Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How to get along with Russia

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    How to get along with Russia

    The British Council could learn a thing or two from Finland.

    Author Sofi Oksanen, winner of this year’s Finlandia Prize for literature, will not be able to travel to St. Petersburg to take part in a poetry evening organised by the Finnish Consulate General in the city. The reason this time is that her passport and visa are missing.
    The Finnish poetry evening, which takes place today, is the fourth of its kind, in which young Finnish poets have read their works to a local audience.
    Oksanen, who is known primarily as a leading contemporary prose writer and playwright, was to have recited new prose poems at the event.

    The travel agency Russian Tours says that Oksanen’s passport and visa were sent to her by express mail, according to normal practice.
    According to official records, the letter had been carried to the author’s home address on the morning of December 12th. The record shows that as the recipient was not there, the envelope was returned to the post office to be delivered during the regular delivery round.
    However, Oksanen says that she was at home, and awake, on the morning of the 12th, and did not even get a note indicating that there had been an attempt to deliver the envelope.
    She also says that there was no indication at the post office of the envelope, which was not found in spite of thorough searches.

    Tracing the letter by reference number at the Hämeentie post office in Helsinki, Helsingin Sanomat learned on Thursday afternoon that the postal worker delivering express letters in the morning had not been able to get inside the front door of the building where Oksanen has her apartment, because the door code was unknown.
    The letter went into the day’s ordinary delivery, and was supposed to have arrived at noon the same day.
    The letter carrier recalls that two free-distribution newspapers, Etuovi and Helsingin Uutiset, appeared on the same day, which means that there was a relatively large volume of mail to be delivered.
    Oksanen says that the postal records do not have an indication that the delivery had reached its destination. She says that she carefully went through all of her mail many times, while looking for the important paper.

    In August, Oksanen’s participation in the poetry evening was called into question because Consul General Olli Perheentupa did not want her to participate. The reason that he gave was that Oksanen is not actually a poet.
    Oksanen voiced suspicions at the time that the real reason might have been that she has written about relations between Russia and Estonia in a very critical fashion

    #2
    How to get along with Russia

    fuck it, we are all skint. Lets go to war with the buggers/beggars.

    Incidentally, I fully expect a serious, gloves off, kick off very, very soon. Hopefully, the UK will not be involved.

    Comment


      #3
      How to get along with Russia

      I'm pretty sure the UK will be involved, being pretty much the Russian government's least favourite country. Finland has much better relations with Russia, and it's a bit depressing to see how they've achieved that status.

      Oksanen won the Finlandia prize for literature during the recent OSCE conference in Helsinki, and Finland's foreign minister Alexander Stubb announced that during one of his speeches (he was chairing the event). Mainly to piss off the Russians, who were being pretty intransigent about the resolutions.

      Stubb is very pro-NATO and advocates a western orientation, and since he came back to Finland he has been undermined on a regular basis by the older generation of Finlandised officials and politicians. The type of people who tried to stop Oksanen going to St Petersburg.

      It's weird, because Russia has ensured that Finnish paper production is going to be decimated in the next year, by putting punitive tariffs on timber exports. In the 'good old days' they'd never have dared do that.

      Comment


        #4
        How to get along with Russia

        A trade war between Russia and the EU would be hugely counterproductive to both parties.

        As to the main subject above, withholding express mail is a relatively benign instrument of repression, all things considered...

        Comment


          #5
          How to get along with Russia

          Good thing they're slapping tariffs onSouth Korea and Japan too, then.

          Comment


            #6
            How to get along with Russia

            ...the postal worker delivering express letters in the morning had not been able to get inside the front door of the building where Oksanen has her apartment, because the door code was unknown.
            Yeah, well that's sort of the point of the door code innit, to prevent just anyone wandering in. There'll be some other arrangement though, like the none too tricky ringing the doorbell. The sort of thing the regular postal deliverer does.

            Ball Comrade wrote:
            I'm pretty sure the UK will be involved, being pretty much the Russian government's least favourite country. Finland has much better relations with Russia, and it's a bit depressing to see how they've achieved that status.
            Doesn't happen too often BC, but we're going to be on opposite sides of the fence of this one. Why depressing?

            Stubb is very pro-NATO and advocates a western orientation, and since he came back to Finland he has been undermined on a regular basis by the older generation of Finlandised officials and politicians. The type of people who tried to stop Oksanen going to St Petersburg.
            The only Kokoomus politician I've remotely any time for is Niinistö. I'll credit Stubb with having the balls to speak his mind, but beyond that he's just another right winger. There's no benefit whatsoever in Finland joining NATO.

