- short notes on power, politics and psychology
THOMAS ROSENBERG
Speech held at
EUROPEAN ANTI NUCLEAR
MANIFESTATION
HELSINKI NOV 9-11, 2007
Opening slide:
A man drilling his own head,
saying:
“When everything is in our own hands,
nuclear power is absolutely safe!”
This is Finland in a nutshell. And also the answer to the question asked by so
many during the last years: Why Finland? How is it possible that this small and
prosperous nation in the North has gone nuts when it comes to nuclear power,
and now goes in the opposite direction, compared with most of the Western
world? The nuclear plans as they are ambitious, i.e. Finland aims to become a
leading nation concerning know how and expertise in many parts of the nuclear
fuel cycle, from mining to final deposit of radioactive waste.
The political och psychological ice breaker was definitely the decision in
principle made in the parliament in 2001, concerning the final deposit of
radwaste, the first decision of its kind in the world, and adopted with almost
overwhelming numbers: 159 for and only 3 against. After that the road was free
for the nuclear entrepreneurs: a fifth reactor, now under construction by TVO
in Olkiluoto, bigger than ever before; plans for uranium mining on many
different locations in Finland; a new third reactor by Fortum in Lovisa; the
attempt by the German giant EON to take the people in Lovisa by surprise, by
planning a new reactor next to the former ones; and finally the attempts to do
it again, but now in a Trojan horse called Fennovoima, and located either in
the neighboring municipality or somewhere on the west coast.
An astonishing development, indeed, compared with the political climate in the
rest of Europe. And talking about the climate; this is not due to the present
climate discussion, as this development has been clearly visible for
years.
So, what are the reasons for this Finnish exception? Why does Finland differ in
such a remarkable way? The reasons for this are of course complex, but let me
summarize them in some short notes, concerning
1) the political trust
2) the environmental legislation
3) the technological hybris
4) the psycological and moral ethos
(1) The political trust
In Finland, the primary rock is unusually stable, something which is a perfect
brand when selling final solutions for the spent fuel. But that goes for the
political system, too. Finns do not riot, or even put the legislation seriously
in question – and if so, the critiqs are very soon incorporated in the state
apparatus. This was the case with the labour movement in the first part of the
20th century, and with the green movement in the latter part of the century. In
most European countries there still is a strong and sovereign environmental
movement – but not in Finland, as many of the activists, especially those with
academic education, sooner or later are absorbed into the environmental
administration, both in the public and the private sector.
Another aspect of the political trust is the strong municipal autonomy,
reflecting the strong local and regional independency typical for the Nordic
countries. Or to put it in Asterix’ terms: Finland is, and has always been,
full of small Gallian villages! (That is, up til now, as the market economy and
its centralizing logic now finally is destroying all the small communes in the
country, but that is another story.). One aspect of this, of importance when
dealing with nuclear matters, is the municipal veto so central for the Finnish
democracy. Something which paradoxically can be in the interest of the nuclear
industry.
The formally strong position of the municipalities means that the companies, be
they mining industries, reactor builders or deposit planners, are forced to
start at to local level. This may sound democratic but actually means a
technique of ruling well known from the Roman empire, i.e. divide et impera.
The first and decisive battle is fought between a giant company on one hand and
small and helpless local groups on the other, usually with no connections to
the national level, not to speak of the international. When the project at last
reaches the national level of decision, i.e. the government and the parliament,
the energy on the local level is totally gone, and the former resistance and
critique therefore totally nonexistent, e.g. in the national news media.
(2) The environmental legislation
One of the main arguments in favor for nuclear expansion in Finland is that our
environmental legislation and administration is so well developed. Therefore
nothing that can put neither people nor nature at risk can be established – or
at least so it is assumed. The main cornerstone is the law about Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA), from 1994. Since that the major legitimating
instrument for all major and troublesome projects in the republic, and more so,
the more risky and controversial the project in question is.
Not surprisingly, the EIA-process involved in the nuclear projects have become
the perhaps most effective argument in trying to gain the confidence and trust
needed. Worried? No, problem, as we can offer you participation in the hearing
process! This goes both for new reactors and for the final deposit of radwaste,
the latter resulting in the biggest EIA so far in Finland, between 1997 and
2000). I had myself the opportunity to follow this process very closely, and
have written several analyses of it, from the activist’s point of view (one of
them available here as a copy).
Most of the research made on the impact of EIA points in the same direction:
the assessment programs can never basicly change any major project, not to talk
about stopping them, and less so the bigger the project and therefore the
vested interests involved. This goes, of course, even more so for EIA:s
connected with nuclear power. Our experience with the radwaste-EIA can be
summarized in one word: theatre. A script made in advance, in which Goliat was
doomed to defeat David.
(3) The technological hybris
Finns trust, in general, in the state. Even greater is, however, their trust in
science, technology and expertise, especially if this is Finnish. Perhaps due
to the relatively short period of higher education, and the small population,
Finns are very proud of their scientific and technological successes, and
something like a technological or cultural critique is almost totally
absent.
One reason for the absence of critique is directly connected with the smallness
of the circles involved. Take nuclear fysics or geology as an example (two
fields directly involved here); when everybody knows each other, and are
connected with several mutual bonds, no critique or illojality is hardly ever
rising.
With success stories like Nokia and Pisa (according to which the Finnish
schools are the best in Europe) this feeling of national pride, combined with
mutual dependencies (or corruption, if you will) has turned into hybris. We can
solve every problem, and also have the guts to do it! The latter turning us to
the last point.
(4) The psychological and moral ethos
The Finnish exception, or wonder, when it comes to nuclear power, is, I think,
fully understandable only when related also to the “winter war-mentality” and
stubbornness characterizing the Finns, with their hard experiences from the
last century. “The only country that payed its war debts” – a fact often
admired by others, but also deeply influencing the Finns themselves. Others may
flee from the front (especially the cowardly Swedes, our favourite object of
friendly hatred), but we will always stick to our duty!
Or, to put it in terms of nuclear politics: others may flee their
responsibility for the spent nuclear fuel, for also mining uranium when using
nuclear energy, or something else of this kind – but we will not desert!
***
So, to summarize: Finland differs in nuclear politics because of a peculiar mix
of factors that in itself may sound democratic and positive (such as municipal
autonomy and advanced environmental legislation), but combined with the other
components at stake result in a nuclear naivety hard to believe!
Thomas Rosenberg
sociologist, freelance reseracher and columnist
chairman of the former Lovisa-movement (1997-2000), the citizen movement
against nuclear waste disposal in Lovisa.
Drottninggatan 28, FIN-07900 Lovisa
+358 (0)19 532 460; +358 (0)50 528 7171; thomas.rosenberg at
dnainternet.net
