<TITLE: Politics Seminar 2
ACADEMIC DOMAIN: social sciences
DISCIPLINE: political science
EVENT TYPE: seminar discussion
FILE ID: USEMD01B
NOTES: seminar includes presentations USEMP01D-E (USEMD01A and USEMP01A-C are part of the same course)

RECORDING DURATION: 32 min 58 sec

RECORDING DATE: 29.11.2001

NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS: 10

NUMBER OF SPEAKERS: 7

S1: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Finnish; ACADEMIC ROLE: senior staff; GENDER: male; AGE: 51-over

S2: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Lithuanian; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: female; AGE: 17-23

S3: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Dutch; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 17-23

S4: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Russian; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 17-23

S5: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Finnish; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 24-30

S6: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Finnish; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 24-30

S7: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: German; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: female; AGE: 17-23

SU: unidentified speaker>


<S1> okay , let's begin , there is a seminar , next , no it's a , next week yeah , er tampere peace research institute on northern dimension is if anyone is interested let it go around . but if someone of you is here still next spring and june there is one opportunity for summer school in moscow <P:07> and then to the topic , you are the first one yeah </S1>

<PRESENTATION USEMP01D by S2>

<S1> okay thank you <APPLAUSE> and then , audience has voice </S1>
<S3> of course a couple of questions erm this citizenship how much does it influence the people are they the russians allowed officially to work and everything </S3>
<S2> no yeah i can explain it's erm yeah sorry i i didn't probably didn't mention @@ it's a if you don't have a citizenship you can't vote </S2>
<S3> okay yeah <S1> alright </S1> i never thought it i mean [(xx)] </S3>
<S2> [no but you can't] vote and you can't actually make any kind of decisions so like for example when the after 1991 the people found okay so it was all decided by estonian side so how things should be done [not considering the people] </S2>
<S3> [yeah of course] makes sense but i mean on a more daily basis </S3>
<S2> no <S3> [(have)] </S3> [but you] can't yeah there's language you can't you can't be hired by the government organisation if you don't have su- [sufficient] </S2>
<S3> [yeah but ca-] can i legally if i'm a russian living in estonia like (if) i don't speak estonian can i legally open a shop or er work at this shop </S3>
<S2> you have to use their you have to use their language even in business it's it's <S1> [yeah] </S1> [law now] you have to use it if you can't if you can't prove that you have the sufficient well that's what i believe if you don't have that you have a sufficient er knowledge <S3> [yeah] </S3> [of estonian] then you can't do </S2>
<S3> then you can't even get a job officially </S3>
<S2> well i think in certain areas you can but for example in service you can't if you have to <S3> mhm </S3> erm if you have a direct contact with the people and you don't have s- efficient estonian then you can't get it <S3> yeah yeah okay </S3> and i mean it's funny thing because @the@ the estonian it was an article i read it was a famous estonian tele- television i don't know reporter or something he went on strike on the hunger strike because er the the estonian government they made some kind of simplifying towards the citizenship law for the russians so @he went to the hunger strike because of their@ thinking that it's it's unfair </S2>
<S4> okay what what can we do if we say estonian citizen citizenships who studies in in estonia at school and but teaching in in russian is it okay in russian i know some <COUGH> [in some schools (it's fine) yeah] </S4>
<S2> [no okay they because] they they have a ra- law on minority you ki- you you you have a right to to have your school and language but it's i mean how i understand this problem it's it's kind of like the the whole policy it's just like to to wait to somehow to put russian on the back and maybe it's fair i don't know but like for example you can have a school but they there is no fund from government so people can't really erm </S2>
<S4> so there is another problem how to integrate such kind of people who who who are estonian but they don't speak [estonian] </S4>
<S2> [oh you] mean estonian </S2>
<S4> yeah i mean <S2> [oh] </S2> [e- e-] estonian citizenships they are they are estonian but they study in school in russian and teaching is in the ru- russian also there are such kind of examples in universities so it's something (i also saw) when there is all you have to use er [er] </S4>
<S2> [yeah] </S2>
<S1> [to what you refer] 'cause i know that there are courses for instance in tartu university in russian language <S2> yeah </S2> and then there is a private university which is partly for russian students and all the courses are in russian language </S1>
<S4> no not just what i [mean is] </S4>
<S1> [in in es-] in tallinn </S1>
<S4> yeah in tartu </S4>
<S1> i've been investigating this university so evaluating this universities last spring </S1>
<S4> i mean in in tartu university in tartu so [(xx)] </S4>
<S1> [there are also] courses in russian </S1>
<S4> er courses er even , i know [something] </S4>
<S1> [but no] not whole programmes </S1>
<S4> really actually i know some people here the programme a- a- almost the whole programme of course there are some courses in estonian but almost the whole programme in russian in philo- philology </S4>
<S3> so it's if those are some citizens then you can safely assume that they also speak estonian right </S3>
<S4> not s- not s- [no (xx)] </S4>