            Comment


              #7
              How to get along with Russia

              It's depressing to see just how easily the older generation of Finnish politicians and officials is willing to perform small acts of censorship so as to avoid offending the eastern neighbour. I'm only singling out Stubb here because he is the most prominent example right now, being the Foreign Minister and all. I don't have any time for his politics either and I think NATO is 1) useless for Finland and 2) off the table for at least a decade now.

              I see this as more of a generational thing than a political thing, really. Older politicians were part of the apparatus that sent refugees back to psychiatric hospitals, and were almost proud of their kgb contacts. They didn't have a lot of other options, but I don't think the same pressures exist and the behaviour should have changed by now. It won't until these people retire or die, as Alpo Rusi has conclusively proven.

              It will be interesting to see if the Greens keep their slightly critical Russian policy as they grow more popular. They would appear to have clean hands for the most part, and the crossover between Amnesty and Green party activism is pretty high.

              Comment


                #8
                How to get along with Russia

                Finnish folk:

                This is as good a time as any. Can you explain finnish politics to me?

                My very rough understanding is that Finland for most of the cold war had a very social democratic system, was not western-oriented, and basically played nice with Russia (for geographic reasons) while managing to stay out of the Warsaw Pact.

                Then, the USSR collapses, the Finnish economy goes into a tailspin as it loses a major market with 20% unemployment, etc. So what happened to Finnish politics at this point? Was there a sharp turn right? Was joining the EU seen as a "right-wing" reaction to the left's acomodation with the soviets?

                Is the foreign policy divide as simple as right= NATO, fuck the Russians and left= not NATO, be nice to Russians?

                How does the success of the high-tech industry (Nokia in particular) affect the left-right balance?

                Comment


                  #9
                  How to get along with Russia

                  The western orientation was fairly gradual, with EFTA membership coming in 1961 and Nordic Council membership in 1956. The legal stuff was in place so that Finns could move freely and had trade agreements with the EC, but they were also the only country that paid war reparations in full. These were mostly paid in industrial goods, and the continuing Friendship, Co-operation and Mutual Assistance treaties had clauses demanding a certain level of trade every year. Some years they really had to scrabble around for plausible bartering deals, given the crap produced in Russia, but it ensured people had jobs, for the most part.

                  Then in the early 90s that suddenly stopped. I don't know too much about that period economically, but I don't think EU membership was purely an economic thing. They did it because they could get away with it, and would have done it earlier if they could've. The dominant view about NATO among the foreign policy establishment is that it'd be nice, but it's too late now and they should have done it back in the 90s when Yeltsin was too drunk to notice. Like they did with the EU. The right wing government we have now keeps saying that Finland is not a neutral country, and has not been since the country joined the EU in 1995.

                  The improved EU mutual assistance guarantee is one reason the Finnish government approved the Lisbon Treaty straight away, despite the objections of the neutral (really neutral, Swiss-type neutral, they don't get conscripted) Ålanders. Who are quite pissed off right now, but we'll get to that in a bit.

                  Nowadays you have the National Coalition party (right wing, liberal), the Christian Democrats (family values), the SDP (trade unionists, lefties, but fairly economically liberal when in power) the Greens (much further to the right than their European cousins, their leader used to be in the Liberal party, which is now electorally insignificant), the Leftists (oddballs, further left trade unionists, ostalgics), the Centre party (corruption loving rednecks, woman harrassing priests, farmers, and rotary club members in small towns) the True Finns (REAL rednecks, no rotary club members, more social benefits and fewer immigrants) and the Swedish People's Party (odd combination of the swedish farmers in Ostrobothnia and around the south-west, and the old aristocrats. There was a scandal recently when an SFP functionary got tipsy, grabbed a woman's breast at a reception, and after he'd been sacked one of the party grandees said that you could expect that kind of thing from a peasant from Korpo). The SDP are the only other party that has a significant Swedish membership, although the aforementioned Stubb is a member of the NatCons and a swedish speaker. His dad writes a decent hockey column for Hufvudstadsbladet, actually, but anyway.

                  The government is currently green-natcon-christdem-centre. The Centre party are always in power (Urho kekkonen was one of them, and he was president for 26 years), but have annoyed their base by colluding in the shutdown of several state-owned paper mills in the last year, and suffered for that in the recent local elections. The left-right debate is getting a bit of a revival now, with the socdems and leftists loudly proclaiming that the government is not doing enough and will slash services soon.

                  I am tired, but I'll post that and see if it makes sense in the morning.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    How to get along with Russia

                    Ball Comrade wrote:
                    It's depressing to see just how easily the older generation of Finnish politicians and officials is willing to perform small acts of censorship so as to avoid offending the eastern neighbour.
                    Same side of the fence after all, I was anticipating Kekkonen getting a prominent mention. Yes, I'd agree with your comment above, but disagree to the extent you seem to be implying that these contribute to Russian-Finnish relations. There are a lot more weightier things to be considered.

