Prime Minister Petteri Orpo and opposition leaders argued on Wednesday in Helsinki about changes to the nuclear energy law that would allow nuclear weapons to be brought to Finland. SDP chair Antti Lindtman said the party does not support the proposal if certain restrictions on nuclear weapons are not written into the law. The opposition criticized the government for preparing the legislative proposal in secret and not bringing it to parliamentary preparation before its announcement. SDP deputy chair Nasima Razmyar says she calls for seeking unanimity and a return to parliamentary discussion in the debate on removing nuclear weapon restrictions. SDP chair Antti Lindtman says Prime Minister Petteri Orpo's recent statement on the nuclear weapons debate has raised new questions.
Petteri Orpo said that SDP wants to restrict Finland's security because it opposes changes to the nuclear energy law, and he stated in the discussion at Sanomatalo that the government is not changing its proposal. The government justifies removing nuclear weapon restrictions with recommendations from the Defense Forces and defense administration officials. Orpo said he is prepared for the foreign and security policy report to state that nuclear weapons would not be brought to Finland in peacetime.
I think it is justified to examine Finland's current legislation. I do not consider it sensible that we have unnecessary obstacles.
Unlike former Prime Minister Sanna Marin, SDP has opposed the government's legislative proposal and considered it important that legislation retains a provision prohibiting the bringing of nuclear weapons to Finland. Antti Lindtman said Sanna Marin gave strong criticism to the government about how it has handled such a sensitive issue as nuclear weapons. SDP parliamentary group chair Tytti Tuppurainen has said SDP wants restrictions on nuclear weapons to be clearly written into law.
Opposition parties Centre and Harry Harkimo (Liik) support the idea of a nuclear-weapon-free Finland in peacetime, while SDP, Left Alliance, and Greens do not support the solution. Former Prime Minister Sanna Marin said she considers it justified for the government to intend to change legislation so that nuclear weapons could be brought to Finland if it relates to Finland's military defense, NATO's common defense, or defense cooperation. Centre Party chair Antti Kaikkonen proposed on Wednesday a joint party declaration on a nuclear-weapon-free Finland in peacetime.
Well, Sanna Marin gave strong criticism to the government about how it has handled such a sensitive issue as nuclear weapons. We are exactly in agreement on that.
In Sweden, France will initiate a deepened dialogue on nuclear deterrence with a handful of European countries, including Sweden. Ulf Kristersson assessed it as a big decision to say yes to a dialogue about how French nuclear capabilities could cooperate with other countries', in Sweden's case conventional capabilities. Magdalena Andersson does not back a nuclear dialogue with France. Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard says S is very unclear and hesitant when it comes to security policy and that it would be irresponsible to say no to the dialogue.
Sweden has a nuclear doctrine that was adopted when Sweden joined NATO and is formulated in rather vague terms, meaning Sweden sees no reason to have nuclear weapons or permanent bases on its territory in peacetime. There is agreement among Swedish parties on that doctrine, but on whether Sweden should allow nuclear weapons on Swedish soil in war or crisis, the agreement is not as great. Government parties think yes while Social Democrats are more vague.
She might have said that she does not support unnecessary restrictions, well I guess no one supports unnecessary restrictions but those that are appropriate and in line with Finland's long-term policy.
Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said he thinks the left wing is wavering worryingly on this issue. The government and Social Democrats disagree about initiating a dialogue with France on nuclear weapons. Whether there is a possibility for a cross-party agreement in Finland on nuclear weapons legislation, given the calls for parliamentary discussion, remains uncertain.
I do not know how big a disagreement there is here, but I can say that the party approaches nuclear weapons with great consideration. Finland has every reason for great patience, consideration, and caution due to its location.
There is no reason to doubt that even those countries that have different restrictions in law would not be fully within NATO's nuclear deterrence.
If for example Lithuania, which is right next to Kaliningrad, or Latvia, Romania, and many other eastern member states have different restrictions in law, does that mean these countries have a security gap or that NATO's nuclear deterrence is not full at the moment? I don't think so.
I think it wavers worryingly on the left wing in this issue.
I assessed it as a big decision to say yes to a dialogue about how French nuclear capabilities could cooperate with other countries', in our case Sweden's, conventional capabilities.
I will not put any words in her mouth, but I felt after those conversations that it was not that Social Democrats intended to oppose the decision the government made.