FINLAND'S PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES SPAR OVER

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HELSINKI 000988

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL PGOV MARR FI NATO
SUBJECT: FINLAND'S PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES SPAR OVER
SECURITY ISSUES

REF: HELSINKI 920

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED - PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY.


1. (SBU) Summary: The unofficial opening rounds of
Finland's presidential campaign appear to indicate that
European and trans-Atlantic security issues could become
central themes. Conservative Party candidate Niinisto
has advocated that Finland embrace European security
guarantee mechanisms and downplayed NATO membership,
although his remarks may represent mere rhetoric designed
to spark debate, and not deeply held views. Center Party
presidential candidate (and PM) Vanhanen has
emphasized that the U.S. remains crucial to European
security, but has stopped short of advocating NATO
membership for Finland. President Halonen -- whose status
as incumbent and a lead of nearly 40 points in the polls
have allowed her to remain largely above the fray -- has
stated that Finland's current security posture requires no
realignment. The views of outside commentators vary
widely. However, most share our opinion that the major
candidates' positions differ only slightly, and that any
real action on security policy will emerge not from
January's presidential election, but rather from the
parliamentary election scheduled for March 2007. End
Summary.

Niinisto's Working Vacation
--------------

2. (U) Although Finland's presidential campaign does not
begin officially until November, an unofficial "pre-
campaign" appeared to begin in August and brought with it
several notable exchanges on European and trans-Atlantic
security issues. The early start to the political season
was prompted in large part by Conservative Party (Cons)
Candidate Sauli Niinisto, who used his two months of summer
vacation from his current post as vice-president of the
European Investment Bank in Luxemburg to return home,
launch his campaign, and begin delineating how his platform
will differ from his major rivals. In addition to being
resident in Luxembourg, Niinisto is the only one of the
three major-party candidates who does not currently hold
elected office. This lack of a bully pulpit leaves him at
a disadvantage vis-a-vis his two principle rivals,
incumbent President Tarja Halonen, a Social Democrat (SDP),
and Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen, the Center Party's
presidential candidate.


3. (SBU) According to his aides, Niinisto sought to open an
early debate on security issues because he believed that
neither Halonen nor Vanhanen was taking a leadership role.
He has publicly advocated that Finland embrace the European
security guarantees as outlined in the now-stalled EU
Constitution Treaty. In addition, Niinisto has accused the
Vanhanen government of a sort of flip-flop -- that is,
first opposing the European guarantees, then embracing them
when they became part of the EU Constitution Treaty, then
once again abandoning them after the French and Dutch "non"
votes. As for NATO, Niinisto has downplayed Finnish
membership in public, recognizing that voters strongly
favor maintaining Finland's traditional policy of
nonalignment. When pressed in private, Niinisto remained
noncommittal, even to the suggestion of European security
guarantees possibly being a step toward NATO membership
(see reftel). His stance puts him somewhat at odds with
many others in the Conservative Party, which is not of one
mind on NATO but historically has tended to favor Finland's
membership. For example, the Conservative Party Chairman,
Jyrki Katainen, has been a steady proponent of eventual
Finnish accession. Indeed, many observers -- including
some Conservatives -- contend that Niinisto's public views
represent rhetoric designed to spark debate and distinguish
himself from other candidates, rather than deeply held
personal beliefs.

Vanhanen Responds
--------------

4. (U) Candidate Vanhanen has responded publicly by
emphasizing the importance of the United States to European
security. In a recent speech to Center Party activists and
Parliamentarians, Vanhanen highlighted the "historic
commitment of North America" to European defense and said
that Finland should do its part to "make sure that U.S.
interest in Europe and its defense survives." He argued
that seeking to turn the EU into a military alliance is "
not on the horizon" and that "no overlapping or competing
security solutions should be built between Europe and the
United States." The PM stopped short of advocating
that Finland join NATO, but did note his government
supported keeping "the option of NATO membership" open for
discussion.


