Speech by President of the Republic Tarja Halonen at Lennart Meri Memorial Conference in Tallinn, 29 March 2007

(check against delivery)

How are you, Europe?

President Lennart Meri was a true European. He had many opportunities at an early age: he learned as much as he could about Europe, recognised the richness and plurality of its culture, and learned several languages. Lennart Meri was a cultural figure in the full sense of the term.

On the other hand, he had to live through the darkest period in European history and to experience its horrors; he saw his country invaded, his people oppressed and its freedom suffocated.

But in the midst of all the difficulties, Lennart Meri believed in a small nation’s right to exist and in the vitality of its culture and language. He believed in the Estonian identity and considered it a richness.

He stubbornly believed for decades that freedom would dawn for Estonia, and when it finally came true, he said: “I always knew this would happen.” His faith and his life’s work are a remarkable legacy for all Europeans.

Another true European, Jean Monnet, witnessed war, destruction and suffering, and this prompted in him a vision of all the nations of Europe living in peace, harmony and cooperation. The causes of war had to be eliminated, old disagreements uprooted, and a foundation laid for true cooperation. The countries of Europe had to be tied together so closely that war would become impossible.

Jean Monnet had a vision of a new Europe and an idea of how to make it happen. His greatness lay in combining the two. He had his head in the clouds but his feet firmly on the ground.

A third true European, Winston Churchill, and his contemporaries saw that the future of the then war-torn Europe lay in cooperation. Democracy, human rights and the rule of law were the fundamental principles of the Council of Europe, which was founded in 1949. Economic cooperation was added to the European project a few years later with the founding of the European Coal and Steel Community, which later evolved into the European Community and then into the European Union.

Unfortunately, the Cold War split Europe into two camps. Finland’s contribution to European unity was an attempt to bring nations closer together across Cold War boundaries and to reinforce the universality of the principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Today, the Cold War is history, the Berlin Wall has fallen, and Estonia like many other countries is once again independent. European cooperation bodies have expanded: the Council of Europe first, then the EU, then NATO. We must be determined to continue along this path. After the great enlargement processes, we must have the energy to continue pursuing integration among ourselves, to undertake a sensible division of functions, and to cooperate in good faith. The European Union is not the same thing as Europe, even though the EU is an extremely important factor in building the future of Europe.

Many of you here today know that I am fond of the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights. This is not just a personal feeling, as it is a sound principle that democracy must govern international cooperation, and international law too. Commitment to values and obligations stems from the free will of a sovereign nation. The member states of the Council of Europe have committed themselves to the European Convention on Human Rights and many regulations which complement it, enabling an individual citizen to bring a government to court for infringements of his rights. This is a unique achievement in the field of human rights in the global context. It is the foundation of European integration, and it is up to us Europeans to ensure that it is strengthened, not eroded.

* * *

The past 50 years have seen an unprecedented development, based on the acknowledgement of serious errors and the recognition of building blocks for the future. We have followed the example of the people whose faith in the future conquered the dark shadows of the past, great and encouraging people like Lennart Meri, Lech Walesa and Vaclav Havel.

The enlargement of the European Union to include ten new Member States three years ago and two more Member States this year demonstrates the power of broad-based integration. The aim of joining the European Union is a strong incentive for achieving difficult changes and reforms on the national level. The enlargement process has prompted unimaginable developments at all stages.

The fundamental concept of the European Union is clear. However, experience has shown that this concept has not always been methodically pursued. Developments have progressed in stages, sometimes quickly in leaps and bounds, sometimes slowly and haphazardly. Today, it is commonplace to say that we have lost sight of the concept.

This is a claim that we must take seriously. We cannot build a common Europe without the contribution and support of our citizens. An EU without strong institutions and without democratic decision-making cannot succeed. But on the other hand, we cannot simply turn the other cheek to whatever criticism and abuse is thrown at the EU.

* * *

The European Union needs a new founding treaty. It is not so important what this treaty is called. Germany, the current Presidency holder, has an ambitious plan which deserves the support of all the Member States.

The Treaty now submitted to the Member States for ratification should be essentially retained. There must be scope for minor adjustments, of course, but the delicate balance of the Treaty as a whole should not be upset. The institutional solutions it proposes will ensure the efficient functioning of the EU, expand democratic decision-making and increase the effectiveness of the EU both externally and internally.

