The Finnish Perspective on the Membership in the European Union by Jaakko Blomberg, on 29 March 2000

MEMBERSHIP IN THE EUROPEAN UNION THE FINNISH PERSPECTIVE Jaakko Blomberg Under-Secretary of State, Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Finland Speech at the Near East University, Northern Nicosia March 29, 2000

My presentation today is part of a consistent Finnish effort - crowned in Helsinki in December - to promote an enlargement of the European Union that very much includes the whole of Cyprus.

Some you may have been present at our previous contribution to bringing the EU closer to you. I mean the seminar last December on the enlargement of the EU and Cyprus at this very same University organized by Professor Suistola and Ambassador Patokallio.

After the EU summit in Helsinki, all of us share a strategic objective, and we want to encourage everyone to work for reaching that objective. Turkey wants to get into the EU, and was confirmed as a candidate in Helsinki, a historic decision. I know that you - the Turkish Cypriots - also want to be part of Europe. So do the Greek Cypriots. Greece already is in the EU. This situation creates new dynamics and new opportunities to get out of the zero-sum game mentality so prevalent up to now. Gains for one can become gains for all.

The road ahead is long one but - as the Chinese say - even a journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step. The EU and its member states are now beginning to take those first steps towards you, Turkish Cypriots, by telling about the EU, what it is, what it stands for, what it requires. The visit here just last week of the member of the European Commission, Mr Verheugen, is evidence of this and it will be followed up by the Comission delegation inn Nicosia.

***
The history of the EU proves that the characteristics of peoples in different member states have not disappeared with increased integration. Despite our differences, we share common goals and values. And we have decided to work together in order to achieve and to uphold them.

The basic aim - to maintain peace and security and spread prosperity throughout the continent - remains firm and unchanged. Integration is still the most effective and natural way to promote peaceful development across the whole continent of Europe.

The EU is open to all European states which share our values and principles and are ready to fulfil the membership requirements.

***

Finland´s accession negotiations lasted only 13 months, but our integration into the EU started many years earlier. The first move was association with and later membership in EFTA from 1960. The second one was the free trade agreement with the EEC in 1974.

The next important step was the European Economic Area. The negotiations between the EEC and the member states of EFTA were opened in 1989. On the basis of the EEA agreement we began to apply the single market legislation. That simplified our task when the accession talks with the EU began in 1993. We could then concentrate on those sectors which were not covered by the EEA, such as agriculture and structural policies.

The EEA negotiations also served as a useful learning process for the government, the Parliament and the entire Finnish administration. More than 500 civil servants took part in that process. They were obliged to learn not only the acquis communautaire - the EU legislation and norms - but also the decision-making rules and procedures of the EU.

I mention all this to underline that adaptation to EU membership is a long and arduous process. And it is never unproblematic.

The starting point for our accession negotiations was that we had a clear and strong interest in joining the Union. We shared its goals and principles and we were prepared to accept its legislation. In the negotiations we concentrated our efforts on a limited number of issues which needed special solutions.

Among the most complex issues was our wish to ensure that agriculture could continue in all parts of Finland and that long distances and our sparse population would be taken into account in regional policies. We also wanted to maintain our higher norm level on certain issues related to the environment. And the autonomous status of the province of Åland Islands called for special arrangements. All in all, we negotiated about ten special solutions or transitional arrangements.

The government conducted the negotiations in an open way. The Parliament in Helsinki was kept well informed about developments in the negotiations. The interest groups, which included employers, trade unions and others, were involved in the process.

The negotiators also briefed the media very openly, not only on the achievements but also on the difficulties. In the end, by spring 1994, there were no real surprises concerning the results of the negotiations.

The accession agreement was submitted to a national referendum in autumn 1994. The result was clear: 57 % of the Finnish people voted in favour of it. After ratification in the Finnish Parliament and in those of the member states, Finland became a member from the beginning of the year 1995.

***

Today, after a little more than five years’ experience, EU membership continues to enjoy the support of the majority of Finns.

There are many reasons for this steady support: the sense of security about our place in Europe has increased, the young generation has more opportunities to study and work abroad and Finnish companies have easier access to EU markets and more opportunities for co-operation. An there are many others.