<S2> [no but it was like] er it was kind of like yeah it was in this way you you were granted the citizenship like automatically if you are like no matter nationality but if you lived there or your family lived before this russian occupation <S4> [oh , right] </S4> [so they made you] start from this <S4> [mhm] </S4> [so that's] why it was like only yeah as i told it was 80,000 russian who get this and <S4> [yeah] </S4> [and all the] estonians they've got this but the the language law it come later it was [1995 so that] </S2>
<S3> [mhm-hm okay] okay okay that's fine okay . can i ask you a difficult question <S2> yeah </S2> basically is this in some way really i mean that's of course we've we have all seen this apartheid thing in south africa </S3>
<S2> in what in [south yeah] </S2>
<S3> [in south africa] apartheid is it in some way comparable or not to that (extent) at all </S3>
<S2> no , you mean why did i refer to that i was more like when i was defining why why minority should be minority not by the amount but rather by what po- kind of power they have because it is often that the they demand or like what i've read at least the estonian side it was more like now look at these this is this russian er they they are so huge amount you can't even call them minority and <S3> [yeah] </S3> [it's] you can't say about the , because minority means for me at least that it's lack of power and er . and like , yeah it's it's another thing in sorry @@ i i just go on but it's another interesting thing it was like that in estonian press it's always like they speak with this group term if you if you know what i mean it's like all this like those russian they came to to to rus- or to estonia they they didn't know our language and now of course now they can't get a job and you kind of like yes yeah maybe it's fair but when you think about like like separate people like if you if you for example think about like okay i know this mrs petrova has a three kids and now she can't get a job because she doesn't speak estonian you you suddenly start feeling simplifying like and but they always use this group , group t- </S2>
<S5> just a comment wouldn't you say that is a situation that is quite prevalent in in a number of countries in europe i mean that happens if you if you only talking about er or let me correct myself not only but you are talking about sort of bureaucratic repression er that kind of repression call it repression it goes on for example in france with the old er er the former colonies er we have the same situation in finland it is difficult to get n- there's always the language in er in the background so it is difficult to get a citizenship it is difficult to get social security and so on </S5>
<S2> yeah yeah [i agree] </S2>
<S5> [so] for you what was the thing that made you think about this particular topic </S5>
<S2> well because i think that er it's it's quite erm er i would say it's quite like no well that's what i think at least it's quite unfair because well it was it's not that this people they didn't want to learn estonian or they were like kind of like coming there as oc- occupant it was a policy and like they they came and there was no need to kind of learn estonian and like they was always there i mean if you take ukraine we have even reverse it's like er people in the capital they don't speak ukrainian anymore so it's but it shouldn't be like kind of the reason to maybe to , i mean to to like to kind of revenging them back so it was <S5> [mhm-hm] </S5> [a different] thing it's they came because it was kind of this policy and like , i don't know but i- it's of course they the problem of minority is always a problem everywhere <S5> [yeah] </S5> [it's] like you can take any country and they always have <S5> [yeah of course yeah] </S5> [some of them as more violent] like turkey for example <S5> [yeah] </S5> [or] some </S2>
<S4> yeah yeah i mean then the russian there's such a <S2> [yeah] </S2> [problem] especially in the esp- republic of tartarstan because of the tartar they are in mino- in minority in this republic but er their rules are tartars so they're minority </S4>
<S2> yeah but the only thing i probably would like to answer you that you you , okay the people are there now so you have try to deal with them if we all s- start like to remember or like you know start suddenly thinking so how actually swedes co- like come up to be in finland so you can also think about this maybe occupants' roots in a way [so] </S2>
<S1> [no] no </S1>
<S2> no </S2>
<S1> no </S1>
<S2> no okay </S2>
<S1> no it's not really that </S1>
<S2> [no (i mean)] </S2>
<S1> [there] were swedes or swedish speaking people or maybe swedes living in finland much before the swedish <S2> [oh okay] </S2> [occupation] and the question is then whether is ever was an oc- occupation 'cause i think that in in , at the in the beginning somewhere in my lecture i said something about this and <S2> [yeah] </S2> [there's] one option that swedes were leaving so they were the sw- finnish estonian and finnish swedish sea powers <S2> mhm </S2> and this division line was somewhere in finland and therefore it's possible to say there was never any occupation </S1>
<S2> [yeah i guess i'm just] </S2>
<S1> [or that] one part of finland occupied the other part of finland </S1>
<S2> okay sorry i i think i missed the first lesson i but i think still you have to grant the citizenship on the real real <S1> [yeah] </S1> [like] bind of what the people have because you can't really say okay you russian now go to russia i mean estonia is their land so though i understand the estonian side very good but it's </S2>
<S1> er okay before we go to the next topic , i i think that . in a way the question <NAME S5> made what made you study or be- become interested on this issue it is a relevant question 'cause this your topic leads us a bit further to more general <S2> yeah </S2> discussion about human rights or in general whether we can apply <S2> yeah </S2> same rules and norms every ca- in every case 'cause cases are different and the case estonian case er is a different case than for instance finnish case or some other cases er , in the estonian case , a problem is how to , er deal with the russians or what rules should be apply who were who are born in estonia but their citizenship has been refused they are not citizen <S2> mhm </S2> and it the the occupation is not the not to blame those people <S2> mhm </S2> they have never occupied [anything] </S1>
