abdi (mts)...abdi (mts) helsinki 2018 finn`s opinions on foreign and security policy the advisory...

THE ADVISORY BOARD FOR DEFENCE INFORMATION

Bulletins and reports

November, 2018

1/20

18

FINNS`OPINIOS ON FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY, NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY

ABDI (MTS)

Helsinki 2018

Finn s opinions on foreign and security policyThe Advisory Board for Defence Information (ABDI)

ABDI Bulletins and reports November, 1/2018

Ministry of Defence

ISBN Nid.: 978-951-663-032-1

ISBN PDF: 978-951-663-033-8

Layout: Government Administration Unit, Publications

Helsinki 2018

FOREWORD

A survey commissioned by the Advisory Board for Defence Information (ABDI) ex-plored the opinions of Finnish people on Finnish foreign and security policy as well as defence policy. The survey also included questions on factors affecting safety and citizens’ sense of security, developments over the next five years and factors giving rise to concern. This year’s survey also included a new question about the ex-port of defence materiel. The survey consisted of 18 questions in total, one of which was asked for the first time.

Commissioned by the ABDI, the survey was carried out by market research com-pany Taloustutkimus Oy. The study was conducted as a part of omnibus research in the form of personal interviews. Interviews were carried out with a total of 1,034 individuals. The majority of interviews were conducted at the interviewees’ homes, while 313 individuals were interviewed in reception halls. The target group of the study comprised the entire population between the ages of 15 and 79, with the ex-ception of the Åland Islands. The sample was formed by quota sampling in which the target group’s quotas were the distribution of age, gender, province and munic-ipality. The interviews were conducted in 89 localities, 54 of which were cities and the remaining 35 other municipality types. The sample was weighted to match the target group. The weighted N values correspond to the population aged 15 to 79 in thousands (SVT 31 December 2017).

The interviews were conducted on 21 September–7 October 2018. The margin of error is ±3.2 percentage points.

When interpreting background variables related to party affiliation, it must be taken into account that the margin of error regarding the large parties is smaller, which

enables the collection of more reliable information on these when compared to smaller parties whose supporters are numerically fewer in the sample.

Party affiliation was ascertained by asking the following question: “Which party would you vote for if parliamentary elections were held now?” Of all of the respond-ents, 68 per cent (699 persons) revealed their party affiliation, while 32 per cent (335) declined to do so. In 2017, the corresponding numbers were 67 per cent and 33 per cent.

The report comprises a text section with illustrating figures that also present the time sequence of the questions asked in previous surveys. These illustrations were prepared by Taloustutkimus Oy. Some of the questions represent a continu-ous sequence since 1964. The questions were drawn up by the research and work branches of the ABDI. The research branch compiled the report for the work branch.

The data from this survey, like that of the previous surveys, are stored in the Finnish Social Science Data Archive at the University of Tampere (www.fsd.uta.fi).

The ABDI’s survey reports are available in Finnish, Swedish and English on the AB-DI’s home page (www.defmin.fi/mts).

In Sweden, the ‘Myndighet för Samhällsskydd och Beredskap’ (MSB) conducts simi-lar surveys. Their most recent report was published in January 2017 and can be ac-cessed here: https://www.msb.se/sv/Produkter--tjanster/Publikationer/Publikation-er-fran-MSB/Opinioner-2017--allmanhetens-syn-pa-samhallsskydd-beredskap-sak-erhetspolitik-och-forsvar/

Also in Norway, the ‘Folk og Forsvar’ conducts annual surveys on security and de-fence policy; their most recent report was published in August 2018. It can be accessed here: http://www.folkogforsvar.no/meningsmalinger/meningsmalin-ger-2018

The survey reports published by the ABDI are in the public domain. When referring to them, reference must be made stating that the data come from a survey con-ducted by the ABDI.

http://www.fsd.uta.fi

http://www.defmin.fi/mts

https://www.msb.se/sv/Produkter--tjanster/Publikationer/Publikationer-fran-MSB/Opinioner-2017--allmanhetens-syn-pa-samhallsskydd-beredskap-sakerhetspolitik-och-forsvar/



http://www.folkogforsvar.no/meningsmalinger/meningsmalinger-2018

http://www.folkogforsvar.no/meningsmalinger/meningsmalinger-2018

Contents

Foreword ................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 7Decrease in will to defend the nation.............................................................................................. 9Personal will to defend the nation remains strong ..................................................................... 11Support for general conscription has declined from last year .................................................. 11Current general conscription model still viewed as best for Finland’s defence system ..... 13General civic service sees an increase in popularity .................................................................... 14Women less confident in the management of foreign policy ................................................... 14Support for military non-alignment remains unchanged ......................................................... 15Increased uncertainty about Finland’s NATO membership ........................................................ 16Confidence over the future of the European Union remains unchanged ............................... 16Decrease in sense of insecurity .......................................................................................................... 17Finland’s participation in Nordic and EU defence cooperation increases the security of Finland and Finns ............................................................................................................. 18The European Union, the UN and the OSCE have positive effects on Finland’s security .... 19Decreased confidence in the management of defence policy .................................................. 20Support for export of defence materiel under current regulations ......................................... 21Finland’s defence cooperation viewed positively ......................................................................... 22Military situation in Finland’s surroundings not expected to change .................................... 22Decline in support for increased defence appropriations ......................................................... 23Climate change, international terrorism and the global refugee situation cause the greatest concern .................................................................................................................................................... 24Research Branch of ABDI in 2015–2019.......................................................................................... 26Branch-specific .................................................................................................................................... 26Chairs of the ABDI ................................................................................................................................. 26Secretariat of the ABDI ........................................................................................................................ 26

