Sari Rautio
Ambassador of Finland to Spain
Luis Ayllón / Alberto Rubio
Sari Rautio observes with interest the crossroads at which the European Union and Finland find themselves. The invasion of Ukraine, immigration, the green transition and the entry of new candidates are “difficult” challenges, acknowledges the Finnish Ambassador to Spain. However, she is cautiously optimistic because “in the EU, solutions are sought until they are found”.
A few weeks ago the EU agreed to begin the accession process with Ukraine and Moldova. How does Finland view this agreement?
For us it is very positive. We have always been in favour of opening negotiations with Ukraine because we think it is important for it to have this possibility, as long as it fulfils the requirements. And now it does. We are very happy about that.
There are many reasons for taking this step, including of course the geopolitical situation. Russia is threatening the existence of Ukraine, which has the right to decide which organisations it belongs to. And I think it is very important that the EU gives this signal to make it clear that we not only strongly support Ukraine with material and financial contributions for its legitimate defence, but that we also support its race towards the EU.
What would happen if Ukraine does not win the war? We may be faced with the paradox of opening negotiations with a country that will, at best, be occupied.
We Europeans are convinced that Ukraine will win because it has to win. If it does not, we will all be at risk. That is why we have to support Ukraine in its legitimate defence.
It is also clear that negotiations with Ukraine will take years, it will be a long process. Its accession to the EU will not be a reality, let’s say, in two years, although everything has been done in Kyiv and they have been much quicker than other candidates. It has been impressive.
But I think this Russian aggression has really changed the perception in the EU of what is going on and what our geostrategic position is. Until now, people in Europe thought that there would be no more wars, because we thought that nobody would be crazy enough or irresponsible enough to provoke them. Now we have realised that it is not only up to us, but that we have irresponsible neighbours. That is why accession negotiations have now been opened. We want to have these countries in our sphere and their legitimate wish is to be members of the EU. There is no reason to refuse it. The situation is not easy, but it is clearly better to open negotiations than not to do so.
Hungary recently blocked a 50 billion package to support Ukraine. Can the EU work like this, with countries constantly blocking important decisions?
I don’t think we have any other choice in making decisions, even if it is sometimes difficult. The EU has the rules it has and we have to play by those rules. When you talk politics you can always find a solution. It is true that there is frustration with President Orbán for how he is treating his partners, for how he wants to take decisions. But that is the EU, an organisation where you negotiate and look for solutions until you find them.
Let’s not forget that we have already decided on many, many sanctions packages against Russia. They have all been difficult to negotiate. There are always countries that oppose until the last moment. But in the end we got the deal. That is what the European Union is like.
The invasion of Ukraine seems to have changed the European perspective from a security point of view. In fact, Finland and Sweden applied for NATO membership. How was this decision, which changed so many years of neutrality, viewed in your country?
Let me start with the concept of neutrality. It may sound rhetorical to you, but for us it is important to stress that we have not been a neutral country for 30 years. When we joined the EU, we put all neutrality to one side. Since 1995 we have been allies of our European partners, although at that time we remained militarily ‘non-allies’. But now, since April this year, we are also allies militarily.
The decision to join NATO is a process that will be much discussed in the future. In the 1990s, when we decided to join the EU, there was also consideration of what kind of relationship we wanted with NATO. There were politicians who wanted us to join the Alliance as well. However, there were many who were against it because they thought it was best for Finland to stay out, but to strengthen the relationship with NATO. And with this strengthening of relations we have continued for 30 years. What changed this situation was the Russian aggression. With it, Finnish citizens and politicians decided that it was time to join NATO. It was passed in Parliament with 96 per cent of the votes and with public opinion very much in favour. It was a very important, quick and consensual decision.
Do you feel more secure now?
