Speech by President of the Republic Tarja Halonen at the German Council on Foreign Relations on 3 May 2007

(check against delivery)

I am delighted to be able to speak to you here at the well-known German Council on Foreign Relations (Die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik – DGAP). Our countries and our peoples have had a close relationship for hundreds of years. We are both northern European countries, on the shores of the Baltic Sea. We both belong to the European Union – and we have often found each other also within the Union.

From the very beginning, European cooperation – first in the Council of Europe and then within the European Union – has been based on shared values: democracy, human rights and the rule of law. People also hoped for economic wellbeing, that is prosperity and social justice. These have been gradually brought within the sphere of cooperation.

Last month in Berlin, we celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the Treaty of Rome. Five decades ago, work started on deepening European integration to promote stability and prosperity in Europe.

Enlargement

There have been various motives for enlargement of the European Union at different times, but it looks as though there have always been both economic and political reasons for it. Earlier on it was a general rule to enlarge and deepen integration alternately. The end of the Cold War created a great opportunity to reach out across old divides – the opportunity to create a new Europe.

Even in advance, it was anticipated that the effort required would be considerable. We knew that the enlargement process would not end with achieving membership, but that the work would have to be continued even ‘after the wedding’. That is the stage we are now in. We need continued work for the benefit of integration. For the sake of clarity, it has to be said that this process of intensifying cooperation needs both the new and old Member States. It seems to me that we are in the middle of a longer and more difficult process than we were prepared to admit at the beginning.

Each Member State has its own character and we must avoid making over-simplified generalisations. It seems however that, before the recent enlargements, the common goal of EU membership held back many of the internal problems and historical disagreements with neighbouring countries. Now we see some of these emerging again. In addition, we have perhaps underestimated the degree of self-confidence of the new Member States, or to put it another way, their sensitivity to ‘instructions that seem to come from Brussels’.

On the other hand, in old Member States, many people often see globalisation as a double-edged threat. The expressions ‘Polish plumber’ and ‘China effect’ illustrate this double worry: change in the European internal market and how Europe will fare in the globalisation.

There are still improvements to be made in different sectors of society in all Member States. The ‘reform fatigue’ that may have caused by the major effort leading to membership must not be allowed to take over. We have to recognise together how much we have achieved. It has called for a great deal of work which must not be thrown away: we must grasp the challenges that we face now. We are going in the right direction.

Enlargement has brought stability to our continent, but the enlargement project is still incomplete. At the December European Council we agreed on the continuation of the EU enlargement policy. We agreed unanimously that we would stick to promises given to the present candidates – that is Turkey and the countries of the Western Balkans.

Finland takes the view that each European country which undertakes to comply with the basic values of the European Union and fulfils the criteria for membership should be given the opportunity to become a Member State. The end result is inevitably dependent on the will of each applicant country to make a commitment to membership and to implement the necessary reforms.

New Treaty

The European Union has expanded to a community of 27 countries. We need a stronger house for our bigger family. The Union needs a new treaty. In the Constitutional Treaty process, the old Member States have had more difficulties than the new. The negative outcomes in France and in the Netherlands seemed to have been as much about the social effects of globalisation as about the treaty itself. Despite the fact that the Constitutional Treaty could in part be a solution to these problems. And that’s what people in Spain and Luxemburg seem to have been thinking when voting ‘yes’ for the treaty.

The Constitutional Treaty was perhaps not a perfect solution but it was a functional entity. Finland supports the plans and the timetable for a new treaty that have been drawn up by the German Presidency. The new treaty must retain the delicate balance and the essential parts of the Constitutional Treaty that has already been agreed and signed. The mandate for the coming Intergovernmental Conference should be clear on this.

A timetable for the treaty process is necessary, although should not be the main issue. We have to explain openly to people both the need for the new treaty as well as what would be the consequences of indecisiveness or inactivity.


EU for the citizens

The basic strength of the Union should be genuine cooperation and solidarity. Looking after one’s own interests and viewing European Union activities as merely an internal zero-sum game will not lead to positive development. European integration has always been a matter of cooperation from which all the players benefit - the ‘win-win’ model.

Throughout Finland’s membership, we have based our integration policy on this idea. We are actively involved in all aspects of Union activities. In this way, we can have the greatest influence on the common issues, are best able to benefit from the results and take responsibility of the affairs of the whole continent.

The European Union has to be developed as a community both of Member States and of citizens. The added value of the Union activities has to be genuine. In recent years, a lot of resources have been used in the EU for discussing and preparing for institutional reform. Although a new treaty is necessary, ordinary citizens may have seen the extended negotiations as though Member States and institutions were only interested in strengthening their own power base.

Interpretation of the will of the citizens is a complex issue. It looks as though people want to keep power in the nation-states, but at the same time they want to create a stronger Union. Making progress solely by consensus is very difficult. People seem to be satisfied with the steps taken such as the euro, and the same goes for freedom of movement and the Schengen Treaty.

The positive attitude to the European Union shown by the young Europeans has certainly been influenced by the fact that the universities in the Member States are open to all EU citizens and by different training exchange programmes that have been created. I think that more and more young people should have the chance – through study, practical training or some other activity – to form a picture of a united Europe and see what it really means in practice: common values and an integrated economy, but also richness of cultural diversity.

