Finland’s nuclear energy controversy – MPs on different lines – 2024-04-09 23:01:31

In the opinion of Jussi Saramo, the chairman of the parliamentary group of the Left Alliance, Finland’s current nuclear energy law should not be changed on a whim. Atte Kajova

Chairman of the parliamentary group of the Left Alliance Jussi Saramon according to Finland’s current Nuclear Energy Act, one should not start to change the conditions at will.

Saramo took a position on the law on Tuesday in the plenary session of the parliament, where there was a referral debate on the government’s proposal on cooperation between NATO countries regarding nuclear defense information.

– When we talk about nuclear defense, we are talking about a very sensitive area in the sense that all the Nordic countries have decided that there will be no nuclear weapons in the Nordic countries. In Finland, it is in the legislation, which was stated in the NATO decision. In other Nordic countries, there are political decisions that nuclear weapons will not be brought to the Nordic countries.

According to the Nuclear Energy Act in force, the importation, manufacture, possession and detonation of nuclear explosives are prohibited in Finland.

“We have to obey the law”

Deputy Chairman of the Defense Committee Mikko Savola (Centre) said that he couldn’t resist Saramo’s speech.

– The realism is that nuclear weapons will not be placed here, and they will not be offered to us, and we don’t really want them here. But we have quite a strict nuclear energy law in this country and I am sure that we will have to comply with it when we participate in training activities, Savola stated.

According to him, when you want to maintain nuclear deterrence as part of the alliance, different scenarios can come up.

Also a member of the defense committee Jari Ronkainen (ps) thinks that all restraints from our own legislation should be removed. The coalition Timo Heinonen agreed with Ronkainen. Heinonen is also a member of the Defense Committee.

– I am not in favor of arbitrarily writing off any deterrent, deterrent, for example through our legislation.

Saramo (left) pointed out to Heinonen that nuclear weapons are not the only thing for which Finland has already set negative conditions in NATO in advance.

– Finland will not take any other weapons of mass destruction, neither chemical nor biological weapons, nor land mines. Different NATO countries have different weapons, and we are not here to take all of them, but we are involved in all the planning, Saramo said.

Saramo does not understand that the Nuclear Energy Act should be changed because of the exercises. According to him, NATO does not “push nuclear weapons around”.

– If you were to put up with it, that’s what the majority of Finns didn’t want.

A member of the Defense Committee Mika Karin According to (sd), Finland would put itself in a completely different position than it has traditionally been in, if it renounces nuclear disarmament on its own soil.

The goal is a world without nuclear weapons

According to Heinonen, NATO’s goal is a world without nuclear weapons, even though the goal is distant.

– Today it is not in sight and therefore NATO’s deterrence is based on nuclear deterrence. As a small country, we should not set our own conditions.

Oras Tynkynen (vihr) says that even in dark times, it is good to keep in mind the ultimate goal of a world without nuclear weapons.

– It is a very distant, very unrealistic goal at the moment. But the vision should still be kept alive. Nuclear disarmament must not be unilateral, but must proceed throughout the world.

According to Tynkkynen, the biggest threats in the world are the nuclear weapons of rogue states like Russia.

The government’s presentation itself concerned a cooperation agreement on nuclear defense information. With the agreement, Finland can receive information about the effects of using nuclear weapons and how to protect against them, while committing to share information with other NATO countries.