The Politics of Neutrality and Defence: Finnish Security Policy Since the Early 1970s
| DOI | 10.1177/001083678201700307 |
| Published date | 01 November 1982 |
| Date | 01 November 1982 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
The Politics of Neutrality and Defence: Finnish Security
Policy Since the Early 1970s
KARI MÖTTÖLÄ
Finnish Institute of International Affairs, Helsinki
Möttölä, K. The Politics of Neutrality and Defence: Finnish Security Policy Since the
Early 1970s. Cooperation and Conflict, XVII
,
1982, 287-313.
For Finland, the last decade has been one of implementation in foreign policy and
doctrine formation and material expansion in defence policy. After tracing the fun-
damentals of Finland’s security conception, the article notes that the basic argument
and strategy for an active foreign policy line, promoting peace and security, and based
on acceptability of the line in the East and West, was established as early as the
mid-1960s. Finland’s Nordic security policy for confirming the ’disengaged’ position
of the area has been tenacious, whereas in European and global fora Finland’s activity
has been more dependent on the East-West climate. The three parliamentary defence
committees formulated a defence doctrine legitimating the national defence system
and ensuing armaments programmes dimensioned to respond to a limited conventional
attack. The internal debate resulted in a consensus doctrine on how much Finnish-
Soviet military cooperation to include in the defence doctrine that corresponds with
the basic philosophy of Finland’s foreign policy to trust in political regulation as the
best security guarantee even in conflict situations. The military provisions of the
Finnish-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance are to be
used actively and reliably to maintain the preventive effect of the defence arrangement.
With the onset of the 1980s the debate on the increased danger of limited nuclear war
is testing the credibility of the defence doctrine based on a restrictive threat conception
and questioning the concept of security policy traditionally used.
I. ON SECURITY AND SECURITY
Questions of war and peace have in
POLICY
many ways been at the core of Finland’s
foreign policy. Experiences of history and
Facing the uncertainties of a new era in
effects of the geopolitical location have
East-West relations, Finland can look
made it clear to the Finns that the wav-
back on a dynamic period of foreign and
ering of peace in the environment -
in
defence policy-making of her own. This
Northern Europe and Europe in general
has involved formulation of principles and
-
constitutes a threat to Finland’s secu-
programmes of action and the implemen-
rity, too. This consideration also deter-
tation of them during the rise, peak and
mines for Finland the concentrically
eclipse of detente. Even so, the new dec-
widening sphere of her own responsibility
ade is placing before Finland -
like all
and interests in the work for international
European countries -
new kinds of chal-
and her own security.
lenges to her security, and the solutions
Like all sovereign states, Finland strives
to these problems are far from easy or
to ensure that she will be able to control
predetermined.
her own position and -
in extreme cases
287
288
-
safeguard her existence if and when
As a concept, security policy is broad
force is used in inter-state relations or
but at the same time narrow. All the
there is a threat of the occurrence of such
instruments of external relations -
for-
violence. It is a trend typical of the
eign policy, defence policy, commercial
present-day world that such policies must
and economic policy, communications
increasingly be preventive by nature since
policy, etc. -
and the supporting domes-
the use of military force -
in the East-
tic measures are by definition included in
West framework at least -
would lead
the realm of security policy.2 On the other
to an unpredictable catastrophe.
hand, security policy as an intellectual
The concept of national security policy
construction tends to contract the per-
will be used here in the established man-
spective as regards state behaviour in its
ner to denote the activities by which Fin-
relation to such extreme conditions as a
land protects the basic values connected
struggle for national existence - ulti-
with her existence as a state and a nation.
mately in an armed conflict.
