Timo Kinnunen
Särkiniementie 16 A 41
70700 Kuopio

Klikkaa tästä palataksesi takaisin Timon Serverimaailma etusivulle - Click here to return back to the front page of Timos' Serverimaailma homesite

Klikkaa tästä palataksesi takaisin sivulle Tietoo - Click this link to Return back to the page of Information

Klikkaa tästä palataksesi takaisin Kokoelmaan Timon lähialueyhteistyöraportteja Joensuusta - Click this link to Return back to the collection of Some reports by Timo on Cross-Border Cooperation

On the article "Savon Eurooppa-politiikka" at Savon Sanomat on the 11th Febryary in 1995


This paper, which I have written on the 12th February in 1995, was almost prophetical in many senses. I wrote this "report" just for KEHI -course in Joensuu, but all response which I got was the question: "Have you given this to Mykkänen to read?" I just felt intuitively that they considered my shot story a good prick, or sting, and therefore they gave that demand. I had nothing against Mykkänen, and I do not even know personally that man at all. I have nothing against Savolaxian people, either, and therefore I postponed my publication for years. Nowadays it has only a kind of historical value, if it can have even that one. When I tried to process an "art of bindery" -project, I met personally two managers of IS-paino, and I had a paper-cup-coffee with them, and they only urged to me more results before they could join into the project. This means that there were no factual results - as well as I had no success when I tried to make an agreement with Suomen ja venäjän ystävyysseura, because they simply didn't seem to be interested at all of my propositions. Also there I had that paper-cup-coffee -system. Just the same was the situation when I tried to contact the people of Kuopio University, and I had a very experience that all I tried to say was worth of nothing, and that they knew all beforehand better that I did. An just the same was the situation when I tried to meet enterpreuners of Teknia.

You should know that I have not got any monetary support for my activities, or for my studies, and I must pay all cost by myself, as well as buy gasoline for my car, and drive almost daily from Kuopio to Joensuu, and back, and there were also several additional costs, too. And I did not got ANY support from Joensuu, and still I tried to make these questions clear, and I made an enormous work, and just for nothing! But that is life, and just life. Anyway. I felt that I was totally alone, and I actually I did not have any success at all. Now I know pretty well that Joensuu should give me some concrete support, or that it should be more involved into my project. But this is true situation in Finland, in general, because no administrative person there is interested in individual people, or in their thoughts, or ideas. If we think that fact, I got more success than I ever could even expect to have. Namely, I really had some concrete meeting, and I did many such things which are actually out of scope of the men of streets. You can pretty well imagine this situation when thinking me as a person who is not really invited to the party, but is still there with a valid member card, and rights. It is just as playing as an actor! During the time when I wrote this, Savolax was one of many other possible cluster of applicants for cross-border programs of European Union, but it was left outside. One of the reasons, why this took place was that provincial leader, and his close companions just considered that financial support for cross-border cooperation projects too easy to get. This was a part of a big fooling, that some Finnish people really were believing that our country is getting more money back than it is just putting to European Union. Nobody makes an agreement according with one is just loosing money when taking more participants to his own system! Therefore, I was not alone when being fooled. When just studying a map, Savolax seems to be geographically far more close to Russia than e.g. western Finnish provinces, or other European applicants. Unfortunately this closeness is not close enough, because in Savolax there were only few enterpreuners who were interested in making investments to the East, or willing to take risks.

"Savon Eurooppa -politiikka" by Antti Mykkänen

Provincial leader of Savolax, Antti Mykkänen, wrote an article on the 11th February in 1995 at Savon Sanomat, where the expressed his views concerning the Savolaxian policy for Europe. I cannot help it, but there were some echoes of colonialism, as well as utilitarianism, and by them, perhaps, a kind of megalomany, too. [At the article] there was a scheme of world map, where there were the restricted region for consumers, the region for investments, and two different basic areas of raw-materials in Russia and the United States of American. The whole idea of an article was that both The U.S., and European Union could be interested in an utilization, as well as in financing of two regions of Siberia - that is - to become owners of those resources. Then there was a scheme concerning those direction, according with different currents of energy, and raw-materials would intersect in Savolax, and how Savolaxian people could become as intermediate medium between different interest groups. According to the article - both Savolax, and Finland are in the essential vertex, when thinking the flow of raw-materials, and energy, whose totality can described as triangle-shaped creature, lying on the surface of the globe. Other vertexes of this concentration are European Union, Russian, and The United States of America. But it shall raise a question, however: For what reason just Savolax could be so essential factor in this configuration - and - are the other participants mentioned interested in this kind of arrangement of roles at all - as Antti Mykkänen has outlined them? Are there some secret contracts, or agreements between those participants? Or - is Mykkänen just planning such a kind of triangular agreement, which we know from the history - just for the good of the profile of his provincial organization. And if so - isn't the whole model still derived from the age of colonialism? But if so - there is remaining the question: What kind of special experience Savolaxian have concerning the practice of colonial policy? But before discussing any further, we should study how the things are arranged in European Union right now, and especially how they have been arranged before.

