Speech by Minister for Foreign Affairs Timo Soini at the Annual Meeting of Heads of Mission

Speech by Minister for Foreign Affairs Timo Soini at the Annual Meeting of Heads of Mission on Monday, 22 August 2016.

(CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY)

Dear ambassadors, dear colleagues,

A year is a short time for changes in the world. Over the span of one year the tendency is to dramatise change too much, while with long sights it is often underestimated.

Many of the issues up for discussion today were already on the table when I stood at this same lectern in August of 2015. Europe was surrounded by a shrinking ring of shape-changing conflicts and instability. The notion of a period of deep peace that prevailed a few years ago had already gone. The European Union was suffering the pains of internal crises. The Ukrainian conflict had already reached the trench stage. Migration to Finland grew strongly, before its sharp peak later in the autumn. Radical Islamist terrorism frightened people.

But new events have taken place during the year as well. At the end of September, Russia forcefully introduced itself as a party to the war in Syria and the situation in the Middle East. Russia proceeded close to a rift with Turkey in November, started rebuilding relations in June and made the first call to the shocked Turks following the attempted coup in July. Quick moves.

The pace of developments in Turkey has been even faster. The country has experienced uncontrolled inward and outward migration, a new escalation of the Kurdish conflict, elections dividing the people and the difficult immigration negotiations with the EU ─ and, the most serious of all, an attempted military coup. The mood in Ankara is understandably sensitive.

The news this year has been dominated by terrorist attacks in Ankara, Paris, Brussels, Kabul, Beirut, Baghdad, Orlando and Nice. The full list is much longer. There is nothing new in terrorism, of course. But some sort of feeling of powerlessness and ‘new normal’ have been heard from Europeans; here we go again.

In terms of Finland’s foreign policy, however, it seems that democracy produced the news of the year. The result of Britain’s referendum at Midsummer is certainly one of recent history’s most far-reaching single events, a true ‘Where were you?’ moment.

* * *

Ladies and gentlemen,

I don’t want to try to present an exhaustive analysis of the state of the world in this speech. Nor do I want right now to try to go through every important foreign policy theme. Instead, I will focus on a few. First I will say a bit about the international situation and especially about Europe and its neighbouring area. Then I will try to outline the impacts of the changes on Finland. And finally I will say a few words about how our own house, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, should, in my opinion, react to the changes.

I will start from Europe. As you know, I personally do not believe in invariably deepening integration. Now this ever closer Union thinking is challenged in any case, from various quarters. On the one hand it is tested by the unsolved fundamental problems of the Euro area and, on the other hand, by the instability of the neighbouring area and the ensuing, at times uncontrollable, migration. Voters are dissatisfied.

The mood has changed. At the latest with Brexit, doubt seems to be creeping in the minds even of the Euro elite over whether the European project is turning back towards land. Is the rocket reaching its zenith before it leaves the Earth’s pull of gravity? Is the famous bicycle coming to a halt ─ and what happens then?

In a way it is also a question of the return of history. The Utopian faith in eternal progress gives way to the much older notion that history has no clear direction. Instead of a straight line, one can see wave motion or even a circle.

In the mind of the individual citizen, belief in progress may have meant that one’s children would achieve a better ─ or at least about the same ─ standard of living as their parents. When this belief is eroded, voters may become angry.

Don’t misunderstand. I don’t believe in invariably deepening integration, but I also don’t expect the disintegration of the European Union. There are alternatives. We need common structures. We need common places for discussion. Common problems require cooperation. The demolition of large structures involves great risks.

Besides, the European Union is also a security community, the importance of which should not be underestimated. As a security community, the EU is in accordance with Finland’s interest. The Union also has a chance to survive and adapt. This requires, however, that we must begin adhering to commonly reached agreements.

On the other hand, Europe exists as a community of values independently of the European Union. With Britain’s withdrawal from the Union, we must jointly agree on new modes and structures of cooperation with the Brits. That process may even result in something good.

An old and good example of a close and prosperous European community of values, which exists regardless of the EU, is the Nordic countries. The Nordic countries’ basic foreign and security policy solutions differ, but that has not prevented the countries’ unique coexistence. For us, the closest example is of course the special relationship between Finland and Sweden where the countries complement each other’s resources in a way quite unusual. More on this a little later.

The instability in Europe’s neighbouring area continues, however. While Western Europe was still able to stabilise its neighbourhood after the Cold War, today it appears unable to do so. This applies to both the Eastern and the Southern Neighbourhood.

Russia’s way of seeing the security architecture of our neighbouring area differs from our own. To Russia, power policy is a tool among others. Dialogue is in everyone’s interest, but it has its steps moulded by history. Successful dialogue with Russia requires that a small country has know-how, is clever, and pulls together.

