Speech by President of the Republic Tarja Halonen at the Pohjois-Karjala Kirjapaino Group's celebration in Joensuu on 1 October 2004

As autumn begins we have been remembering the end of the Continuation War 60 years ago. Today the situation is quite different, decisively better. Peace has lasted for a record period. The Cold War that followed the Second World War is over and international integration has sustainably brought a solution to many difficult European problems.

Today our concept of security has expanded. The threat of traditional war has decreased, but people's daily lives seem threatened by many things, from terrorism, international crime and rapidly spreading new diseases to environmental catastrophes and climate change. With increasing international contacts and globalization security has become a common challenge for humanity.

For us to be able to take of our own security we must cooperate with other nations and especially our European neighbours. We must do something about threats where they arise. We can work to strengthen democracy, human rights and the rule of law and to support social justice and sustainable development everywhere. The UN, the EU and other European cooperation such as the Council of Europe and the OSCE are established channels for this.

At the same time we must take care of the security of our own country and people, Finland and Finns. We cannot forget the lessons of history but we must be able to evaluate the changes taking place in the world.

* * *

Changes in the security policy climate have usually taken place gradually. An exception was the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington on September 11th, 2001. Only a few months before this the Finnish Government had submitted a report on security policy and a lively discussion was under way. President Johannes Rau of Germany was visiting in Helsinki at that time, together with his wife. The visit ended with a joint expression of sorrow in which President Rau predicted that the world would never be the same after that day, and he was right.

Those shocking events decisively influenced development around the world and especially in the United States. The effects extended to Afghanistan, Iraq and the Middle East. They speeded up structural changes in NATO and the NATO countries and also in Sweden, which is not a member of NATO. Undoubtedly they also influenced the rapid intensification of the EU's security and defence policy cooperation in recent years.

A week ago the Government submitted a report on Finnish security and defence policy to Parliament. This 167-page document describes our country's security policy environment and the changes that have taken place in it since the previous report, during the past three years. The report is our Finnish response to the security challenges of the new century.

The goal of Finland's security policy is to promote our country's independence and basic social values as well as Finnish security and welfare. We can achieve this by engaging in a consistent foreign policy and by maintaining a credible defence and participating actively in international cooperation.

The report's starting point is broad in two ways. On the one hand security is geographically indivisible in today's world. The most likely threat is regional crises. Even crises far from Finland's borders can extend their effects to Finland.

On the other hand the concept of security in the report is broad in the sense that all the factors that influence security from the use of military force to natural disasters have been brought together as a whole. The means to deal with them are also viewed as a whole, from health care and oil clean-ups to military national defence.

Never before have our nation's security and defence policy reports been consistently based on such a broad concept of security.

* * *

Finland's own security has been strengthened during this decade. The stability of our geographical region has increased. There remains much to do in multilateral and bilateral work, however. For example, border agreements between Russia and Estonia and Latvia have not yet entered into force.

Our internal security is very high by international standards, but work continues because our society has become more vulnerable as a result of otherwise positive technical and economic development. The biggest threat to Finnish security is nevertheless expected to come from outside our borders.

Of prime importance in our security policy is preventive work, both here in our own country and in the field of international cooperation. In neither case is this do-gooding. Instead it is practical and clear-headed work that also increases our own security.

Finland has been a member of the European Union for ten years. During this time the Union has become the most important channel for our preventive security policy. Finland also strongly supports the United Nations as a means for worldwide cooperation.

If crisis prevention fails, it is imperative to manage crises so that they do not cause broader repercussions. Even here military crisis management should only be a last resort and temporary measure. In follow-up work reconciliation and civil crisis management must also be given priority. But if the fire department is needed, it must arrive quickly and do its job skilfully.

Finland has played a leading role in UN peacekeeping work for nearly half a century. In recent years we have also participated in NATO-led crisis management operations, relative to our population more actively than most NATO members. The EU is presently developing its own crisis management capacity and Finland will also participate in this work, according to its traditions.

Finland's strengthening crisis management capacity will decisively support our ability to defend our own country. The backbone of our own credible defence capacity will remain regional defence based on universal military service, however.

Our defence appropriations are meagre even by Nordic standards. In spite of this we are able cost-effectively to train a large reserve and constantly modernize our defence forces' equipment. Our education system has also created a good foundation for the voluntary recruitment of high-standard personnel for international crisis management tasks.

Today and in the future we can be confident that our defence forces will fulfil their tasks in defending our own country and in demanding international operations.

* * *

In connection with the Government's report it was also decided that Finland will relinquish anti-personnel landmines and join the 1999 Ottawa Convention. This convention bans the kind of landmines that have caused and are still causing enormous destruction and suffering to the civilian population in crisis areas around the world.

Although Finland was not prepared to sign the Ottawa Convention at the end of the last decade, in 1997 we voiced support for the convention's goal, a complete ban on anti-personnel landmines. We also made a commitment with the other members of the EU not to replace existing landmines. We likewise decided to investigate how landmines can be replaced by other weapon systems and what this will cost.

In the 2001 report we set the goal of joining the convention in 2006 and of getting rid of landmines in 2010 without harming our credible defence capacity. I was involved in this decision and I hoped that we could follow it up.

On the basis of studies we have now decided that Finland will join the Ottawa Convention in 2012 and use the four years allowed by the convention to get rid of landmines.

The most important thing is that the clear decision that has now been made ensures the credibility of our foreign policy and national defence. The deployment of new weapon systems to replace landmines will begin in 2009. The decision means that Finland's defence capacity will not weaken, but rather the opposite. If the replacement of landmines had only begun after they reached obsolescence, in the middle of the next decade, our defence capacity could easily have weakened. The long preparation period also makes it possible to adjust costs to other budget requirements.

* * *

The Government's report provides a strong foundation for the long-term development of our security and defence policy. The biggest task here is the good and effective coordination of military and civilian crisis management.

We already have decades of experience of military crisis management. Participation in the creation of the EU's rapid reaction force will be a major task in the coming years. In developing civilian crisis management, including the participation of the police, the Frontier Guard and rescue and other authorities, we still have a long way to go. We have to build a suitable and respected profile for Finland and Finns in international peacekeeping work.

Parliament has started a very lively debate on the report. No less than 209 speeches were given in the preliminary debate. The decision on landmines, which was long in the making, was also discussed at length in Parliament, as we have been able to read on the pages of Karjalainen.

This lively debate is positive. It is an indication of the final freeing of our foreign and security policy culture from the rigidity of the Cold War years. Parliament's response will be the starting point for the preparation of the next report three or four years from now.

* * *

I have discussed timely issues regarding Finland's security and defence policy. I would also like to remind you of the approaching local elections. Remember to vote!

I would like to present my congratulations to the Pohjois-Karjala Kirjapaino Group on its anniversary and wish its newspapers and the entire Finnish local press a healthy future in the service of freedom of expression.