Finland on the agenda
Datum: 16.11.2009
Finland on the agenda
The Fall’09 turned out to be highly Finnish: the “House of Finland” has been officially opened, Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen and Mayor of Helsinki Jussi Pajunen have visited St. Petersburg, St. Peterburg’s Governor has made her return visit to Finnish capital, one another association agreement for the next two years has been signed by the two cities, Russia-Finland Forest Summit has been held, The Foreign Trade Association has opened its office in Russia, exhibitions of Finnish photographers, and other cultural events were arranged. And at the end of November the Finnish Film Week has been held “for dessert”. Valentina Matvienko refers to Finland as to St. Petersburg’s strategic partner, and Finland says ‘yes’ to the Nord Stream gas pipeline on its territory, the number of visas to Finland increses annually, the high-speed rail is being constructed – the positive trends are obvious, still there are problems in the Russia-Finland cooperation which are constantly being overlooked by authorities. The “Baltic Go-Ahead Elephants” Analytical Group has discussed some of similar questions before (see Draft Action Plan and Anniversary achievements). But the fact that there is no any progress on the matter, requires more specific projects and suggestions, as well as interpretation of the given draft’s thesises. Let us turn our attention to three of them.
1. Banking system
The Russia-Finland’s total turnover is tens of thousand million dollars, the Finnish investments in St. Petersburg economy are hundreds of millions dollars, the Russian investments in Finnish real estate are hundreds of millions dollars again, still there is no any infrastructure created to maintain the cash flow between two countries. As the “Baltic Go-Ahead Elephants” Analytical Group’s research has shown, none of the Russian banks in Finland operates systematically, and in Russia the interests of Finland are most widely represented by the Nordea Bank of Sweden, at all (see Unsecured trade or Finnish banks’ operation in Russia). The development of open and free business between Russia and Finland requires Russian bank’s branch office to be established in Finland.
As mentioned in the Draft Action Plan, the largest part of contacts with Finland falls on the Northwest region of Russia, and so a branch of exaclty the Northwest Bank on the territory of Finland is advisable.
2. Public opinion
Investment climate, the conditions in which business could be set up and developed in foreign country include such factor as public attitude degree towards foreigners. For Finland the matter has additional dimensions: the first is the European Union, the second is historical experience of cooperation with Russia, and the third is the Finnish self-identification. “New opportunities to expand and consolidate… the collaboration” which St. Petersburg’s government foresees in Finland, requires immediate public opinion research and, if needed, further campaigns held in the Finnish mass media, aimed at adjusting the image of Russia and the Russians, including businessmen and tourists.
In particular, the fact of the evident bias from the side of both Finnish individuals and legal entities against Russian businessmen investing in Finnish real estate, gives serious concern. At times, the question is transferred into political plane. It would be well not only to achieve equal opportunities with representatives of other nationalities, but to create maximum auspicious conditions as well.
In order to produce balanced results, the two-sided research is to be conducted: in Finland and in the Northwest region of Russia.
Public opinion research should be divided into two parts:
The following parameters are to be included in the opinion poll: Target groups: Among age groups:
For completeness of research, such parameter as self-identification should be added to the questionnaire for the Finns: do they feel themselves more European than Finnish? The given question is a regular subject of the Eurobarometer surveys, on behalf of the European Commission, still it is much important to find out if there is a correlation, and of which size, between the Finns’ self-identification and their attitude towards Russian citizens. That will allow most effective campaign to be carried out after considering the results of the research.
For conducting opinion poll within Finland, the involvement of government institutions would be quite reasonable, as follows from Matti Vanhanen’s announcement that Finland will aim to develop “adequate cognition” about Russia (see “Action Plan for Russia, adopted by the Government, April 16, 2009”).
The present research funding from the Russian side may be done at the expense of the “Program on promoting the positive image of St. Petersburg from abroad” and on the “Tolerance Program” of the Committee on Foreign Relations.