<S2> [yeah that's] that's what i mean </S2>
<S1> and that i- that's one of the problems you were discussing the very that's very true , and then on the other hand russian perspective is that , or , in fact i i think that i i should say this in a more general way that er , estonians after the new after , the collapse of the soviet union thought that all the russians should go away because they don't belong , that is <COUGH> they were in estonia because the occup- sov- soviet and then russian occupation , and that and then then they can talk about the correction of historical wrong and they might have a justification for this but then russian perspective could be what does 22 years of independence means before that it was a part of russia <S2> mhm </S2> so russians can also correct , the historical wrong <S2> mhm </S2> it shouldn't be independent so there are two different perspectives to see the situation and what makes us to say that one of these perspectives is , right , and which one is wrong </S1>
<SU> [but is that] </SU>
<S1> [okay we] take nation states and independence sovereignty , er so self-evident that we don't question about it , but what justifies finally independence what is er what is independence needed for in the estonian case they really wanted to have independence in order to preserve their identity <S2> mhm </S2> and therefore they also wants to get out of the russians and russian language and whatever even russian minority and somehow they have they er they are also justified for this attitude </S1>
<S3> but isn't then the only way to find a solution basically to like combination of those two totally conflicting lines </S3>
<S1> yeah maybe we should forget the history and think about what kind of er <S3> yeah [(future)] </S3> [future] yeah what kind of a future we like to create that this may be more important than to look backwards back to the history and justify something with history , er history can always used for whatever if you li- what if you want , you can pick up different separate factors and jus- justify something and leave everything what what doesn't fit with your picture , you can leave them out and forget them , so therefore history is a complicated issue . er and what you said about to blame russians about the bad situation of the country and that is also something which is i very much share your opinion that it's not maybe so that estonians or some others can blame just soviet union or russians , er the old town in tallinn that has been in a very bad shape and i has heard many estonians to say that because the russians they didn't care er or because the socialist system but then how is possible that in poland in warsaw they recreated reconstructed the wh- old town after the war in the context of socialism and in soviet oc- during the soviet occupation so there is something to blame themselves also i think not only russians or soviet union or the system </S1>
<S3> but i'm not sure how much that is about poland wasn't part of the soviet union itself i was here [(xx)] </S3>
<S1> [yeah but no no] i can also go to lithuania <S3> okay </S3> in kaunas they started to reconstruct paint old building old town during the socialist period but they never did it that in tallinn . so it's not [only only warsaw] </S1>
<S3> [(xx) i mean] my question based on minority which is (xx) [areas] </S3>
<S1> [mhm] </S1>
<S6> about stalin i heard i heard that er during the 70s they had a vote in the city council that should they tear this old toompea castle , @away@ and build <S1> [pull it down] </S1> [a new] new techno city and it was like one or two votes that @@ <S3> saved it </S3> that saved it so it was <SU> mhm-hm </SU> pretty close that that @@ those castles wouldn't be there anymore </S6>
<S1> mhm should they be </S1>
<S6> but but somehow i [think] </S6>
<S1> [if you go] to turku you can see that many old places have been put down and new buildings , valueless buildings have been build instead on the places and this you could do the same for the <SIC> dooming </SIC> cathedral in turku </S1>
<S6> yes but i i meant that it was pretty close that [if you are a tourist what do you go to tallinn to see , and] </S6>
<S1> [yeah yeah i unders- yeah yeah yeah yeah] that that that's the reason why many tourist go to <S5> [yeah yeah] </S5> [tallinn] yeah . and it was pretty close here in tampere that this old city hall , mustn't be p- put down , that was also depending on just a couple of votes . so we we shouldn't blame socialism or it's it's in ev- every system the same modern is more valuable than the past </S1>
<S6> of course but somehow i agree that the russians had some kind of opposite (midas touch) there because er they they made lot of thi- things that like in in those old buildings and , even even though i don't know it's a if it's a russians' fault but er they <S1> [(ha-)] </S1> [somehow] they affected </S6>
<S1> in a way it's possible to say that somehow they understood the meaning of history 'cause KGB buildings were often in the old historical buildings <SU> @@ </SU> that they had the sense of history , like nazis <COUGH> </S1>
<S5> so does sweden come in to this in any any form because it seems like er , it seems like the the russians they think they're superior to the estonians , so it seems that they could be bitter about something and since in estonia you had a , erm swedish communities at la- at least i'm not quite sure how big they were , was there something there that they were sort of defending different kind of values and once they actually got hold of the estonians they just made them suffer after that and now the estonians are doing the same thing again so when did this vicious circle start is there something to do with that </S5>
<S2> it's a good question but i er @@ </S2>
<S1> okay let's go to the second presentation , thank you </S1>