From the history we know that it was already in 1957 when EEC-countries made a contract in Rome, in which it was defined the structure concerning the commercial-, and development aid with colonies, and overseas countries. A year later, in 1958, it was founded EDF, which was aimed to help French Africa, but later, in EDF's seventh contract period between 1991-1996, the quantity of those, which were aid-given, or participant, was 69. For the article, there can be a lesson - namely - what comes first, tries to stay first. Then, there has been four sequential LOME-contracts, starting from 1975, and lasting in 2000. Those LOME-contracts are concerning different economical arrangements, and development aid cooperation. But what is important, is that those contracts are legally binding. They emphasize both the equality, and independence of the participants, as well as the right of target developing countries to define what kind should be their appropriate political,- social,- economical,- and cultural systems. In addition to this, these contracts cannot be annulled, which refers to their continuity, and to their safe, and established nature. It is just ACP-country, who states any initiative, and indicative program, in which there are defined the priorities and goals of cooperation, sectors, operations models, and instruments - and just ACP shall choose the most important local, and national project to be realized. After this, European Union shall evaluate an appropriate among of aid, which is given. Then the process shall continue with several negotiations between EU and ACP- country, and after then there shall be a formation of National Indicative Program. But one could ask after effectiveness of the project now. LOME IV includes that demand in question concerning the effectiveness of an aid given. EU-markets are mainly open to the products of ACP-countries, but there are certain exceptions concerning the products, which are important to the economy of the southern Europe. But what shall we learn about this. There seems to be a tendency in European Union to take in notice the needs of target countries, not only the needs of the country who gives an aid, or credit. Then, there are some humanistic prerequisites concerning the aid given by LOME, as the demand of enlarging of democracy and the human rights in the target countries. This does not realize by the activities of European Union, but it must be due of activities of target countries. In addition to this, there are certain mechanisms within LOME for structural adaptation, and for fund, as STABEX, SYSMIN, and SAP. The developmental aid - as such - consists of technical aid, financing of investments, and credits. Then there are micro-projects, and project investments. But if we study LOME from the point of view of economic system only, there are certain contracts concerning customs, and the General Systems of Preferences. This is a deadline between the other target countries, and LOME. In the year 1976 European Union started cooperation with Asia, and Latin-America. In general, the relationships between European Union and Asia, and Latin-America are made according to LOME, and this is the case also with Mediterranean countries. However, there are some differences. Those contracts with them are made bilaterally, or sometimes multilaterally, when there are groups of countries. Their main emphasis is with economical cooperation, and not traditional developmental work. There are not so good commercial preferences as with LOME, indeed, but especially in Latin-America there is still the strong emphasis of the demand for the presence of democracy and the human rights, or the tendency of increasing them.

Just similar prerequisites are stated in Maastricht in 1993, with its a. 130u-130y. There is a demand for the stabile economic- and social development, which ought to be supported in the developing countries. In addition to this, the developing countries must be [gradually] integrated to the world economic system. There must be a fight against poverty, as well as it must be developed democracy and civil rights in those countries - binding together the principles, which has been accepted in UN, and by similar organizations. But there are another demands, too. When cooperating with developing countries, there must be coherence in all of the activities, as well as coordination and complementarity. What we should learn by that? That there are the social dimensions, and the principles of complementarity and coherence, which are not present, when emphasizing e.g. Savolax as an crucial agent between the east and west. We should insist, instead, that the boundary is quite artificial, and that there are thousand of active agent in the both sides of the former boundary between the two coalitionists. From the previous material we can conclude easily that the main stream of all economical cooperation between European Union, and different developing countries, is directed mainly to the south, and not to the northern areas of the earth - as to Siberia, for example. The kernel of Antti Mykkänen's article is that both the northern, and middle Siberia is an enormous stock of raw material, which can be transported via Finland to the "western" Europe, and Scandinavia. Another point of view by Mykkänen is, that via Finland there could be transferred to Siberia such things as monetary transactions, goods traffic, and know-how from [and between] European Union, and The U.S. Mykkänen outlines at his article that Savolax could utilize its geographical position as bridgehead [or beachhead], and proposes for that Savolax is a reasonable area for investments for European, and the people from The U.S. - for the further activities in Russia.