Dialogue is not, and must not be, any compromise in our policy emphasising international law and a rules-based approach. On the contrary, discussions must bring up these departure points tirelessly. Multilaterally recognised and established fora, such as the OSCE, have their own important meaning.

To Finland, Russia is always a key issue and an important neighbour. We cannot and do not want to turn our back on Russia. At the same time we must be honest with regard to the facts: through the illegal occupation of Crimea and its actions in Ukraine, Russia has violated central principles of the European security system.

It is in everyone’s interest that the reaction to this has been determined. The common sanctions are upheld. But old biblical wisdom applies here, too – punish sin, not the sinner. Whether or not the preconditions to return to a more normal agenda in relations between the EU and Russia exist depends on Russia’s own actions. There is still no alternative to implementation of the Minsk agreement.

* * *

Ladies and gentlemen,

“Rapid and unpredictable changes are the hallmark of Finland’s transformed foreign and security policy environment.” This is stated in the Government Report on Finnish Foreign and Security Policy published in June. The Report presents the priorities and goals of our foreign policy.

In the autumn of 2016 it is no longer unclear to anyone that the security architecture prevailing in Europe and based on multilateral cooperation has been challenged. In fact, the entire international normative system has similarly been challenged.

Instability has increased on our continent. The number of uncertainty factors has increased. If the importance of the established, rules-based structures crumbles, a small country loses. Finland’s interest must be recognised, and it must be defended also in this case.

At the same time, the picture of conflict has changed. In a complex and interdependent world, politics is extended “by other means”, as Clausewitz’s assertion states. Of these “other means”, only one, and the extreme, is traditional warfare. Others are various tools of political and economic pressure and confusion. Finland, too, is a target of hybrid influencing. Our society’s resilience and understanding of this influencing must be strengthened, and it has become stronger.

Another indication of change in conflicts is international terrorism. During the year, the pull of ISIL and the stream of foreign fighters, including Finns, to the Caliphate have waned and the brutal organisation has been hard-pressed. This has, however, been reflected as increased terrorism in Europe, even though the most devastating attacks have once again been experienced in the Middle East.

The threat of terrorism is real, and at least as real is the fear it causes. At the same time, however, the risks must be placed in perspective. Let it now be said clearly: the terroristic ideology of hatred is not a real threat to our social order. The black flag will never wave on the roof of this building. During the year I have had to say that one must not give in to fear. A sense of proportion helps in this.

Although the threat of terrorism is real, it is small to the individual person. It is good to remember that, as far as we know, not a single Finnish citizen thus far has ever died as a victim of international terrorism. Fiddling with a mobile phone on the motorway is a safety risk an order of magnitude greater than the risk of being caught in a terrorist attack.

But it is clear that it is a serious problem that we have to face, one way or another. Our national foresight and intelligence capability must be strengthened. In this, the connection between the external and internal security is highlighted. Abroad, a terrorist attack may be a high-pressure preparedness situation also for a diplomatic mission, and we have received reminders of this, among others, in Ankara, Paris and Brussels. The Ministry’s crisis preparedness nowadays is impressive, but the real test will come only when Finns end up as targets. Hopefully that day is far off. There has been an alarming number of close calls.

The challenges of an open, democratic society are often mentioned in connection with both hybrid influencing and terrorism. In the opinion of some, an open society gives an unnecessary handicap to asymmetrical threats. In poker, when the opponent is playing five-card draw, it can be more difficult to succeed at Canadian stud.

But this is not the whole truth. An open society can seem vulnerable because it is polyphonic and because it does not always retaliate. But one should not underestimate the resilience of democratic order based on law and trust when the stakes are raised.

The effects of changes on Finland are more direct than before. We received a literal reminder of this last year in Tornio. In retrospect we can state that the greatest challenge of mass immigration lies in the feeling of losing control. Fundamental questions arise when it seems that the situation is no longer in anyone’s control. In this regard, we coped with last year’s greatest pressure rather well. Finnish actors demonstrated problem-solving skills and smooth cooperation when it was most needed.

Changes are also quicker and more surprising. One of the lessons to Finland in recent years is the importance of foresight. At the same time as we maintain our defence capacity, we must be prepared for ever new surprises. In this, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and the network of diplomatic missions of course play a central role.

We must look after Finland’s defence capacity and security. As the Report states: for the sake of its own security, Finland does not have the option to isolate itself. Cooperation must be deepened and intensified. Our international networks must constantly be reinforced on all continents. This requires hard legwork and a high bar also for the diplomatic missions.

Sweden is always Finland’s closest and most natural partner. We both genuinely want to strengthen this connection. It was easy to note this last Wednesday in Stockholm. It is only natural that defence cooperation with Sweden also proceeds in a determined manner. Together we are stronger and we support each other.

