Government formation has been in the headlines daily, and the incoming government will also determine the direction of Finland’s EU relations. As Europe Day approaches, we at the Turku Young European Federalists would like to give the government negotiators a few guidelines that they should keep in mind in their future EU policy.
1. Only a unified message can help us survive in a world of lies
In recent years, the European Union has been plagued by internal quarrelling and a lack of consensus. Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has been one of the most outspoken critics of the Union among European leaders, but anti-European rhetoric has been on the rise across Europe. This has given anti-Union actors both room and a support base within Europe. Russia, for example, has taken advantage of this opportunity and increased the reach and visibility of eurosceptic actors, including by directly funding right-wing populist parties in Europe.
Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine served as a minor turning point, as it allowed the Union to once again find its common voice in opposing Russia’s actions. However, there is a fear that this cooperation will only extend to one area, as eurosceptic actors have by no means disappeared from Europe. The most effective way to counter disinformation efforts by Russia and other outside actors is to strengthen one’s own message, rather than engaging with the lies themselves. Ukraine has served as an excellent example of this during the war. Ukraine has not wasted time correcting the lies presented by Russia, but has instead focused on conveying its own unified and strong message. The European Union and all its member states should take a lesson from this. Every member state should have a unified and clear message about what it wants from European policy, which would also be directly reflected in the Union’s stance. When the message is unified, there is no room left for outside actors to spread alternative perspectives and lies.
2. You cannot escape responsibility by blaming the EU
A central idea in the populist rhetoric seen even in Finland is to create a divide between an us-group and a them-group. This has manifested itself, among other things, in the divide created between the elite and the people, where the elite—meaning politicians—are blamed for all of society’s shortcomings. This is known as scapegoat rhetoric, as blame is placed on the shoulders of a particular group, thereby absolving the speaker’s own group of guilt. As eurosceptic populism rises, the divide takes a different form: Finland versus the European Union.
The European Union is blamed for senseless regulations and bureaucracy that supposedly cause Finns to suffer. Time and again, an accusing finger is pointed at the EU, even when the real cause lies elsewhere. There is often talk of the EU’s inflexible bureaucratic machinery, without acknowledging that Finns themselves also have the ability to influence the content of laws, regulations, and directives. It is important that the incoming government recognises when there is a genuine issue at the Union level and when it is necessary to take responsibility for its own decisions. The incoming government should remember that while it is acceptable—and indeed appropriate—to be critical of the EU, it cannot be blamed for one’s own mistakes.
3. A lack of vision regarding the EU’s potential also limits Finland’s own opportunities
The EU has been described as “an economic giant, a political dwarf, and a military worm.” This describes the EU’s competence across different dimensions. However, the incoming government should make use of the EU in all its potential, rather than seeing it merely as an economic tool. If the incoming government confines itself to viewing the EU solely as an economic actor, the EU will also remain as such. Through the EU’s political cooperation, it is possible to form, for example, unified climate action or jointly respond to humanitarian crises such as pandemics. Through the EU, it is possible to produce a strong, unified message and create an agenda that genuinely improves Finland’s own opportunities to be a global actor as well. A lack of vision regarding the future opportunities offered by the European Union also renders the government lacking in vision when it comes to how Finland could benefit from the Union’s potential.
4. If you want to complain about problems, it would be best to also offer solutions
It must absolutely be possible to criticise the EU, since no system created by humans can be considered perfect. Criticism is indeed an important step towards change, as it helps identify the system’s real problem areas. Currently, however, critics are not willing to fix the problems they notice, but rather criticise purely for the sake of criticising. In reality, though, it is possible to change the EU’s system, but this requires more than mere complaints—the right actions must be taken. One of the problems with EU decision-making is the unanimity principle, which gives a single obstinate country the opportunity to block numerous decisions. One concrete way to solve many of the problems related to EU decision-making and bureaucracy would be to reopen the founding treaties, which would make it possible to fix the challenges arising from the system, such as dismantling the unanimity principle. The incoming government should therefore keep in mind that if it wishes to criticise the EU or use it as a scapegoat, it must also take action to solve the problems.
Veera Kiiskilä, Political Officer & Pieta Päivänen, Chair
Turku Young European Federalists