                    I see this as more of a generational thing than a political thing, really.
                    I certainly agree with that.

                    ... and were almost proud of their kgb contacts.
                    Almost? There must've been a time when the Stasi spoke better Finnish than German.

                    Culturally, Finland has always had a western orientation. The social and economic links with Sweden in particular, and also Germany date back centuries. Russia, on the other hand, despite its proximity (more probably, because of it) and economic importance, has mostly been viewed with a certain degree of suspicion.

                    While Finns enjoyed quite a considerable degree of autonomy under Russian rule, following independence in 1917 (and the blood bath that was the ensuing civil war) the functions of state and general running of the country were based largely on the way things were done in Sweden. It's a pretty good rule of thumb that although the Whites (effectively the ruling classes of the day -- certainly those pulling the strings were) won the civil war, it was the Reds, over a period of time, who won the peace that followed. I don't have the clearest of pictures of these times, but presumably politics externally would be westward leaning while keeping on good terms with Moscow.

                    The Soviet invasion in 1939 changed everything. It's hugely debatable to what extent Stalin ever intended to annex Finland and how much the savagery of the defence may have dissuaded him, but at the cessation of hostilities he was able to dictate severe terms to his neighbour. This had a heavy influence on Finnish foreign policy, undoubtedly reinforced by events in Hungary in 1956 and later in Czechoslovakia, that lasted until the break up of the Soviet Union. BC's earlier comment about generation more than party politics is significant. There's no doubt that many older Finnish officials behave towards Russia in a manner shaped through some degree of fear, and see a country that post-1990 produces the likes of Zhirinovsky, and is still prepared to use force when it wants to. Almost all younger politicians will have a very different viewpoint.

                    Out of time now, I'll try to post again later on.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      How to get along with Russia

                      The government is currently green-natcon-christdem-centre. The Centre party are always in power (Urho kekkonen was one of them, and he was president for 26 years), but have annoyed their base by colluding in the shutdown of several state-owned paper mills in the last year, and suffered for that in the recent local elections. The left-right debate is getting a bit of a revival now, with the socdems and leftists loudly proclaiming that the government is not doing enough and will slash services soon.
                      Ugh, that's wrong. Swap the Christdems for the swedish speakers, who are always in power in a similar way to the Centre party.

                      I'm not sure about the Reds winning the peace, at least until the 50s or so. I mean, they weren't all immediately exterminated, which was a victory of sorts, but they still had a fair way to go before there was much of a welfare state.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        How to get along with Russia

                        Fair comment BC, though I was angling more at the much more egalitarian society that developed from the chaos of 1918, and that the White leaders definitely weren't fighting for.

                        Anyway, the purpose of dredging up some of Finland's past is to try to put some perspective to AG's question about joining the EU. I'm sure that BC is dead right about it not being purely economic; Finland's joining had wide ranging cross-party support, and was seen by many as joining something they ordinarily belong to but had been denied earlier through deference to the Soviet Union. Joining NATO, on the other hand, is firmly in the realm of the right wing and those living in cloud cuckoo land who believe foreign troops are somehow going to save us from any future Russian onslaught.

                        I'll put a somewhat different slant on the political parties compared to BC. The three large parties are SDP (Social Democrats, power base typically the larger towns, especially in the south and south-east), Keskusta (Centre, power base the smaller towns, especially in central and northern Finland) and Kokoomus (Right wing coalition, power base where the money is, namely south-west Finland. Traditionally, the first two have often run neck and neck (popular vote often in the 22-25% bracket) and have been slightly the bigger brother of Kokoomus (19-22%), though the last couple of years has seen a surge of support for the right wing, with both other parties being clipped a little. Next up in the popular stakes is Vasemmistoliitto (broad left wing alliance, ~10%), in power as recently as 1999 but on the slide ever since Suvi-Anne Siimes quit as party leader. Going in the opposite direction are the Greens who will soon overtake Vasemmistoliitto at the polls. Forever scratching around the 5% mark are SKP (Swedish speakers) and KD (Christian democrats), who have recently been joined there by the meteorically rising racist bastards PS (for some obscure reason rendered into English as "True Finns").

                        Finnish governments are necessarily coalitions, the horse trading starting the instant the result is known. Recent tradition is that each of the big three take it in Buggins' turn to sit through a parliament in opposition, while the other two bribe one or more of the smaller parties to behave themselves for 4 years.

                        How does the success of the high-tech industry (Nokia in particular) affect the left-right balance?
                        It's difficult to see that it's made any difference at all. In terms of the colour of government then this has continued on a fairly routine cycle over the period in question.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          How to get along with Russia

                          That's a much better appraisal of the parties and their relative strengths and weaknesses.

