[A-List] Finland: the non-NATO election

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

On Sunday the polls close for the parliamentary elections here.
Thankfully -- it's been a thoroughly tiresome campaign in which the drabness
of the main competitors flows from tv screens and newspapers every day,
threatening to drown us all in a syrupy ooze of reconstituted sincerity.
Cardboard candidates vie with each other over their earnestly pro-family
posture, particularly nauseating in the case of the conservative Kokoomus
party ("the children are our future") which is in control of a Helsinki city
council busy closing children's day care centres and reducing places
available in remaining ones as well as reducing the quality of food
provision in these all in the name of "savings".

But the main scandal of the campaign has been the almost total exclusion of
Finland's possible NATO membership as an issue. Apart from a few brave
individuals on the left, the issue has been sidelined for later, while it
keeps simmering in op-ed pages and tv debates in an apparently parallel
universe, as opinion-formers and key elements of the state ideological
apparatus get to work trying to shift the massive majority of public opinion
against NATO membership towards a more favourable position. This was
demonstrated most clearly in a remarkable tv debate shown two weeks ago on
the state channel 2, in which pros and antis lined up against each other. On
the pro-side were various rightwingers and mealy-mouthed Social Democrats
who argued that Finland needs to be represented at the "top table". The
editor of the main newspaper, Olli Kivinen (quoted below), was a
particularly egregious presence, accusing the main opponent of NATO
membership (Left Alliance MP Jaako Laakso) of using the issue "for political
ends" (!), while Laakso countered with accusations of censorship, claiming
that articles he had written for the Helsingin Sanomat op-ed page had been
rejected on the grounds that they had not adhered to the pro-NATO editorial
line taken by Kivinen. This prompted a rise in studio temperature, as
Laakso, whose monitoring of developments has resulted in the publication of
a highly critical book charting the subtle and unseen changes being made to
Finnish foreign and security policy (down to the adjustments being made to
Finnish railways and ports to meet NATO specifications), was vilified as an
extremist by the assorted NATOphiles opposite.

In the interests of fairness the debate chairpersons opened the debate more
widely, and of course it was left to a Green Party spokesperson to be all
things to all people, saying how uncomfortable she was with the idea of
membership but that she could hardly predict how she might feel about it
later. In other words, Joschka Fischer eat your heart out. More interesting
was the representation of the rump of conservatives who are, in fact,
exactly that, within the anti-NATO section of opinion. However these
national Tories are being replaced by the up-and-coming neoliberals who draw
support from big business (e.g. Nokia) and the aspirational petty
bourgeoisie (a growing constituent of Finnish political sociology these
days -- entrepreneurialism has become as much a cult here as elsewhere,
unfortunately).

The position of the former communist Left Alliance in all this is deeply
depressing. Since it is part of the coalition, it cannot formally oppose
existing government policy, although it can provide greater nuance (big
deal!). Thus its campaign revolves around soft images of its leader,
Suvi-Anne Siimes, dressed as an interior decorator proclaiming solidarity
and togetherness as the defining "values" of the party and its politics.
Again, big deal. Siimes has voted alongside her more rightwing colleagues in
authorising pension and health care cuts, and while she voices concern for
the invisible poor when reaching out to her left audience (via what has
become the party mouthpiece Kansan Uutiset newspaper), she switches back to
the soft focus solidarity for the benefit of a more general audience. Were
it not for the courage and principle of individuals like Jaako Laakso it is
difficult to see why on earth this party exists at all, since it is merely a
more rhetorically left version of the SDP. The SDP itself has a few
worthwhile individuals amid the wreckage, but overall it is as hopelessly
compromised as Blair's New Labour, Persson's SDP in Sweden, and the pre-Iraq
war SPD in Germany. Kivinen's point below (they all have to behave
themselves to stand a chance of getting into the coalition) is particularly
pertinent concerning the Left Alliance, whose role as a legitimating sop to
neoliberal "reform" fools progressively less -- Siimes' tenure as party
leader has seen a steady decline in electoral support. A reactivated
Communist Party of Finland will not help her exposed left flank. As for
Kivinen, while what he says is very true, the manner of expression would
undoubtedly be one of knowing satisfaction, since he has lined himself up
alongside the Atlanticists and speaks with the assurance of one who feels
the great tide of history flowing in his preferred direction.

Prime Minister Lipponen visited the White House last month and got very
chummy with Bush, and certain sections of the press here are starting to dig
around what exactly was agreed between the two. Aside from warm noises of
friendship we heard little about it at the time, although there was a very
nice photograph of Lipponen and Bush smiling together which was plastered
everywhere. It's an unofficial secret here that Lipponen has effectively
gained his thirty pieces of silver in return for "guaranteeing" the smooth
passage of Finland into the formal security architecture of the US global
imperialists. Personally I know of Finnish military personnel who are being
assigned to postings in the US lasting literally years, in order to
contribute to the formulation of US security strategy over the next 15-20
years. Full spectrum dominance involves the covert and/or simply tacit
"cooperation" of formally neutral countries  in the emerging new imperialist
paradigm. But kicking out Lipponen to make way for Anneli Jäätteenmäki is
unlikely to make any substantial difference to this. Finland's coalition
politics makes any substantial change much harder to enact, and the real
struggle is going on behind the scenes as control of the state apparatus in
all its forms is being struggled for by those fractions with an Atlanticist
orientation (as represented by the Soros-funded Ahtisaari Foundation headed
up by curiously active former president Martti Ahtisaari) and those
fractions with a more European focus, together with the far smaller fraction
that imagines that Finland can somehow reverse EU membership and revert to
Soviet era inconsequence and prosperity (unfortunately a significant section
of the far left belongs to this group). Jäätteenmäki's Centre Party is an
outgrowth of the old Agrarian party, and it remains strong in rural areas.
Therefore, as long as farming interests are attended, they will swing
whichever way is most convenient.