The goal of security policy has an external
But the concept of security policy has
and internal dimension: for the people,
its own political background and social
to develop their society and welfare in the
role. It was introduced in Finland -
fol-
way they wish; and for the state, to act
lowing the example of other Nordic coun-
as a sovereign participant in the conduct
tries -
in the 1960s~ and was linked with
of international affairs. It is fundamental
the process in which defence policy estab-
in the legalistic-normative and collective
lished its position - alongside foreign
nature of the traditional notion of security
policy - in the doctrine of security policy.
that the benefits of the internal dimension
A
national debate on defence policy prin-
are attained by fulfilling the criteria of the
ciples and budgetary allocations to arma-
external dimension: ’The aim of Finland’s
ments took place in and around three
security policy is to protect the safety and
parliamentary defence committees which
welfare of the citizens by maintaining the
published their reports in 1971, 1976 and
country’s independence in all circum-
1981. The main part of this article is
stances.&dquo; Political and military means of
devoted to the analysis of these debates
security policy are used for state sover-
and decisions. But in the Finnish philos-
eignty towards which the sacrifices of the
ophy of security policy this is only part of
people must also be directed -
in the
the picture.
interests of their own lives.
The primary role in Finland’s security
Any conception of national security
policy is played by foreign policy and
also contains inherently the psychological
national defence supports it ’both in times
and individual aspect of how people
of peace and in possible crises’.~ In the
experience their own security or insecur-
postwar Finnish policy, this is the order
ity. In a world where nuclear weapons
of things both in time and in priority.
have made all state territories violable
Finland has used the political regulation
and where economic, social and cultural
of her relations with neighbouring and
interdependence penetrates state bor-
other countries as the first and main sol-
ders, the traditional methods of security
ution to her security problems.
policy are being increasingly challenged.
Accordingly, the first and essential part
Although nowhere formulated into a
of any treatise on Finland’s security policy
clear-cut policy, balancing or combining
is a survey of her political endeavours to
the requirements of normative and
influence the security environment. This
psychological security will be one of the
principle is followed in this article.
main tasks of future security policy.
Even if it follows from the basic Finnish
289
analysis that foreign policy is primary and
of the correctness of the line chosen and
peace-time efforts are crucial for the main-
followed ever since. ~ This again gives
tenance of her security, these self-evident
strength to the argument which depicts
conclusions do not remove the tension
the surrounding world, the nature of
between peace-time and war-time poli-
world politics and Finland’s place there
cies, between
8
political and military instru-
for the political strategy.
ments from Finland’s security policy. The
The strategy side of the doctrine defines
international position that a country
the middle-range or ’instrumental&dquo; objec-
acquires by her peace-time foreign and
tives through which the more basic values
defence policies has a bearing on her des-
of security policy are attained: first, the
tinies during deepening crises or armed
maintenance of trust and good relations
conflicts. But those military and political
with the Soviet Union and, secondly, neu-
measures, for which a country -
accord-
trality, i.e. keeping Finland outside the
ing to the official doctrine - is preparing
Great Power conflicts of interest. The
herself in anticipation of the use or threat
policy instruments used to achieve those
of use of force against her, affect the
objectives are the Eastern policy with the
international position of the said country
Finnish-Soviet Treaty of Friendship,
in peace-time. This ’political reflection of
Cooperation and Mutual Assistance
the defence arrangement is particularly
(FCMA) of 19481° as the point of depar-
evident in the case of Finland, and its
ture and the permanent framework for
regulation is one of the key tasks of secu-
decisions and actions and the policy of
rity policy-making. It is also the main
neutrality which gives the guidelines for
source of dynamics in the Finnish security
Finland’s political efforts in the wider
policy doctrine.
international context.
Finland’s Eastern policy and policy of
neutrality are parallel in time and in action
II. THE DOCTRINE: COMPONENTS
but placed in hierarchical order in the
AND
DYNAMICS
totality of security policy. In the words of
The Finnish doctrine of security policy has
J. K. Paasikivi in 19441 :
remained unchanged in its basic premises
since the late 1940s. This
Dominant in Finland’s
means that the
foreign policy is the
fundamental decisions
relationship of our country with our great
were made in the
Eastern neighbour, the Soviet Union. It is
formative years of 1944-48; they were not
the actual problem...
To continue reading
Request your trial