<PRESENTATION USEMP01E by S7>

<S1> okay thank you <APPLAUSE> okay comments questions <P:16> nothing to ask </S1>
<S3> just wondered one thing wasn't totally clear to me these peacekeep- the finnish peacekeeping volunteers were they with the guns or were they like diplomats or something </S3>
<S1> with guns </S1>
<S3> with guns they were [they were just] </S3>
<S1> [but not] not allowed to use </S1>
<S3> no of course they were just okay they were doing just regular okay i wasn't sure about that part but of the thing i just , okay just the UN er [(xx)] </S3>
<S1> [the first operation] was in suez and then in cyprus and </S1>
<S3> mhm okay good </S3>
<P:06>
<S5> what about the UN crisis it had to go through in the beginning of the 90s how was it seen in in the finnish membership </S5>
<S7> yeah fin- there was in 1991 erm a nordic reform project and they were working all together and saying that they should str- er strengthen the UN <S5> yeah </S5> and keep on working actively together that's again this thing of the nordic identity what they </S7>
<P:06>
<S1> if you don't have then i have couple of comments reactions to this to your presentation as such i wouldn't say that i could find any mistakes there or could say that this is wrong or you shouldn't say so , because the point is that very much depends on the sources you you refer to and in the finnish case and this is maybe good to know , er very much scholars in the 60s 70s and still 80s , were more advocating the finnish offical foreign policy so what has what the scholars has said reflects finnish foreign policy the research wasn't that critical and analytical in a sense it was but on the other hand it wasn't and this is maybe something what's is more or less impossible to know from abroad and even in the finnish context because research is supposed to be something objective but it it had a very close connection on the other hand it's possible to say that they didn't have much to er accuse or blame the finnish foreign policy the neutrality policy it was quite acceptable for the scholars too peace policy . er but if one looks a bit from a different point of view finnish foreign policy there is much to be criticised or to present in a different way than you made but of course you can't do that if you'd 'cause you had to refer to the sources you have and you you haven't done any basic study </S1>
<S7> well this was quite hard because there were just publications from the 1960s and then there was oh UN and now we are really active and <S1> [yeah that] </S1> [so on] for 70s there [was nothing] </S7>
<S1> [that's the worst] period <S7> mhm </S7> but it was more or less the sti- the same still in the 70s , er another thing what , is maybe good to mention in the context of your presentation though you didn't refer that much to theories but er the way you said you presented your arguments , and made your whole presentation that , comes close to i don't mean that you you come c- close but the way you present the finnish foreign policy is er very much according to neorealist approach , which means that because in realism power , military power er , as a ultimate mean of foreign policy is the most important and sovereignty and so on but in a neorealist approach is the international system which very much defines what a state can do and this is what you also said said about finland that it was the international context or international security system what which made something possible or made some things completely impossible for finland to do or to say and this is er from a theoretical perspective this is very it's very much important , and then it's also it has also sense in a way that paasikivi and kekkonen themselves er lead very much on a realistic and led on neorealistic approach they were really <SIC> statemen </SIC> in a sense of realist theory of int- political realism of international relations , but from this point of view what you said this is a minor thing about paasikivi being against finnish membership in UN i wouldn't say that he was against it was just a question a matter of the time [and then] </S1>
<S7> [first he wasn't] then in 1952 his thought was [(xx)] </S7>