We have always thought of all possible ways to strengthen our security. This means that it is not only the armed forces that guarantee security, but society as a whole that makes it possible. Security has to do both with a very credible defence, a military service for all men and voluntary service for women, and with free education of a good standard and for the whole population because it brings homogeneity and resilience to society.And also social services, border services, our fight against disinformation, against hybrid threats… all this has to do with security. Joining NATO is just another step in this security system.
And what does Finland’s accession, and Sweden’s if it happens, mean for NATO?
If we look at the map of Europe and NATO, it adds 1,350 kilometres of direct border with Russia. As I was saying before, we have been a NATO partner for 30 years and we have had joint exercises for situations where Russia is the potential aggressor. So we are not starting from scratch, but it does change the geography. And it also means making long-term decisions. There is now talk about whether there will be NATO troops in Finland.Nothing is planned at the moment. It will be our decision and it will be made according to our interests.
Has there been any change of position on NATO membership since the change of government?
I don’t think so. The main party in the current government, the Kokoomus, which belongs to the EPP like the Spanish Partido Popular, has always had a more pro-NATO view, but it was the previous coalition government, led by the Socialists, that made the decision. We have a very broad consensus.
Also populists parties?
They are also clearly in favour. I believe that public opinion has really been decisive. Since the 1990s there have been many polls. Until autumn 2021, about 20-30% were in favour, the same percentage were against and about 50% were undecided. The Russian aggression changed this.Today support is up to 90%. Public opinion has changed. I would give less importance now to political parties.
It is a radical shift.
It is radical, but it is a fact. It is Russia that has brought about this change.
Finland is one of the countries that know Russia best. Why is Russia’s relationship with its neighbourhood always so difficult?
Because Russia is the way it is. We have never been a difficult neighbour for anyone. It has always been Russia’s fault.
And where is the problem?
In Russia’s imperialist and colonialist ambition, which has always existed and is now seen in Ukraine. All of Russia’s neighbours have had to try to survive and fight against these ambitions. That is why we have had all these wars, like the one Russia started against Ukraine with a fabricated provocation in order to have an excuse to go in. The USSR did the same with us in November 1939 (Winter War). It is Russia itself the reason for this difficult relationship.
Nothing has changed, then. Putin’s regime is the heir of Soviet ambitions, isn’t it?
And the Soviets were the heirs of the Tsars. If you look at Russia’s history, it has always sought its internal stability by trying to expand its borders at the expense of its neighbours. Russia has always tried to base its internal stability on imaginary external enemies. And they are still there.
Last week, Vladimir Putin announced that he will move troops to the Finnish border and said there will be “problems” over NATO membership. How do you feel about these threats?
Well, they follow on from other statements of his in the same vein. Of course, we don’t like them and we don’t find them acceptable because Finland is part of a defensive alliance that doesn’t threaten anyone. I only hope that in the future we can have more civilised and constructive relations with Russia.
How is the construction of the border fence with Russia progressing?
A section of the fence has already been built. A few weeks after the invasion of Ukraine, our government decided that, in order to facilitate the management of the border, we needed a fence. Not for the whole border, which is 1,350 kilometres, but for the 200 kilometres that are closest to the main border crossing points.
The idea is that if, for example, there is a Russian hybrid operation manufacturing an immigration flow on our border, it will be easier for our border guards to manage those flows. Of course, the wall is just one more piece in our objective to better manage our security. It is not a 100 per cent guarantee that no one will enter Finland with bad intentions, but it helps us to manage it.
Are the border crossings still closed right now?
On the evening of 15 December all the crossing points were closed again, after being opened the day before after two weeks of being closed. The problem is that as soon as they opened, Russia sent migrants who were waiting in their cities back to the border. The government then took the decision to close the border again until mid-January.
Do you think that migration flows to Finland are driven by Russia?
Of course, Russian security services are apparently managing these migration flows. The Russian security services are apparently managing these migration flows. They have a social media campaign where they more or less invite everyone who wants to enter the EU to come to Russia first. Then the security services take them to the border and advise them how to get in.