It would be irresponsible to prolong this process and to lose the chance to make a fresh start. But on the other hand, it is not enough just to create new tools. Europe must demonstrate solidarity in going forward.

The strength of the European Union is in its will and its strength to renew itself, even if this has been difficult at times. Another strength is its openness, the will and the ability to accept new Member States.

Thanks to enlargement, European values have spread wider. Thanks to enlargement, prospective Member States have undertaken decisive, fundamental and rapid action to improve themselves. Thanks to enlargement, the Union has itself become stronger and more important. The EU is a stronger actor now than ever before. It should be possible for further countries to join, as long as they fulfil the membership criteria. Of course, not every country wishes to do so.

* * *

I already said earlier that the European Union is not Europe. I have also reminded you that the Council of Europe, the OSCE and all other bodies engaged in European cooperation have their own important roles to play. The EU must display a sincere willingness to develop its cooperation with these bodies and with countries that border on the EU. This is a broad field, with a great many objectives and practices. It is in the interests of the EU to pursue this approach as actively as possible.

The EU and Russia have a relationship of increasing interdependence. Cooperation, closer relationships and increasing interaction are the only feasible way to go.

The experiences of Finland’s EU Presidency, which ended some months ago, were encouraging in many ways. The summits organized in various fields in the name of permanent partnership were a clear demonstration of greater mutual understanding and an acknowledgement of mutual benefits.

It is all the more regrettable that negotiations on a new Cooperation and Partnership Agreement with Russia were not initiated. Achieving this agreement is clearly in the interests of the EU, and we may safely assume that it is equally in the interests of Russia. I hope that these negotiations will begin as soon as possible.

The importance and role of the European Union in the world have grown. During the crisis in Lebanon last summer, the EU presented a united front and managed to achieve a halt in hostilities. The EU was the first to provide humanitarian aid and was also a major player in putting a solid peacekeeping operation in place in the region. The only regret is that the EU has only rarely displayed such a unanimous and effective response.

The EU is showing a strong tendency towards combining military crisis management with civilian crisis management. There are situations where civilian action is preferable to military intervention. And, of course, in some cases, both are needed at the same time. This is exactly where the crisis management operations of the EU find their special meaning, their usefulness and their justification. Cooperation and the division of labour between the EU and NATO must be kept on the agenda – already because of overlapping memberships.

Closer co-operation is needed especially in the development of rapid reaction forces. Both organisations already have these capabilities and are developing them further. By the way it is interesting that in the EU these troops are called “Battle Groups” and in the NATO “Response Force.” As we do not have any practical experience about the use of rapid reaction capabilities in crisis management, it is essential that we share information between the organisations and develop capabilities in good co-operation in order to avoid unnecessary overlapping and misunderstanding.

Finland for her part is participating in two EU Battle Groups. We are right now in high readiness with Germany and Netherlands and next year we are going to be in duty in the Nordic Battle Group with Sweden, Norway, Estonia and Ireland. NATO has offered for the partnership countries a possibility to be involved with supplementary contributions in NATO Response Force activities. We are currently considering this offer.

* * *

The European Union is a unique entity. The disastrous failure of wartime politics created a new need, which evolved into a vision, which in turn translated into a plan. Former enemies forged a strong union, leading to growth and prosperity never seen before.

Accepting the EU, with all its strengths and weaknesses, is not an easy task. Yet try we must; and we have an excellent opportunity for doing so. Young people are more mobile today than ever before. The EU has programmes to bring students together, and more and more young people are taking the opportunity to study at a university or other institution in another Member State. It is hard to imagine a better opportunity for adopting an international attitude and a readiness for cooperation.

Building the EU has required both vision and action. We bear a great responsibility towards future generations. When we eventually look back, we can perhaps with some satisfaction say that we gave the EU more substance and carried the original concept forward.

It is my wish that in the future we can all join Lennart Meri in saying that we always knew that this would happen, and, like Jean Monnet, see our vision translated into reality. It is also my wish that we will continue to live in peace and harmony, to witness ongoing development, and to see our young people growing up in an environment of cooperation and solidarity.