5. (SBU) Privately, Vanhanen's camp has been even more
explicit. His chief of staff, Riisto Volanen, has
repeatedly emphasized to us that, of the three major party
candidates, Vanhanen is the strongest advocate of trans-
Atlantic cooperation. Niinisto's recent public remarks on
EU security cooperation demonstrated that Niinisto viewed
European guarantees as more important for Finland than the
trans-Atlantic relationship -- and perhaps even a
substitute, Volanen added. He also said that he expected
the issue to figure prominently in the campaign and, in
fact, the PM has continued to reiterate the importance of
trans-Atlantic ties at many of his public engagements.
Nevertheless, even Volanen would not go so far as to
suggest that NATO membership itself will become a campaign
issue. NATO is a very touchy subject for Finnish
voters, and Vanhanen -- who may have the most to lose
politically should he fare poorly in the upcoming
election -- cannot afford to lose votes over it. (Vanhanen
currently trails Niinisto by two percentage points
in recent polls.)

The President: A Safe Distance
--------------

6. (SBU) For the most part , President Halonen has appeared
happy to allow her two main rivals to do most of the
sparring on security issues. Halonen enjoys a tremendous
lead in the polls -- a position of strength which has
allowed her to weigh on issues when it suits her. (The
most recent Finnish Gallup poll indicates that if elections
were held now, Halonen would take 58 percent, enough for a
first round win.) That said, some on the left have quietly
expressed concerns that Halonen needs to become more vocal
on security issues and that she cannot afford to allow
Vanhanen and Niinisto to dictate the tenor of the
discussion. Perhaps as a result, Halonen has recently
begun advocating both continued progress on European
security guarantees (despite the setbacks on the
Constitution Treaty) and support for trans-Atlantic
partnership in a series of characteristically positive
public comments. Halonen -- like Vanhanen -- opposes NATO
membership for Finland in the short term, but has not ruled
it out as an eventual possibility. However, unlike the
Prime Minister, Halonen sees the NATO discussion as largely
theoretical and clearly favors non-alignment; Vanhanen, on
the other hand, appears more inclined to believe that, at
some point, Finland may actually join NATO. In any case,
Halonen has sought to de-emphasize the issue altogether,
emphasizing that "in our current external environment,
nothing has happened that would call for any new decision"
on Finland's overall security stance.

Other Comments
--------------

7. (SBU) The candidates' sparring has, of course, prompted
a wide range of other commentators to weigh in on the
security debate. Max Jakobson, a former senior diplomat
and perhaps Finland's most respected foreign
policy commentator, declared that "the EU cannot be relied
on as a defense policy player" and that Finland must join
NATO "before there is an emergency." (Unfortunately,
Jakobson's pleas have fallen on deaf ears; only one
candidate -- Henrik Lax, of the small Swedish Peoples Party
-- openly advocates NATO membership.) Others have
commented on how any changes in Finnish policy might affect
relations with Russia, the EU or the U.S.; on whether
Finland suffers a security "deficit" or a security
"surplus;" and, of course, on the fact that, to most
voters, the candidates' positions really differ very little
from one another.

Our Comment
--------------

8. (SBU) It is valid to question whether or not the
candidates' positions are ultimately all that different in
the eyes of a Finnish electorate that still jealously
defends the notion of Finnish nonalignment and opposes
NATO membership by an 80 to 20 percent margin. For U.S.
observers, the more important question might be whether any
candidate, once in office, can muster the political
momentum necessary to effect a real change in Finnish
security policy. All acknowledge that the right leader
with the right message might be able to sell the Finns on
NATO membership, yet ironies abound: Halonen, who will
likely win, would no doubt prefer that NATO membership
remain an academic discussion for the six years of her
second term. However, influential figures within her SDP
party (including former PM Paavo Lipponen) are beginning to
quietly suggest that NATO membership must be put on the
table sooner rather than later. Niinisto's Conservative
party is the most inclined of the big three to support NATO
membership, but the candidate himself has de-emphasized
NATO in favor of European security guarantees. And
Vanhanen, the most open to NATO, faces his own Center
party, the bulk of which is steadfastly against Finland's
joining NATO. In the end, any major security policy
changes will depend more on what type of coalition enters
government after the March 2007 parliamentary election --
and on whether the new prime minister and the president
elected this January together can provide the right
leadership and the right message to counter public
skepticism.
MACK