Finland: “With NATO membership, nuclear disarmament will end”

From END Info 32 | DOWNLOAD

By Markus Mustajärvi, Finland

Speech by Markus Mustajärvi in ​​Parliament on 16 May 2022. Mustajärvi is a Left Alliance member of the Finnish Parliament for the Lapland constituency and sits on the Defence Committee.

Mr President! During this period, I have received more information on foreign, security and defense policy issues in three committees and two working groups than any other Member of Parliament. During this season alone, I have been sitting in Parliament’s security room for hundreds of hours listening to experts. My opposition to NATO has only strengthened...

The Finnish government and foreign policy leadership have decided to abandon military non-alignment and to rely on armed security as a result of NATO membership. Military non-alignment served us well throughout the post-World War II period, staying out of the conflicts of interest of the great powers during the Cold War ... Back at the end of last year, the leadership of our country, the President and Government of the Republic, reminded us that Finland's policy of staying out of the military alliances is intended primarily for difficult times when our country may face military confrontation. Back in the autumn, it was emphasized that Finland would not allow any third country or foreign armed forces to use the soil of our country, waters or airspace for hostile purposes against another state. Now all this is forgotten.

Mr President! The political leadership does not seem to take into account the fact that the security policy situation in Finland is not improving but deteriorating under NATO policy. Finland's military position may strengthen with NATO membership, but the security situation in Finland as a whole will deteriorate. At the same time, the long common border between Finland and Russia is becoming the border of the Russian-US-led military alliance, the border of confrontation. The enlargement of the military alliance in the vicinity of Russia's most important nuclear bases in a situation where confrontation in the Arctic is escalating will in no way increase security and, as I said in the debate, no one will fall after the nuclear war. Political leadership does not seem to take into account that NATO membership of the two previously non-military Nordic countries will have a negative impact on the delicate balance of the entire northern region and also of the Arctic region. It is known that the United States also wants Finland's and Sweden's support against Russia in the Arctic, and seems to be succeeding in this.

Mr President! Naivism is not an idea. One after another, key players in the government have argued that we need to go to the nuclear bloc so that we can work more effectively for nuclear disarmament. The non-proliferation treaty enshrined in the government's program has not progressed because this government has not wanted to create obstacles to NATO membership. No NATO member state has signed the TPNW and NATO as an organization does not support it. I remind the left and the Greens that Finland is now nuclear-weapon-free. With NATO membership, nuclear disarmament will end, it will be replaced by a so-called nuclear umbrella. Finland is now making the decision to apply for NATO membership without any conditions. The Swedish Social Democrats, on the other hand, are trying to negotiate that NATO should not deploy bases or nuclear weapons in Sweden, at least in peacetime.

As a member of the military alliance, we will be involved in a major war if one breaks out in Europe. As a member of NATO, we are a leading country. With regard to nuclear weapons and the HX project, it is no coincidence that Finland ended up acquiring F-35s, and in particular a US plane. They were the only option capable of carrying nuclear weapons, and our fighter pilots will certainly be trained for that.

* * * * * * 

Markus Mustajärvi made the following intervention on 17 May 2022, setting out alternative proposals to NATO membership.

1. Finland must declare that under no circumstances will it allow nuclear weapons to be deployed in Finland or its land, airspace or sea areas to be used for the transport or transit of nuclear weapons, as this would automatically make Finland a frontrunner in nuclear war.

2. Finland does not intend to train Finnish pilots to transport and use nuclear weapons.

3. The armed forces of no other country, nor the military bases of NATO, should be permanently stationed in the territory of Finland. In this way, Finland avoids and stays outside the risks arising from the escalation of the international situation.

4. Finland does not allow or allow any other state or its armed forces to use the territory or airspace of our country for hostile purposes against other states. - This point is directly from the report adopted in the autumn.

5. A referendum must be held on Finland's membership in NATO.

In the light of the above, I submit the following statement to Parliament for approval:

“Finland is not applying for NATO membership, but will continue to be non-aligned. Only outside the military alliances does Finland have the opportunity to stay out of the war when the Great War broke out. ”

This is the presentation that will be shared with you.

Then, when Norway was mentioned here many times in a recent debate and it was said that Norway has received certain conditions, such as the absence of permanent troops on its territory and the non-acceptance of nuclear weapons on its own territory. Well, permanent forces can be rotated in such a way that they are constantly rotated. The strength remains, but the men change.

And about nuclear weapons then: Who knows which fighters or submarines or battleships have nuclear weapons. No nuclear-weapon state will tell anyone else what armaments it is carrying.

Translated from https://vasemmisto.fi/

All errors the responsibility of END Info