Our position in Europe and on the international scene has been strengthened. EU membership has enabled Finland to influence issues of international significance on an equal footing with other EU member states. A good example of this is the notable contribution to the resolution of the Kosovo crisis made by our then President, Mr Martti Ahtisaari, just a few weeks before the start of the Finnish Presidency of the EU..

In spite of the generally positive feeling about the EU, membership has of course had some negative aspects. It has brought problems particularly in agriculture. Dramatic changes in producer prices caused difficulties for our farmers. We feel that the EU´s Common Agricultural Policy does not pay enough attention to the problems of countries with unfavourable climatic conditions.

***

If we divide "the Finnish EU history" into stages, stage one was preparation for the coming membership talks, stage two was the negotiation process itself and stage three was the first years of membership. This year, after having completed our first EU Presidency, we are moving into the fourth stage: that of a "mature member state".

Let me say a few words about the EU Presidency, which we recently concluded. It was in many ways a crucial period for the Union as a whole. It was generally deemed a success in the areas of substance, working methods and practical arrangements. Finland’s aim was to promote the Union’s internal and external operations in an active and impartial manner, emphasising the importance of transparency and efficiency in the EU´s decision-making processes at all levels

The Presidency was for us - a small member state - a very demanding but extremely useful experience. We learned a lot about the way the Union works. This is experience that we can use in the future.

***

And now, let me turn to future challenges. There are three subjects I would like to take up in this context, namely enlargement, institutional changes and development of the common security and defence policy of the EU. All of these are vital for the future development of the Union.

As I suggested at the outset, enlargement is one of the Union´s most important challenges as we enter the new millennium. Enlargement will promote stability and security as well as prosperity and social development in our continent.

The enlargement now envisaged will roughly double the size of the Union and fundamentally change its nature. Speed and quality are both of the essence in this process: speed because this unique opportunity must not be missed, and quality because what has been built up in the Union must be retained with care and developed further.

The substance of membership is divided in 31 chapters, each to be negotiated in turn with the applicant country. The negotiations have advanced according to plan and we have now opened about three quarters of the negotiation chapters with those countries which began negotiations in 1998. The objective is to open the rest of the chapters during the ongoing Portuguese Presidency. During the Finnish Presidency it became evident that we are now approaching a new phase in the negotiations. As we proceed and more difficult chapters are opened it will become more difficult to reach a common position among the member states.

The decision at the Helsinki European Council to open negotiations with six new countries was a big step forward in the enlargement process. We also agreed in Helsinki on a new negotiation method which allows each applicant country to proceed according to its own merits, as already decided in Luxembourg. The better prepared applicants should not have to wait for the slower ones. If the countries now entering into negotiations proceed well in their preparations they should, within a reasonable time period, have a chance to reach the same level as the countries already negotiating.

From now on EU monitoring of the applicant countries´ implementation of the acquis will be more strongly emphasised. It will be more closely linked to the opening and provisional closing of negotiations on each chapter. This will provide a better picture of the candidates´ preparedness for EU membership. It was also confirmed that all membership criteria must be fulfilled before accession is possible.

***

The Helsinki European Council recognised Turkey as a candidate State destined to join the Union on the basis of the same criteria as the other candidates. With Turkey the accession process now covers 13 candidate states within a single framework.

The decision is especially important in the context of EU-Turkey relations. The relationship is an old one, deriving from the sixties. And it is well advanced in particular in trade matters through the Customs Union established in 1995. Turkey´s geopolitical role and economic potential make it an indispensable partner for the EU. The Union is looking forward to the expanding cooperation with Turkey on a wide range of issues of common interest.

The implementation of the Helsinki decision has started. A pre-accession strategy will be designed, building on established ground. As with other candidates, the main burden is on the candidate´s side. I have personally been impressed by the tremendous impact the Helsinki candidacy decision has made in the relevant quarters of the Turkish government, society and economy. I cherish with my Turkish friends the new prospect. Major reforms are to be worked out and many are already being processed. The Union will extend its support in this process.

***

The accession negotiations with Cyprus are well advanced although - like with the other five countries of the first group - much work remains to be done.

