[Back matter: Finland and national liberation in Southern Africa] http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.naip100043 Use of the Aluka digital library is subject to Aluka’s Terms and Conditions, available at http://www.aluka.org/page/about/termsConditions.jsp. By using Aluka, you agree that you have read and will abide by the Terms and Conditions. Among other things, the Terms and Conditions provide that the content in the Aluka digital library is only for personal, non-commercial use by authorized users of Aluka in connection with research, scholarship, and education. The content in the Aluka digital library is subject to copyright, with the exception of certain governmental works and very old materials that may be in the public domain under applicable law. Permission must be sought from Aluka and/or the applicable copyright holder in connection with any duplication or distribution of these materials where required by applicable law. Aluka is a not-for-profit initiative dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of materials about and from the developing world. For more information about Aluka, please see http://www.aluka.org [Back matter: Finland and national liberation in Southern Africa] Author/Creator Soiri, Iina; Peltola, Pekka Publisher Nordiska Afrikainstitutet (Uppsala) Date 1999 Resource type Articles Language English Subject Coverage (spatial) Finland, Southern Africa (region) Source Nordiska Afrikainstitutet (Uppsala) Relation Soiri, Iina and Peltola, Pekka. Finland and national liberation in Southern Africa. Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, 1999. 155-213. Rights By kind permission of Pekka Peltola, Iina Soiri, and Nordiska Afrikainstitutet (The Nordic Africa Institute). Description Part of a study on National Liberation in Southern Africa: The Role of the Nordic Countries, hosted at the Nordic Africa Institute Format extent 50 page(s) (length/size) http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.naip100043 http://www.aluka.org Chapter 7 Chapter 7 Conclusion This study has mainly been an account of how the liberation struggle in Southern Africa was understood and supported in Finland. It is an interesting part of Finland's foreign policy and NGO history, a curiosity in the large sphere of what are considered as the country's international relations. And yet because it moved the very foundations of the foreign policy doctrine, its importance is well beyond its actual size. We have agreed with Heino's interpretation of Finnish foreign policy as a dynamic conflict between realists and idealists. We have tried to show that idealism, represented mainly by a number of non-governmental organisations, has in fact influenced the foreign policy of Finland. International politics is not completely determined by hard power play between state machines: softer human rights considerations do have real weight as such, not only as items of propaganda covering more sinister interests. The special characteristics of Finland, as a non- aligned welfare state and as part of the Nordic group of states, gave it resources and motivation to support liberation movements. One restriction grew from real and imagined trade interests connected with good relations with the forces that were continuing apartheid and other forms of colonisation. Furthermore, a close affiliation with those liberation movements which enjoyed Soviet support in the form of military hardware would have harmed Finland's precious neutral image in the eyes of the West. Finland's foreign policy during the Cold War was formed under a clear foreign policy doctrine. The country's main consideration was to balance between the East and the West and make its neutrality acceptable and useful everywhere, especially among its neighbours. This enhanced Finland's security and was very beneficial for its economy. Some factors of Finland's foreign policy decision-making had been internal and non-material. Foreign policy was not only security, trade and guarding other direct interests. The young idealists wanted Finland to act on its own to support the progressive forces in international society, basing its policy on a broader definition of national interest. They wanted civil rights and international justice to form the basis of the foreign policy doctrine. And because they did not see through the bureaucratic jungle of foreign policy decision- making, they wanted to change its authoritarian and secretive apparatus. This apparatus was responsive to the pressure brought by NGOs. Changes in policy did take place, especially after 1966 and again in 1973, in the very direction in which it was pushed. Initiatives had found response among the political leadership. Especially President Kekkonen and several social democratic politicians like Kalevi Sorsa and Vdinb Leskinen were instrumental in bringing the pressure home to the Foreign Ministry. By and large, the officials in the For- Pekka Peltola and lina Soiri eign Ministry were reluctant to accept-or else opposed-these changes, although there were a few exceptions. This changed slowly, when