Of course we also have a special relationship with Estonia. The Baltic countries returned to their own place among independent states 25 years ago. Independent Estonia is a success story, for which our sister nation deserves our deep respect.

Finland and Sweden have also successfully deepened their cooperation with NATO. It is in everyone’s interest that Finland and Sweden are at the table when issues concerning the Baltic Sea are discussed. As to Finland’s application for membership of NATO, the situation remains as before – we are not applying for membership now, but the possibility exists. In this deliberation, how the European security situation develops is the most essential factor. Let’s be as clear as possible here: Although we are not applying for NATO membership now, keeping that door open serves Finland’s security.

The commitment of the United States to European security is the intrinsic issue – whether a Republican or a Democrat sits in the White House. This transatlantic bond is the cornerstone of European security. It is in Finland’s interests to seek close and practical cooperation with the United States. Foreign and security policy cooperation with the United States as well as military cooperation and defence materiel improve Finland’s own defence capacity.

As a member of the European Union, we are not outsiders if security in the Community is threatened. Implementation of the mutual assistance clause of the Lisbon Treaty following the terrorist attacks in Paris is a major first that strengthens the Union as a security community. The shouldering of joint responsibility was also seen in our own response to France’s request for assistance. We doubled the strength of the training operation in Erbil, we placed transport flight hours at France’s disposal and we are strengthening the UNIFIL mission with an additional company.

The EU’s centrifugal forces of course affect Finland equally. Brexit’s details are not known yet in Helsinki, Brussels or London. Still, it can be said that when Britain leaves the EU, Finland will lose an influential – and on many issues, a like-minded – companion. We must ensure that when the separation comes, doors are not slammed and there are no unnecessary quarrels over spoons.

Even if with Brexit the EU would not quite be “Snow White and the 26 Dwarfs” as one of our colleagues described the matter, the Union’s balance will change permanently in any case. This calls for reassessment of our own role and our work.

It is certain that the bar for foreign policy will rise. Our own interest depends more than ever on our ability to exert influence and agree on matters outside our country’s borders: in Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa. Forging contacts, exerting influence, making Finland understood and even selling will be stressed. All this means rising standards and an emphasised meaning of work for you.

* * *

Dear colleagues,

A year ago, I had just started as Minister for Foreign Affairs. My impression of the Ministry was good.
Today it is better.

The Ministry for Foreign Affairs is full of skilful, smart and adaptable people. It is a sincere pleasure to work in such a place. Great attention is paid to leadership, and at the Ministry and the diplomatic missions I see mostly happy, confident women and men who like their demanding work.

I have been involved with people management long enough that I can see when things run smoothly and the work team shines. When colleagues bond ─ and I see this pleasingly often ─ the work has not only strong attraction but also immense power.

This time I also want to bring out, in particular, the role of the family in diplomatic missions. On official trips I have become acquainted with many of your spouses, and I have been deeply impressed. From my own experience as well, I know how great the spouse’s role and importance can be. I can only admire the jump into the unknown that they have to make when transferring out.

According to an old metaphor, a diplomatic mission is like a ship on the open sea. Home is far away and the skipper is next after God. Everyone, including spouses and families, must be able to trust that they are treated fairly and that they are taken care of. The unemployment benefits, healthcare and financial position of spouses should still receive attention.

The working community must be in order. We must ensure the operating conditions of the network of diplomatic missions. Resources are scarce now and in the future, but Finland can no longer afford the fool’s approach of cutting a piece from the top of a blanket in order to lengthen the blanket at the bottom.

The diplomatic missions will be required in the future to exert influence and forge relations even more than before. The importance of the traditional follow-up will decrease correspondingly. Political reporting will not disappear, but increased attention will be paid to the sources of information and to its value. As to the exertion of influence, we must take a couple of steps forward, set targets and monitor them. A more detailed manual of the first phase can be found in the Report.

Ladies and gentlemen,

There is power and strength in language. The winner is the one with a good story. When the blocks of international politics move, the need arises for new national narratives.

Finland is not known everywhere. For this reason we must again position our country to the place where we belong ─ if we don’t, others will do it for us. We need skilled and consistent communications, and the words must be expressed clearly.

Our international position depends on the stories told about us. These stories are either the ones we tell, or then someone else will invent them. We are a Western democracy, an open society based on trust and a Nordic welfare state ─ and every word can be taken seriously. Our history may not be long or glamorous, but the story of the soon one-hundred-year-old Finland is quite good.

You should tell Finland’s story abroad, in your own words and so that you are understood. It is work that has a purpose.

Thank you very much, the best of luck and success!