A note on the current division of Cyprus is in place here. The Helsinki Summit welcomed the launching of the talks aiming at a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem and expressed its strong support for the UN Secretary General´s efforts to bring the process to a successful conclusion.

The Helsinki Summit underlined in its conclusions that a political settlement will facilitate the accession of Cyprus to the Union. The Summit declared that "if no settlement has been reached by the completion of accession negotiations, the Council´s decision on accession will be made without the above being a precondition. In this the Council will take acount of all relevant factors". I trust that this message will be fully taken into consideration by the parties.

Having followed the UN talks fairly closely I am gratified to note that since the Helsinki Summit and the confirmation of Turkey´s EU-candidature there is a new dynamism in the process. When the talks are resumed later in the spring, real and concrete progress should be made. The EU enlargement process is moving ahead. There is now an opportunity which should not be missed.

***

The Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) which began just a month ago is extremely important for the future of the Union. The results of the Conference should ensure that the Union´s institutional structures are in shape to be able to work effectively with 25 to 30 member states.

We have a good basis for making the changes necessary for enlargement. The Helsinki European Council agreed on three objectives. First, the agenda of the IGC should be focused on the institutional reforms necessary for enlargement. The focus should be on comprehensive and lasting institutional reforms. Second, the Conference should work towards a balanced outcome which can be politically defended. The results should be understandable and acceptable to the general public. Third, the Conference should finish its work by the end of 2000 so as to maintain momentum in the enlargement process.

The applicant countries were asked to give their views on the Intergovernmental Conference before it started. It was evident that the applicant countries share the aforementioned objectives.

A guiding principle of this Intergovernmental conference is efficiency. Thus, in our view, the extension of qualified majority voting is the key factor. The extension of qualified majority voting is essential in maintaining the efficiency of the Union.

***

Now I would like to turn to my third topic: development of the common security and defence policy of the EU.

The turmoil over the past decade in the Western Balkans has demonstrated the need for the European countries to be able to better respond to international crises. The decisions made by the European Councils in Cologne and Helsinki were significant steps on the road toward improving the crisis management capability of the European Union. The aim is to develop both military and non-military means to respond to crisis situations, taking into account their multidimensional character.

The development of the common security and defence policy of the EU (CESDP) consists of an institutional dimension and a capabilities dimension. On the institutional side the Union has decided to establish new permanent structures to perform the functions of military crisis management. Interim arrangements have already been set up.

But no institutional reform will be adequate unless the Union can enhance its military capabilities. The Helsinki European Council decided on a headline goal and now is the time to implement this decision. The member countries will have to review their force structures, resources and defence doctrines to suit future needs. In this process we should, however, be careful not to create any unnecessary duplication. NATO and the Partnership for Peace programme provide useful force planning mechanisms. Recourse to NATO assets and capabilities will most likely be needed for possible future EU-led crisis management operations.

Developing a good, working EU-NATO relationship will thus be essential for the progress of the CESDP. NATO has developed mechanisms to co-operate with the WEU. As the EU is taking over the crisis management tasks of the WEU, a new relationship has to be built between the EU and NATO, taking into account the different natures and memberships of these organisations. This applies in particular in the case of the European allied countries, not members of the EU, like Turkey. We should also put in place arrangements that will allow other third countries to contribute to EU crisis management.

***

The international community is going through a turbulent transition. A new millennium has just started. Developing the Union internally and redefining it geographically are necessary. The work is under way. We think it is of utmost importance that the Union functions well and that it is ready to acquire new members and still function properly. We also want to develop the Union so as to enhance its role as a global force for stability and development.

In conclusion, let me underline my main message once again. Given the historic decisions in Helsinki and the shared strategic objective, we hope, and believe, that by the time the accession negotiations with Cyprus will have been concluded, the long-awaited political settlement of the question of Cyprus will also be in hand. The EU, the member states and the Commission will have to work accordingly. And you, both communities on the island, have to be prepared so that Cyprus would be able to enter the European Union as an undivided island. Membership would make it possible for the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots to enjoy the peace, security and prosperity that membership in the EU has already brought to millions of other Europeans, including us Finns. It will not be easy but it can be done.