a new kind of recruitment policy opened the doors of the Ministry to young social democrats- but not to those still more to the left-in the early 1970s. The paradox in Finland has been that although the Soviet Union was an important frame of reference, due to the imperatives of security, a major part of the foreign policy was actually intended to minimise the Soviet influence. Finland has always been, after all, a Western liberal democracy, with a capitalist economic system. A large majority of Finns have always wanted to belong to Western society. Leftists by ideology, the idealists of the 1960s were actually pursuing courses of action which could be seen as supportive of the Soviet line, although this was not at all the case with several organisations, as we have seen. Yet these too had to bear the 'communist' label stamped upon them by the political right. The truth is, nevertheless, that a significant number of the activists who spoke on behalf of those movements were actually connected with organisations openly propagating Soviet foreign policy, like the World Peace Council. Apart from being openly nationalist, some liberation movements were ideologically linked to socialism and supported by the Soviet Union, its allies, or China. In the context of the Cold War, what might have been supportive for the one camp, was definitely against the other. Finland wanted to avoid this, fearing that it would be considered as a dependent Soviet satellite. This determined its relationship to revolutionary liberation movements for a long time. In addition, in the 1960s, many Finnish people were not at all concerned about the independence of the distant colonies. They preferred to look at the problems in the mother country. The NGOs concerned with the situation in Africa pursued the cause, and managed to influence public opinion and turn it definitively against colonialism and apartheid. Ideological differences aside, they united NGOs representing large sectors of the society. Their attempts were joined by the Finnish Lutheran Church, which had carried out mission work in Ovamboland for over a hundred years. Being familiar with the living conditions of black people under the South African regime, the Namibian church and its Finnish servants, the missionaries, took a clear stand for independence, supporting SWAPO. Thus the occupation of Namibia, to a great extent, but also the struggle against Portuguese colonialism, were the common denominator which brought together trade unions and churches, radicals and conservatives, young and old, son and father. This broad alliance, which was further widened by the campaign against apartheid, managed to convince Finland's foreign policy decision-makers to include moral values as one of the justifications for foreign policy. A lot had to be changed, too, in Finland's decision-making apparatus and in the surrounding world. The period of d~tente, together with a new active political doctrine, gave President Kekkonen a chance for new openings in Finland's international activities. Conclusion After the decision of principle in 1973, which authorised Finnish humanitarian aid to be channelled to the liberation movements directly, the Finnish role rapidly became more active. Together with other Nordic countries, the open support for the movements legitimised their activities in the international arena, proving that the movements were not totally dependent on the support from the Eastern bloc. All in all, Finland supported five movements (PAIGC, FRELIMO, PAC, SWAPO and ANC), the latter two being the main beneficiaries.418 Finland's official support to SWAPO (including the Namibia programme, which in practice was channelled to SWAPO as well) over the years 1974-1989 was in total 74.5 million FIM. Finland's official humanitarian aid to ANC started in 1978, and totalling 39.4 million FIM, plus NGO support to ANC projects 6.7 million FIM. In addition to this, Finland supported the other democratic non- racial organisations and institutions in South Africa with 40.8 million FIM. After the support to ANC was discontinued in 1993, Finland was still channelling humanitarian aid inside South Africa to a value of 5.5 million FIM up until 1996, when bilateral development cooperation was started between the two countries. Furthermore, a lot of aid was given by the Finnish NGOs and the Lutheran church. From the first fund-raising campaign of Taksvdrkki in 1969, the NGOs steadily increased their support to the movements. After 1974 their programmes were co-funded by FINNIDA, which always regarded the NGOs as important channels of aid to the liberation movements. Over the years Finland's role in the Namibian negotiated settlement was a significant one. Since 1970, when Finland appealed to International Court of Justice to make a decision concerning the South African mandate in Namibia, Finland had acted as an important mediator in the conflict, which soon became subject to the international power game. Martti Ahtisaari led the process as United Nations representative, and showed enormous patience and skills over the years.