                          Is the foreign policy divide as simple as right= NATO, fuck the Russians and left= not NATO, be nice to Russians?
                          I depart a little bit from muuk here. The right wingers in Finland that want to join NATO think that way for many reasons, but they know which side their bread is buttered and have seen the economic damage that a 'fuck the russians' policy can cause. Finland's ports and transit industry got a huge boost when Estonia moved that statue in Tallinn, with a lot of the cargo that had passed through Estonia moving to Hanko, Turku and even Pori and Kokkola. A funding scandal that erupted when a 'secret' association was doling out money to right wing and centre party candidates (as well as one SDP guy), and that money came from Ahti Vilpula, who at least offers a kiss and a cuddle before he fucks the Russians.

                          But joining NATO is also seen by some as an additional way of safeguarding private property. This stems from the civil war, and its aftermath, when the reds were feared and demonised as the enemy within. Memories of the civil war range from the failed revolution to the right wing idea that it was an expulsion of unwanted Russian troops and the punishment of a few traitors.

                          This article is pretty good about the civil war and it's aftermath, particularly the translations about red orphans from the social security magazine:

                          “Red” women are still a great
                          danger. These women’s homes and the upbringing in these homes are a big
                          part of the reason for our grievous and horrible Civil War. The cruelty of the
                          “Reds” most of all revealed the brutality of Red homes and these women,
                          which in its horrible ferocity is incomparable. The implicit responsibility of
                          our society shall from now on be that these kinds of monsters may no longer
                          raise their children and plant them with their insolent brutality and gnawing
                          hatred, which contaminates the whole mental life of the child. Here must be
                          a strict control and even in slightly suspicious cases the children are to be
                          separated from these monsters. From these conditions the children are to be
                          moved to the continuous influence of good and understanding people, who
                          mean their best.
                          I don't know how much of this affects current thinking of right wingers on NATO, but it is surely there. Modern Russian approaches to property rights are something they think about, anyway, and left wingers are not averse to using rhetoric about Finnish icons. Uralinan Perhonen, a short cartoon based on rude songs about Mannerheim, caused a right kerfuffle this year. This is a good piece on the director, who grew up in Pispala but didn't learn about the civil war at school. I don't know how you teach that period in school without mentioning this stuff, as Tampere was the red frontline, garrison town and major battle of the war. Pispala has the only red monument to the civil war I know of, a stone on the ridge that reads 'here stood the workers of Tampere, defending their rights with weapons in their hands for the last time'.

                          The memory of that time does have make people more cautious. Finns don't just joke about 'first up against the wall' type stuff. When my gf's dad told me in a drunken stupor that he'd take his gun to Helsinki if Matti Vanhanen implemented a flat tax, it really shocked her. Previously he'd corrected me when I talked about the civil war ('don't say that to grandad. it was the freedom war' ) and has been reticent to talk about politics at all.

                          Anyway, about NATO. It's not just a right wing thing. Martti Ahtisaari wants to join too, but he is a career diplomat and not all that popular or influential with other Finnish politicians. The Foreign Ministry is pretty much solidly in favour of joining NATO, often talking about being a 'bridge' country and getting new systems cheaper, but it won't happen and they know it. The alternative seems to be joint procurement with Sweden and Norway, which they're pursuing now.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            How to get along with Russia

                            But joining NATO is also seen by some as an additional way of safeguarding private property.
                            Agreed entirely, and often based on personal or close experience of losing property to the Russians. It's not that this is not genuine on the part of these people, it is simply unrealistic. Short of matching Russian military strength, substantially permanently based in SE Finland (and this isn't going to happen), then there is no military defence against Russia.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              How to get along with Russia

                              Referring back to BC's link to Sakari Jääskeläinen's paper on the civil war, I find his section 4 on the causes of the war under powered and even a bit baffling. At the start of 4.2 he makes the key point about the roots of the war being the gross imbalance in society in the south of the country, whereas further north this is much less marked. That's fine, but then it is necessary to tackle why large numbers of Finnish-speaking egalitarian-minded northerners could be persuaded to do the fighting on behalf of the wealthy, predominantly Swedish-speaking southerners against the Finnish-speaking egalitarian-minded southerners. My understanding is that it is widely accepted that the White army had a serious recruiting problem in the early phase of the war (perhaps Jääskeläinen doesn't?) precisely because most northerners had no motivation to get involved. The change of mind set came when the White leadership successfully portrayed the Red army as being collaborators with the Russian army (this had an element of truth, but only to a very limited extent), thus raising the spectre of a Red victory involving subjugation of the country by a foreign power. By propaganda therefore, what was principally a class struggle became a war for freedom, and Finns were manipulated to fight the enemy within by portraying it as the enemy without. Such calculation by the White leadership is consistent with the atrocities that followed. The bit about Ostrobothnians not understanding who they were shooting at is, frankly, ridiculous. Just my tuppence worth.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X