It’s a completely planned operation in the Kremlin.It is very similar to the operation that Belarus fabricated against Poland and Latvia. Where do these migrants come from?A little bit from everywhere. From Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia… But they are both people who have already been living in Russia for quite some time and others who have now been invited to fly to Russia and cross the Finnish border.
What is the state of bilateral relations with Spain, and have they changed with the arrival of the new governments in both countries?
Our relations are easy and very good. We are very much aligned on all EU policies. Sometimes on economic policy issues we have slightly different positions, but with Spain it is always possible to negotiate in a pragmatic way. We are good friends and that does not depend on the colour of the government in Madrid or Helsinki.
We are very active in the EU. For example, we are both committed to a policy of free trade agreements with Mercosur and other Latin American countries. We also support a green transition, an ambitious EU environmental policy and a credible immigration pact.
There is no problem in relations. What has changed is that we are now allies in NATO, although that is not a big change either. If we look at what has happened within the EU in past decades, regarding security and defence policy, Spain and Finland have always been among the most proactive and ambitious countries in terms of developing European defence policy.
Have our economic relations grown?
There is more activity. The European Next Generation funds, of which Spain receives the largest share along with Italy, have encouraged Finnish companies to see what is happening in Spain with regard to the digital transition and the green transition, which is where these funds are used.
So far, we already have some achievements. The Finnish quantum computing company IQM is building with Spanish partners the first European quantum computer in Barcelona. We also have many companies that have established themselves in Spain in the digital sector providing services to both the public and private sectors. And even before these funds, we had large and well-known companies established in Spain, such as Nokia and Kone, and companies in the shipbuilding and forestry sectors.
In Finland, do you see the future of the EU in technology rather than production?
I suppose we need both, but if we are not able to be at the forefront of digital technologies, others will be able to do it and control our market. The EU needs to be among the leaders in technological development. The Spanish Presidency has done well to analyse which are the sectors where strategic autonomy in the EU is most needed. One of them is digital technology because, if the solutions that win this race are Chinese or American, we may lose control of our economy. There is not a single sector of the economy where digital solutions are not needed.
But we are not bad either. We have companies and a well-trained workforce. It is true that funding is a bit fragmented because we are 27. But if we are able to ensure good education for our citizens and facilitate migration, as well as reduce the fragmentation of funding and technology development, the EU has every chance to be the world leader in technology.
How political situation in Spain is seen from Finland?
That is precisely part of my job, to follow what is going on in Spain. I would say that the political culture is different. In Spain, it’s much more hectic, more dramatic. But when you analyse it, you have to take into account what is really going on behind that little ‘theatre’, because there is a lot of rhetoric.
Spain is quite a different country from Finland. Apart from the difference in population, it has a very decentralised structure, with several levels of administration, and a very different history from Finland.
It is clear that our internal political agendas are very different. That has to be taken into account. But what I see is that Spain has a fully democratic, open political system. It is a state governed by the rule of law and that is what counts.
Finland has been chosen as the country where you can be happiest. Why is that?
We have topped this ranking for six or seven years in a row. But I assure you it has nothing to do with the weather or daylight hours, it has to do with what we call the ‘happiness infrastructure’: the government works; the public services work; the education system is free and provides equal opportunities for all; the work-life balance is guaranteed. We have a social system that allows families to have a balanced life between work and private life. And everything is based on trust between institutions and citizens.
What things could Spain adopt from Finland and vice versa?
The Finns could learn from the Spanish to have a more carefree, more spontaneous attitude. But I do think it has to do with the climate. When it’s 20 degrees below zero outside and there’s no sun in December, it’s a bit more difficult to go out for a coffee on a terrace.
I think that trust in institutions is something that perhaps Spaniards could learn from. And also the search for equality when it comes to social services and education. Finland’s good results in education have to do with what happens in schools, but also with the system.
