Revista Economia n. 13.pmd - Faap

the European Economic Area (EEA) which the non-members of the European
Union (EU) joined in 1992-93. From the EEA there was only one more major
step to the full membership of the EU; the membership application and its
approval by the Commission and other member states. In Finland, EU
membership was approved in a referendum – only the second one during the
entire independence of the country – by 54% in favor and 46% against. These
figures show that the EU has not been universally popular in Finland and even
today criticism continues, though no major political party advocates withdrawal
from membership. Much of the Finnish criticism is due to the perception that
the EU as a complex organization is difficult to fathom and that it has a tendency
to micro manage national issues that would be better left to the principle of
subsidiarity.
Membership in the European Union from 1995 on has had a transformative
influence on the Finnish economy and society. The aquis of the EU has been
incorporated in the Finnish legislation which has altered agricultural policy,
foreign trade policy, competition law, and many practical aspects of everyday
life. Flights between Helsinki and Brussels are fully packed and the route is very
lucrative for Finnair, the national airline. Finland has held twice the six-month
presidency of the EU (in 1999 and 2006), which is always a major test of
performance and endurance for a small country. In the EU, Finland tends to be
a friend of the Commission that is expected to provide counterbalance for the
sometimes selfish influence of larger member states.
In foreign policy, the concept of neutrality has been abandoned and it is
defined now as a form of non-alignment. According to the present government
program, Finland does not belong to any military alliance and the eventual
membership in Finland in Nato is a “real option” though not actively sought at
present. The debate on whether Finland should apply for the membership in
Nato has continued for a decade but there is no resolution in sight. Popular
opinion continues to be against membership as Finland has a deeply-rooted
tradition of defending its territory by the national means. Neither is Russia
considered a serious military threat, although the growing autocratic tendencies
in its political system give reasons for genuine concern. Moreover, the aggressive
and unilateral policies of the United States lead many Finns to wonder whether
the country, as a member of Nato, would be drawn into remote military conflicts
against their own will. On the other hand, Finnish troops participate already
now in Nato-led but UN-sanctioned crisis management operations in Afghanistan
and Kosovo. In Afghanistan, Finland is, however, reluctant to send its forces to
insecure southern parts of the country and favors more the effective integration
of the civilian and military crisis management operations.
The simple reason why Finland does not define itself as a neutral country is
that it is a member, also in security and defense terms, of the European Union.
The EU has developed since the 1990s a Common Foreign and Security Policy
(CFSP) as well as European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) in which
Finland actively participates. The Finnish aim is to make the international policies
of the EU more coherent and effective. In some fields, such as development
Ninety years of Finland’s independence: transition from the periphery..., Raimo Väyrynen, p. 134-146
143