VZCZCXRO3460
RR RUEHIK RUEHPOD RUEHYG
DE RUEHHE #0141 0990943
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 090943Z APR 09
FM AMEMBASSY HELSINKI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4918
INFO RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS HELSINKI 000141 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV FI
SUBJECT: FINLAND: STUBB PRESSES HARD FOR NATO 
MEMBERSHIP 
 
¶1. At a well-attended NATO 60th anniversary event on 
April 2 in Helsinki, Foreign Minister Stubb spoke 
forcefully about the benefits of NATO membership. 
Stubb stressed that he supported the Government of 
Finland's (GOF) policy articulated in the recent 
defense white paper, according to which while there 
are "strong grounds" in favor of Finland's NATO 
membership, currently there is insufficient public and 
political support.  He said that the GOF policy 
requires evaluating NATO's development, which should 
be done in open debate, not behind closed doors. 
Stubb offered ten "NATO facts" as part of that debate, 
many of which seek to allay common concerns of NATO 
skeptics: 
 
- NATO brings military benefit to the Member States. 
- NATO's security guarantees are real. 
- NATO is not a "remote terminal" for the U.S. 
military through which unsuspecting allies are dragged 
to wars on distant battlefields. 
- NATO is an organization where civilians make the 
decisions. 
- NATO membership will not increase countries' risk of 
terrorism. 
- NATO membership does not overrule national autonomy. 
- NATO does not force anyone to give up conscription. 
- Nobody ends up in NATO, you apply to it. 
- NATO membership would not change Finland's Russia 
policy. 
- Yes, NATO membership carries costs but benefits 
accrue to Finland's security. 
 
¶2. Stubb asserted that Finland's policies toward 
Russia would not change due to NATO membership, nor 
would Russia's toward Finland.  He pointed to good 
Finnish-Russian relations following Finland's 1995 
entry into the EU.  Another participant disputed 
Stubb's assertion, arguing that Russia would change 
its policy; the participant added that Moscow does not 
send NATO-related messages without purpose, perhaps 
making a reference to a Finnish Broadcasting Company 
(YLE) interview March 28 with Yuli Kvitsinsky, deputy 
chair of the Duma's foreign affairs committee, in 
which Kvitsinsky said that Russia would mount a range 
of military, political and economic "countermeasures" 
if Finland joined NATO.  [Note: GoF announced April 8 
that Russian President Medvedev visits Finland April 
20-21.] 
 
¶3.  Approximately 500 people attended the event, 
organized by the Atlantic Council of Finland, 
including parliamentarians and high-level government 
officials.  YLE ("the BBC of Finland") covered the 
event on its website; the newspaper Demari and a few 
smaller magazines also attended.  While the event 
included more NATO supporters than skeptics or 
opponents, lively discussion addressed both views.  In 
particular, the question of Russia's possible response 
engendered considerable debate. 
 
¶4. COMMENT.  Last August Stubb spoke favorably about 
NATO in a public speech, causing a stir that forced 
him to reassure parliamentarians that his words did 
not signal a change in the government's policy to 
maintain the "option" to join NATO.  Last week Stubb 
spoke even more emphatically in favor of NATO, but he 
clearly learned a lesson, as he shrewdly based his 
vocal contribution to an open debate on the GOF's 
policy (and voiced explicit support for the existing 
policy).  Some Finns have complained to Embassy 
officers that the "NATO debate" in Finland is based 
more on emotion and outdated attitudes than fact. 
Though modestly covered by the media, this event, and 
in particular Stubb's contribution, helped foster a 
fact-based debate (an MSP goal).  We are coordinating 
with other NATO Member State embassies, the MFA, think 
tanks and the Atlantic Council on other events during 
this anniversary year that will contribute to that 
debate.  END COMMENT. 
 
BUTLER