3. Language
Language is a main communication tool, and hence, an important infrastructure constituent of any contacts between representatives of two countries. The commonly used English language is gaining increasing popularity, however the communication in covenantee’s native language allows achieving maximum effect in cooperation process. It’s not only maximum comprehension of all details of the partner’s position, but a key to understanding of his mentality and worldview. Whereas misunderstanding in business or private communication is a source of conflicts.
In spite of the geographical proximity, Russia and Finland are not ready yet to offer sufficient knowledge base for teaching Finnish and Russian languages, correspondingly. As exemplified by St. Petersburg, where 32 language schools exist in which Finnish is taught, however only 5 of them specialize in teaching Northern languages (with just 2 of them specialized in Finnish only); 20% of schools offer individual classes only (read: for the short term a Finnish student is invited). The high-quality Finnish learning market is monopolized. As for secondary schools, only 5 of them teach Finnish on profound level.
However the tendency of increasing number of groups in language centers, which are the market leaders, as well as the general trends in development of the Russian-Finnish cooperation, show the increasing interest in learning Finnish from the side of the Russian population.
On the other hand, the Finns need to learn Russian, too. And tourists and businessmen especially.
Altogether, the comprehensive Finnish language learning program is required in Russia, as well as the Russian language learning program is required in Finland.
The platform for the Russian language courses in Finland can be made on the base of the Friendship Houses or St. Petersburg representative offices. But it’s “young cadres” who should preside such language centers, as they are able to effect innovations more vigorously. As mentioned in the Draft Action Plan the considerable number of centers responsible for two-sway cooperation, operate in Russia and Finland, but their approach became out of date long ago, and the centers are now an inertial ballast hampering a shoot forward.
For full representation of the Russian language in the regions of Finland, a detailed research of the language learning market is required in the municipalities. Artificial restriction of the geographcial scale of the centers distribution by the regions of Helsinki, Turku and some other big cities, can lead the actual development potential of the Russian-Finnish cooperation to formal framework.
The Finnish and Russian languages courses should be developed for different population groups: businessmen, students, wage-workers, housewives, school- and pre-school children, etc; accordingly, the time schedule should vary, too.
Language centers are to be empowered in the sphere of cultural policy. So the centers may become the catalyst of the Russian literature expansion in Finland. And vice versa, there is an extreme dearth of the Finnish literature and cinema in Russia, and such cultural products can serve as the most available method of the national mentality transfer, that in turn promotes better understanding between countries.
In order to achieve the language centers’ profitability within Finland, they should be provided with translating centers, so those who come to the center can get the full range of services.
The country’s linguistic level could be also realized by means of a joint program at secondary schools: studying Finnish in Russia (St. Petersburg) and studying Russian in Finland (in different municipalities, with Lappeenranta assumed as a pilot project).
The linguistic educational project realization ought to be planned for several years in advance. Within the nearest future, in the context of the language policy, such question as the increased availability of Russia and Finland for those who do not speak any of the countries’ languages. St. Petersburg is realizing similar program in the metro and on the city’s central streets by placing nameboards written both in Russian and English. Though in Finland, because of the national bilingual specifics, there are guide-boards written in Finnish and Swedish only, while it does not help tourists who speak none of the Finland’s native languages. The same practice refers to the foodstuff as well, which in Russia are mostly marked both in Russian and in English, but in Finland it is still only Finnish and Swedish. Increasing the attractiveness of Russia and Finland for the foreigners which do not yet know the countries' languages, requires collaboration in that direction. The English language wide spread occurrence in Russia tolerates address-boards doubling and the Finnish foodstuff marking in English. So Finland is to become more attractive not only for the English-speaking Russians, but for representatives of other countries.
Regarding the demand for English, one of the methods to rise the attractiveness of the Finnish and Russian centers’ could be the addition of the English language courses, including speaking and business English.
As mentioned in the Draft Action Plan, problems of different character can be more easily solved by delegation of powers to the regional and Federal subjects level (in case of Finland – municipalities). That is why the role of the discussed projects participants should be given to representatives of the Northwest region and municipalities of Finland, where, as it will be found out from the opinion poll, the attitude towards Russia and St. Petersburg is most auspicious.
Send message