Skip to content
Media
Valtioneuvoston kanslia frontpage

Speech by Prime Minister Juha Sipilä at the 40th Anniversary of the Advisory Board for Defence Information

Government Communications Department
Publication date 22.11.2016 15.00 | Published in English on 24.11.2016 at 15.19
Speech

(check against delivery)

Dear Members of the Advisory Board for Defence Information,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Security policy, national defence and Finland's preparedness to face crisis are on everyone's lips today. On the one hand, it is worrying that this kind of serious discussion is needed, because it tells about the world we live in.

On the other hand, it is encouraging to see that we are better prepared for a high-level discussion on these topics than before. Special thanks for this are due to all those who work hard to make sure that the discussion and analyses on security policy and national defence are based on facts, broadly-based and unprejudiced.

For more than 40 years the ABDI has been one of the key actors in this discussion. I wish to express my sincere thanks to the ABDI for its important work and congratulate you on reaching this milestone. Keep up the good work – as we know, for a 40-year-old the best years are still ahead.

I really appreciate the way parliamentary cooperation across party limits meets broader societal competence on security policy and national defence in the ABDI's work. Security policy and national defence are topics where reflection beyond the daily agendas is needed. This is even more important today, as we are faced with increasingly complex security threats and less transparent operating environments.

The ABDI is known for its seminars as well as annual opinion surveys, which are read and followed very closely. This year's report will come out in the beginning of December, and it will be very interesting to see how the many unexpected events of the year are reflected in the opinions and attitudes of the Finns.

The ABDI was started in 1976, when Jimmy Carter was elected the US President and Helmut Schmidt re-elected the West-German Chancellor. In China Mao Zedong died and in the Soviet Union Leonid Brežnev turned 70 years old. Times have truly changed, but these countries or their descendants still make headlines today.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

National defence is our common cause. At the heart of it is naturally military defence, which has evolved over time to what it is today, both in the Finnish military bases and in the international duties of our defence forces. Alongside and complementary to it is the excellent voluntary work on national defence done by men and women in various parts of Finland.

However, is important to give some thought to what else is relevant to defending Finland and the Finnish society at the moment and in our times.

For various reasons, both in Finland and in many other western societies, we have recently been faced with the fundamental question of what is our societies' capacity to react and function in the rapidly changing reality. How does our society respond to new challenges and how do we get our citizens involved?

Last summer the Great Britain voted for Brexit. The next president of the United States will be a person whose election was considered very unlikely until about the last minute. Next year there will be several elections in Europe where the barometers showing what is going on in the societies may take new turns.

Our democratic system must sustain the different election outcomes. But even more important is that democracy sustains the post-election times as well - that is, how the institutions and power are being used.

The valuation of democratic institutions and practices is degrading in alarming ways. It is frightening how violations of basic values and freedoms seem to become acceptable. All too often freedom of speech is used wrongly. Basic pillars and practices of international law are disregarded. Truth is not that important if the story is good.

We can see this change in Finland as well. This does not mean that everybody should agree, quite the opposite. Our society may and should be challenged to change and perform better. People's worries are real.

But are the current social structures such that we can deal with these worries? Does the political system still have sufficient legitimacy? Are the key positions in the future occupied by pragmatic people really capable of solving problems or populists offering easy solutions? The silent majority of the people is often left aside to watch when the louder groups are shaping the atmosphere and the ways we act.

And this brings me to my point, to the broad and fundamental questions of defending the cornerstones of our democratic society. Also this kind of national defence is everybody's business, independent of party politics, gender, age, native country, ethnic background or religion. Finland is our common cause and we shall continue to build and defend it together, also in the future. We must be open, have multiple voices, listen, and show tolerance.

This is particularly important now that we are about to celebrate Finland's 100 years of independence. Our 100 years old country is not an open-air museum but our shared home that is very much alive.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I already referred to the unexpected events we have had this year until now – and there is still more than a month of the year left.

Due to these events, certain parties are now urging us to rapidly update Finland's views on the big picture of world politics. One concrete proposal is that the Government Report on Finnish Foreign and Security Policy given to the Parliament last summer should already be updated; Brexit and the election of Donald Trump as the US President are considered to have caused significant changes in our global environment.

It is true that both events are in many ways historical and will have significant consequences both in Europe and in international politics at large.

However, we should bear in mind that Great Britain has not yet officially announced its resignation from the EU and Trump has not yet taken up his post. Foreign policy is indeed endurance sport, where we should not jump into conclusions at the first shot of the starting pistol.

The Foreign and Security Policy Report completed in June has not been written for any static ideal situation either. The description of the operating environment starts by the sentence: "The operating environment of foreign and security policy, both in the immediate vicinity of Finland as well as globally, is in an intense state of flux.” Further below it is stated: "Rapid and unpredictable changes are the hallmark of Finland’s transformed foreign and security policy environment."

It is also pointed out that the external changes impact on Finland's internal development and security and society's resilience to crises in various ways. The same themes were also discussed in the Report on Internal Security that came out last May.

In recent years we have also done important work across government sectors to formulate a comprehensive picture of our total security situation. Phenomena such as cyber- and hybrid threats challenge us to continue this work.

It is important to look at the world the way it really is - not the way we want it to be.

This is the world for which we are also making good progress in preparing the next Defence Policy Report. In this report we will update our analysis of the military operating environment of Finland and specify what maintaining our defence capacity is going to mean. The Defence Policy Report is in many ways a sister of the Foreign and Security Policy Report - obviously the analysis of the operating environment, for example, is very similar in both.