<S1> [yeah but he was a realistic] realistical realistic politician <S7> mhm  </S7> at at at the certain moment it was unrealistic but in principle and this is also i think something i said in my lecture , that f- for instance first of all for paasikivi it was clear or he had a clear mission to bring finland back to the west and therefore UN also was a context for finland to bel- belong to the west but he was also a very careful politician so , it was important to find the right time to do it so for those whose wanted to get finland as soon as possible to UN he was against finnish membership but not in a principle but just in the certain situation context , and the same was with the nordic council what you said and nordic council and UN were the first moves in finnish foreign policy on the way back to west that was the beginning of of this long road rocky road to west and the final thing what's is still missing and we've been discussing here is the n- membership in the NATO then we are really in the west belong to the western community and have said goodbye to the east though we still have some orthodox people in finland its orthodox church belongs to the east , so we shouldn't be that happy to belong to the west we have also in our tradition the east , er . and one thing if i say something about , that is a completely different thing but are you or have any intent- intentions to do anything more with this topic but if you would then you should also take into the consideration the UN its role has been also different in different cold war periods you could also pe- pe- periodise UN it has been certain period it was very much involved in development issues and all what was the , top or the area of UN peacekeeping or conflict resolution that was left outside , during the darkest period of the cold war 'cause it was impossible for UN to do anything everything was depending on soviet union and USSR USA and USSR so UN was incapable to do anything and then the the interest of the UN turned into the development issues er the end of this period was somewhere in the same time when helsinki security conference was held and the result of UN interest on on development issues was er couple of documents which really remained as a documents documents for new international economic order good principles for equality on the global level , er after those documents there were couple of north south dialogues without with big words without any deeds so finally nothing came out and then came second cold war and south could be forgotten again , and some people in the south has said that the second cold war was created because to forget the south and concentrate to issues which really matter the power issues , it's again different thing that that it really was so but it's impossible to understand the change this way , er , then just some minor things nothing to criticise you but just you give a good excuse to to mention these things in finland finns are very proud about ahtisaari's role in namibia and also the UN role but again i would be very cynical in this cas- case and i would say that it wasn't ahtisaari it wasn't UN which brought peace or independence for namibia , maybe it it's somehow stupid to say but the peace or the independence of namibia was depending more or less on cuban forces which for the first time in the history beaten the south south african army in angola twice in big battles and then in south africa they understood that some changes had to be made 'cause those bloody niggers might also understand that it's not an army which is which can never be beaten , so and that started to change even in south africa to post-apartheid policy , so it was force not skill of negotiations and it's very it's really ea- easy to say this way though i'd wouldn't like to say this way i would like to see that it it's peaceful peace diplomacy which br- br- brought the change into south africa but this doesn't seem to be the case it had its role but the , er designing or definite factor was that south african army was beaten in two battles , and then , in fact what you ask about finnish role in peacekeeping operations er that is also an interesting thing in the finnish history , er </S1>
<S5> s- something to do with importing cars </S5>
<S1> yeah important class but [i-] </S1>
<S5> [importing] it </S5>
<S1> importing no but it's im- it's important in a way that if one looks who have been on the field got some field experience those are also those officers who will be in the highest ranks in the finnish army afterwards so it has been used as a road for the career so it has been needed for more national interests than just to keep peace in the world but it peacekeeping came an oppos- option for the finnish army to train officers professional officers in a real situation 'cause we didn't have any war but in this w- in this way we had an opportunity to train officers even soldiers in a real situation somehow to get the experience , and couple of the latest heads of the finnish army they have been really in the field in peace oper- peace keeping operations in the past , got their experience , okay any questions now . no okay , session is over and we see next , tuesday </S1>