All in all, Finnish politics is in a very sorry shape, and not helped by the
fact that the Marxist parties here are still trapped in a Stalin vs. Trotsky
faction fight rather than focusing on the immensity of the tasks at hand.
The CPF is opposed by the Communist Workers Party, whose campaign is a model
of anachronism (e.g. exit from the EU). Meanwhile a multiplicity of fringe
and single-issue groups further dilutes the focus of opposition to the
status quo (e.g. the Retired Party, the Basic Finns, assorted independents
and out-and-out racist parties). And then there are the Christian Democrats
(centre right and supposedly bringing true family values and clean living to
politics -- applied Lutheranism) and the Swedish People's Party (we cater
for anyone as long as you say it på Svenska -- but at the moment we're also
very pro-NATO membership). And while the vast majority of public opinion is
against NATO membership, these same opponents view membership as inevitable,
if only because they anticipate that ultimately the dominant Atlanticist
fraction will prevail, regardless of who formally wins this political
charade.

Michael Keaney

------

Finland's voters point to a female succession
By Christopher Brown-Humes
Financial Times: March 12 2003

As the Finnish election campaign reaches a climax, Paavo Lipponen, the
Social Democratic prime minister, has every reason to feel his eight-year
grip on power may be slipping.

The latest poll shows the opposition Centre Party emerging as the single
largest party, with 25.3 per cent of the vote, giving its leader, Anneli
Jäätteenmäki, the chance to become Finland's first female prime minister.
The Social Democrats are second, with 22.8 per cent.

But Mr Lipponen will not have given up hope. Other polls have been closer
and he knows the escalating Iraq crisis may play into his hands if enough
voters decide on Sunday that experience is what counts at a time of such
dramatic international tensions.

Finland has a tradition of coalition governments formed by two of the three
largest parties, the Social Democrats, Centre and Conservatives.

The current coalition is broader, consisting of the Social Democrats,
Conserv-atives, Swedish People's Party and the former communist Left Party
and was even broader until the Greens quit the government last year. The
rurally-based Centre Party has been kept out of power for eight years.

Mr Lipponen and Ms Jäätteenmäki are the key figures in the campaign, which
is as much about personalities as issues. Mr Lipponen, 61, is defending a
solid economic record, as Finnish growth has comfortably outpaced the
European average, not least because of the success of Nokia, the world's
leading maker of mobile phones.

He has also successfully taken Finland first into the EU and then, as a
founder member, into the euro. He emphasises the need for stability and
experience in the face of the Iraqi crisis and economic slowdown.

But his record is marred by ahigh unemployment rate of 9 per cent - a legacy
of Finland's sharp recession at the start of the 1990s. Ms Jäätteenmäki has
seized on unemployment to argue the case for change. She has also attacked
Mr Lipponen over Iraq, arguing that Finland has been too passive in its
stance. She is a fresh face, having only recently been elected party leader,
and a challenge to the status quo, but she lacks experience in foreign
affairs.

"She hasn't made any mistakes, but she hasn't been particularly impressive
either," says Pentti Pesonen, a political scientist. Polls consistently show
voters would prefer Mr Lipponen as prime minister again rather than Ms
Jäätteenmäki.

It has hardly been a riveting campaign. That is partly because Finland's
deteriorating finances have offered politicians of all parties little scope
to make generous promises over tax cuts or higher welfare spending.

It is also because parties have every reason to underplay their differences
in the run-up to elections. "They have to behave well during the campaign so
as not to hurt their chances of joining the coalition after it," says Olli
Kivinen, a senior editor on Helsingin Sanomat, Finland's leading broadsheet
newspaper.

Some of the issues on which there are real differences, for example on
Europe, have not featured significantly in the campaign. The Centre is less
pro-European than the Social Democrats and likely to favour a more
intergovernmental approach to EU affairs than Mr Lipponen. The question of
whether Finland should apply to Nato arose early in the campaign but died
when Nato's difficulties on Iraq became clear.

The key on Sunday night will be which party emerges as the largest, because
the winner traditionally gets the first chance to form and lead the
government. But, as even the winner is unlikely to collect more than a
quarter of all votes, success is not guaranteed and a period of prolonged
horse-trading may ensue.

The Centre party narrowly missed being the biggest party four years ago.
Some pundits believe it will be so desperate to avoid a third term out in
the political cold that, even if it is the biggest party, it could be
prepared to serve in a coalition government under Mr Lipponen. If the Social
Democrats win, Mr Lipponen is thought to prefer a continued collaboration
with the Conservatives.

A lot will come down to personalities and historical grudges from previous
periods of collaboration. Finland may well have a female prime minister in a
few weeks' time. But it would be premature to rule out yet another coalition
dominated by the Social Democrats and the Conservatives.