In addition to these topics, there are such topics as the financing the human,- road-, and other networks - because of attending to one's interests in investment activities, especially in Russian side. But for what this implies to? There is a taste of the unreliability of Russian side, and that with appropriate control systems the situation could be better. But what is wrong with those ideas presented at the article of Mykkänen? There are no references to the activities of Russian people, and to their own wishes concerning e.g. their social life, or health, or their own plans, or interests concerning the use of minerals, gas, or oil resources of the northern and middle Siberia. At the article, there is a reference to TACIS, which is a fund of European Union - for financing projects, which are oriented to IVY-countries. Another reference to a fund of EU is PHARE, too, which, in turn, is oriented to that part of Eastern Europe, which doesn't belong to IVY. But where are the Russian sources of money for financing the projects, which take place in their own country, however. And where are the sources of money, which the U.S. have to offer? There are no references to the main stream of EU financing for developing countries, either - as any notice to EDF to LOME-countries, and to such contracts as LOME in itself. There are no words concerning Maastrich, which gives many guidelines how to proceed with projects. This sounds me strange, because both in LOME, and Maastrich there are those humanistic guidelines, which seem to be absent at the article. There is not only that point of the economical utility of Savolax, and that who gives an aid, or credit - and gets some utility. We can easily find the interests of Savolax, as well as Finland and Scandinavia, and European Union, and The U.S., but not a much of Russian. There are only some colonialistic tendency to utilize their resources, and being an agent of both European Union, and the U.S., and getting some utility of both of them. But why those [possible] interest groups should need Savolaxians, and their weak resources for a long time, if they have finally got fulfilled their own needs. And if there is an idea to transport goods by waters, or railways, just using container services, there is no sense to pay to Savolax. When the network [of any kind] is ready, there is no need to maintain it, or any planning systems, and when there are better bridgeheads available that Savolax, the interest groups shall favour them, for certain. The direct human contacts are better than intermediate ones.

At the article there are references to such financial sources of support of European Union for projects, which deal with the development of infrastructure, with better schooling, with social welfare, as well as with Health care. As discussing TACIS, and PHARE, the writer seems to give an information that they are easily available. There are the funds like that, indeed, but there are several other interested in them, and who can realize them,too - much cheaper than which is possible when planning Savolaxian proposals. There are some professionals, which are able to get those projects with pretty good proposals - just because they can take in advance necessary background information, and because they have some experience from those instances who are financing different projects, but they cannot succeed in every time, either. And why any brainhunter could find the high-class ability in Savolax without a corresponding high price? And further - have Savolaxian people some extra experience, and knowledge e.g. concerning the human rights, democracy, and refugees? Have they some extra knowledge concerning the world economy, or have they enough intellectual, and other resources to carry out such an enormous project - as being as crossroad to the west, and east. At the article there are many references to the human contact surfaces, too, which are important when getting any information - or financing any project. But when pushing trough only the scheme of somebody's very own - without taking notice of wishes of somebody else's, or another possible, competing plans, or current, or possible political situation, there are not very good chances to get any money, notwithstanding all of the good human contacts, which someone may have. It is quite possible that those people behind those contacts may have a high position, but he [or she] has no kind of imagination, and he has lost totally his all illusions, as well as wishes. And when discussing rights - such as civil-, and human rights, or other questions similar kinds, we ought to take in advance several complicate factors, with which to describe another society than ours, and we should become acquainted with their laws.

Are Savolaxians ready to solve all the problems, if they appear during projects? What is the adequate Savolaxian experience concerning an evaluation of any project, if they are insisting [at the very beginning] that they shall have the decisive role in future. Nobody cannot predict that much. And if the most important Savolaxian interest is the very own provincial utility, and that its financial support shall necessarily be derived from European Unity - then [it shall raise a question] - from where could be found the other interests - without counting the global interests of the whole development of mankind, or our future as a specie? Generally speaking, it seems not very vice to divide the world, on the one hand into the areas, where the raw-materials are [and nothing more], and on the other hand, into the areas, where they are consumed, and whose welfare the whole world economy is to be purposed. There is also the fact that we cannot exploit the raw-materials forever and ever, and that we cannot increase the total among of energy forever and ever. Then there is the demand of equality of man, and many other questions, to which there are no references at the article in question. But if we study the topic of aid more closely, there is the fact that European Union has fixed the most of its financial resources beforehand - because of that the contracts it has done with tens of countries are binding EU, and another participants. There is not much place to expansion to the northern direction - without any extra contribution of money of all the members of European Union. In addition, most of the civil organizations, which are using EU-financing, are much larger, and powerful than any Finnish organization, and they get 20% of all the aid given. Moreover, the most European universities, which have EU-financing, are far better known than any Finnish university, and they have recruited the better human resources than Finnish competing, and tiny Universities. However, there are some specialist groups in Finland, too, but they cannot be associated to those themes which we are discussed.

In general, there is the fact, too, that most of the total internal aid within European Union consists of supporting of agriculture, because of subvention, and by which the world market price can be set low - which costs a lot of money. A great deal of the money, which Finland gets back from European Union, consists of the support for agriculture, and for that reason, it could be fatal to decrease the Finnish agriculture - if thinking with an utilitarian way. But when discussing fixed costs further, there are also another fixed costs, similar kinds, and for the reason, there are not so much money to give to the projects like Antti Mykkänen has outlined. The only way to increase welfare is, and shall be, the better local education, which matches to any education given in the world, and which produces just human resources. The question is: has provincial leader Mykkänen such ones, and is he able to recruit them - and still be able to compete?