the 60th birthday of NATO in the spring of 2009 (Washington Post 2 Dec. 2007). The pain of the nonaligned is just made worse by the fact that there have been no announcements. Sarkozy has a lot of ambitious plans, but no one knows if his political strength will suffice to achieve them. The Gaullist tradition has a strong foothold on France.
Source: Helsingin Sanomat website, Helsinki, in Finnish 22 Jan 08