A citizens’ EU cannot simply mean being a customer, it also has to involve participation. We have to give more support to the freedom of citizens to participate in European affairs. I believe that citizens want to see more cooperation in the Union, in areas which concern their everyday lives and offer them secure visions of the future. Therefore, the focus should be placed on the people. Human rights, employment and environmental protection are important themes for ordinary citizens.

The challenges of globalisation, which the economies of Europe are facing, can be best responded to by a Union which is competitive and open and has a strong social dimension. The system we have in Finland is what is known as the Nordic Welfare Model. Finland has done well in international comparisons of competitiveness and in comparisons of sustainable development, gender equality and education. I do believe that competitiveness and social justice are not mutually exclusive.

The European Union has a good chance of succeeding in the global economy. We cannot compete on low labour costs, so we have to invest in expertise and innovation. The Lisbon strategy is the European answer to a fairer globalisation. It is a good plan, but it has to be implemented effectively.

Germany has taken the social dimension of globalisation as one of the themes for her Presidency – following on from work done during the Finnish Presidency. I had the pleasure of speaking at a conference on this theme here in Berlin last November. Yesterday, the German Presidency organised a conference ‘Quality of Work – the key to more and better jobs’. The EU is committed to promoting the social dimension both inside the Union and in our relations with the outside world. It is gratifying to see the Union making progress on this issue. I want to thank Germany for being so active in this matter.

The other side of sustainable development is caring for the environment. Climate change is a global problem that calls for a global answer. The Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012 and before that we have to try and achieve the maximum possible joint will for action. The United Nations is a natural forum for global cooperation on this, but the European Union could be the necessary catalyst.

The March European Council outlined the European Union view on future international climate policy. Under German leadership, the Union agreed to commit to ambitious unilateral targets and is ready for even stricter targets if the other developed countries make a commitment to restrictions on emissions.

The European Union as a global actor

The European Union is not the whole of Europe. The Council of Europe and the CSCE are particularly important organisations for European cooperation precisely for involving all European countries. This does not mean only Russia or Ukraine but also Norway, Iceland and Switzerland. The EU must be open for cooperation with these European organisations. It is also a question of division of responsibilities and the greatest possible efficiency.

The European Union is a unique form of cooperation. The Union is a story of development that encourages others, too. We must support genuine multilateral cooperation – and promote democracy, human rights, the rule of law and free and fair trade. The strength of the European Union lies in the extensive scope of the measures available to it: from development cooperation and trade to crisis management.

The EU should not try to be a global policeman, or even a global teacher. The Union has the potential to help the world towards sustainable development, but it should not try to do it alone. We must cooperate and help others to cooperate.

The more we are able speak with one voice, the more influence and prestige the Union will have. We must have a consensus on policy outlines and cooperate when it comes to means. There are examples of successful action – one example is the significant EU support to the United Nations UNIFIL operation that followed the crisis in Lebanon last summer. Last autumn there was an EU crisis management operation in support of the UN peacekeeping forces organising and supervising the election in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Our next challenge is Kosovo – the Union will probably take on a major role in the civilian operation in Kosovo. My predecessor’s, President Ahtisaari’s proposal on the status of Kosovo needs full support in the UN Security Council.

Ever since her accession, Finland has been active in developing the Union’s common security and defence policy. We have consistently underlined the importance of widespread conflict analysis. Because of this we have to develop both civilian and military crisis management and the links between them. Finland has been active in promoting civilian crisis management activities of the Union.

Finland is participating in two EU ‘battle groups’. At this very moment, we are in a high state of readiness along with Germany and the Netherlands, and next year we shall be on duty in the Nordic battle group together with Sweden, Norway, Estonia and Ireland.

In international crisis management, we need to develop cooperation between different organisations. Both the European Union and NATO, for instance, have projects to develop rapid response. I consider it important that transparent cooperation between the two organisations works well in order to achieve better coordination. If NATO implements its plans for adding civilian crisis management to its own operating capacity, overlaps must be avoided here, too.

* * *

The European Union is not the same throughout. We must encourage regional cooperation within the Union as well. Regional cooperation is a good supplement to neighbourhood programmes and cooperation with neighbouring areas. The Barcelona Process, the Northern Dimension and the EU’s Black Sea policy are excellent examples of this.

Russia is a strategic partner of the European Union. Despite recent events, cooperation, closer relations and increasing interaction is the only way forward. During the Finnish Presidency, the Union did not manage to make a start on negotiations with Russia on a new and wider partnership agreement. I hope that the next EU-Russia Summit is an opportunity to make progress in this matter.

The United States is a key political and economic partner for the EU. During her Presidency, Germany has promoted the transatlantic economic relations. I understand that the EU-US Summit this Monday was successful in this respect.

The relations of the EU with China, India and the Asian countries in general are becoming closer. It is certain that the importance of the ASEM cooperation is going to increase. The biggest ever summit between the EU and the Latin American and Caribbean countries was held during the Austrian Presidency. Portugal, during her Presidency, is planning to hold a summit with Africa. All of these are important forums for cooperation.

* * *

The future of all of us is constructed on different levels. What we do as individuals, as Finns and Germans, as Europeans, as a part of humanity, is important. Our greatest challenge is how these parts fit together best. I am optimistic insofar as we are gradually making progress towards mutual respect and the desire for cooperation. For us Europeans, it is important to learn to know the world for the very reason that we then learn to know ourselves – this day-by-day more colourful Europe, where different cultures have been woven over the centuries into a fascinating fabric.