In this context I wish to express my special thanks to the parliamentary monitoring group which has participated in the preparation of both reports. The monitoring group has been active and dedicated to its work, and its comments to the preparation process have been truly valued.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The EU has not been able to offer a sufficient sense of security to its citizens, alarmed by the terrorist attacks and regional instability. This is one of the key issues where the EU has to improve its performance, both for the citizens’ and the Union's sake. At the informal meeting of the EU Heads of State or Government in Bratislava in September we noted that the EU is not perfect, but it is still the best instrument for responding to the challenges ahead. One of the greatest among these concerns internal and external security.

In view of the turbulent changes in the world, the significance of the EU foreign and security policy does not decrease, but quite the opposite – it increases. This is also the conclusion in many other EU Member States that are close to us. Within the Union we can do much more to implement the decisions we have already made. Finland stands ready to give its own contribution to strengthening the Union as a security community.

The news the other day was a good example of this: in the past few months we have made good progress in examining the possibilities to set up the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats in Finland. This effort is based on the Communication by the European Commission on countering hybrid threats published last April. Among the recommended measures was that Member States should consider setting up this centre. Finland took the challenge and started to discuss the matter already in late spring. The response from key stakeholders to the matter and Finland taking the lead has been positive. At the meeting last week in Helsinki all participants – 12 countries and EU and NATO representatives – gave their preliminary support to setting up the centre.

In summer, already before the Brexit vote, we drafted a joint declaration with France where we call for stronger common security and defence policy in the EU. The EU countries must have the political will to expand cooperation from crisis management to guaranteeing security in Europe and for the Europeans. Efforts are needed to reinforce the competitive and innovative European defence industry. More inputs are needed in research and emergency supplies. The strategic approach to cooperation between the EU and NATO needs to be reinforced as well.

Security and defence policy may rise to a key position in maintaining the unity of the Union. Finland has many times expressed its strong commitment to the implementation of the EU solidarity clause and the mutual assistance clause. These are not just empty words. The European Council meeting of Heads of State or Government in December will discuss an action plan to be prepared for the fields of security and defence under the Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy. In this context I am going to stress that the EU must be capable of showing the concrete and credible added value it brings to strengthening security and defence within Europe. Progress should be made without delay in taking the actions we have agreed on, both in protecting Europe and in developing crisis management cooperation.

Finland considers it most wise to secure the functioning capacity of the EU and focus on what is truly important, as both centrifugal forces and external pressures are challenging the Union.

Reinforcing Finland's other international partnerships continues as well. Sweden has a special position in this, also in the future. We want to make full use of our position as Enhanced Opportunities Partner of NATO. Close international defence cooperation with different partners is very much in Finland's interest. This is why we will continue to participate in various types of international exercises and crisis management operations.

The United States will remain an important partner for us, both in defence policy and otherwise, irrespective of which administration is in power in Washington. For us it is important that the US will adhere to its earlier international commitments, and will not take action that may weaken the rules-based international system. The actions of the new president are difficult to foresee, but as he is free from earlier ties, he may, in principle, also surprise us in positive ways in international contexts. Time will tell.

With regard to Russia our analysis is clear: the development is very worrying in the light of both internal and external actions of the country. Actions by Russia in, for example, the Aleppo bombings have been blatant infringements of international law.

At the same time it is important to continue the dialogue with Russia. The importance of this dialogue is widely recognised in the EU and our role in this is highly appreciated. No conflict or dispute has been solved without talking and listening and without respect for one's discussion partner, even if there may be major differences in the views and opinions. Contacts between people are among the best guarantees of our neighbourly relations. This is why we welcome the reinforcement of those economic contacts not covered by the sanctions, and the flows of Russian tourists in our country.

In the past few days we have heard that we should be prepared to manage on our own should the tectonic plates start to move in great power politics. My answer to this is: should this happen, we are already well prepared compared to many other countries as we have taken good care of our national defence capacity and the will to defend our country throughout the years. For this I want to thank both our defence administration and the numerous associations engaged in national defence work on a voluntary basis.

In the end, as we do not belong to any military alliances, Finland's security is always in our own hands. It is important that the choices we make are such that they enhance security both in the Baltic Sea region and more broadly.

Inputs in national defence must be continued and further strengthened. We will continue to defend the whole of Finland and to make sure that the functioning capacity of the ground, marine and air forces are in order. We will prepare for the old and new security threats.

In line with the Government Programme, the funding of material investments of the defence forces that had been cut has already been raised to the level proposed by the parliamentary assessment group led by Ilkka Kanerva. The Defence Policy Report that is currently under preparation continues to address the question of resources – not the least because of the imminent decisions to be made on the implementation of the strategic performance projects concerning the procurement of new fleet for the marine forces and fighters for the air force.

Relative to our GDP, in terms of the fighters we are concerned with the same kind of effort as when buying the Hornets in the early 1990s. The procurement of the fighters will take place over the present and next three government terms. This is the period when the costs related to the ageing of our population will also be the highest. To have the funds for these vital purchases for our defence forces we should find as broad a parliamentary consensus as possible.

A procurement operation of this magnitude means that our defence budget will in fact be, on average, 300 to 400 million euros higher than this year's budget of 2.9 billion euros. It will, indeed, be important to have a broad-based discussion on this, too.

We do not yet know what the security situation will be like in 30 years, but what is certain is that new technologies to defend Finland will continue to cost a lot of money. Besides the parliamentary discussion on the substance of the upcoming report, I will seek common understanding of the funding of the investments together with the party chairs.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Government is constantly analysing Finland's security policy environment, but a lot of other work and dialogue with multiple voices on the topic is needed. Reports and statements by various experts are a valuable addition as we analyse the ever-changing foreign policy environment, where a highly accurate and up-to-date picture of the situation is needed.

Different views enable us to create a multidimensional and comprehensive picture of the world we live in and how the changes impact on our national preparedness.

Let us continue this discussion in this anniversary event as well.

I wish to again congratulate the 40-year-old Advisory Board for Defence Information!