FINN`S OPINIONS ON FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY

7


Introduction

The ABDI’s opinion survey for 2018 reveals changes in the answers to many ques-tions compared to the previous year. When it comes to certain questions, the changes are quite significant. This survey does not speculate on the causes of the changes. Future surveys will reveal the direction of development of the changes that are now visible.

In this year’s survey, two thirds of respondents or 66 per cent gave a positive answer concerning the will to defend the nation. This represents a decrease of six per cent compared to the previous year. The last time the rate of positive responses fell be-low 70 per cent was 29 years ago in 1989, when 67 per cent answered the question in the affirmative.

The current general conscription system is supported by three quarters of respond-ents, or 74 per cent. Compared to last year, support has dropped by seven percent-age points. The most significant decrease in support could be seen among respond-ents aged 15–34. The last time such a result was obtained was in 2015.

For the third time now, the ABDI asked for respondents’ views on general civic ser-vice for both men and women, which could be completed as civil or military service. More than half, or 55 per cent, viewed such a model as positive, while one third had negative views and the rest had no opinion. Since 2010, views on this model have become more positive.

Three quarters of respondents, or 75 per cent, feel that defence policy is managed well. Women’s confidence in the way defence policy is being managed weakened by eight percentage points compared to last year, while men’s confidence remained unchanged.

8

ABDI BULLETINS AND REPORTS NOVEMBER 1/2018 FINN`S OPINIONS ON FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY

A total of 70 per cent have positive views on the handling of foreign policy. Wom-en’s confidence in the handling of foreign policy decreased by six per cent com-pared to last year, while men’s confidence remained unchanged.

A total of 59 per cent have negative views of Finland’s NATO membership, while the corresponding figure for last year was 62 per cent. One fifth of respondents, or 20 per cent, are in favour of Finland joining NATO; a year ago that figure was 22 per cent. One fifth, or 21 per cent, had no opinion on this question, compared to 17 per cent last year.

A new question this year concerned exports of defence materiel by Finnish compa-nies. One half of respondents, or 49 per cent, felt that the export of defence materiel should continue in line with the current practices and regulations. Nearly one third of respondents (31 per cent) and more than a third of women (39 per cent) were in favour of more stringent criteria for granting export permits.

Two thirds, or 65 per cent, feel the European Union has a positive effect on Finland’s security. The figure for the previous year was 60 per cent. Nearly the same number of respondents, or 64 per cent, feel the UN has a positive effect on Finland’s security, compared to 61 per cent last year.

The greatest cause for concern among respondents was climate change, with nine out of ten respondents now expressing concern, compared with 75 per cent last year.

9


Decrease in will to defend the nationTwo thirds of respondents, or 66 per cent (72% in 2017), feel that if Finland is at-tacked, Finns must defend themselves by military means in all situations, even if the outcome is uncertain. This view was expressed by 70 per cent (79%) of men and 62 per cent (66%) of women.

Among respondents younger than 25 years of age, 49 per cent (66% in 2017) held this view, compared with 62 per cent (66%) of 25–34-year-olds, 69 per cent (73%) of 35–40-year-olds and 72 per cent (76%) of 50–79-year-olds.

Eighty percent (73% in 2017) of Centre Party supporters answered this question in the affirmative, as did 73 per cent (82%) of Finns Party supporters, 71 per cent (68%) of SDP supporters, 65 per cent (80%) of Coalition Party supporters, 55% (67%) of Left Alliance supporters and 36 per cent (65%) of Green Party supporters.

A total of 23 per cent (22% in 2017) of respondents answered the question in the negative, or 23 per cent (25%) of women and 22 per cent (19%) of men.

Thirty-eight per cent of respondents under 25 years of age (28% in 2017) held this view, along with 28 per cent (28%) of 25–34-year-olds, 19 per cent (23%) of 35–49-year-olds and 18 per cent (17%) of 50–79-year-olds.

Forty-nine per cent of Green Party supporters answered in the negative (29% in 2017), as did 30 per cent of Left Alliance supporters (24%), 24 per cent of Coalition Party supporters (18%), 21 per cent of Finns Party and SDP supporters (15% and 25%, respectively) and 15 per cent of Centre Party supporters (24%).

A total of 11 per cent (6% in 2017), or 14 per cent (10%) of women and eight per cent (2%) of men, had no opinion. (Figures 1 and 2)

10


Figure 2A and 2B: The will to defend the nation

Yes -answers

Autumn 2003

Autumn 2004

Autumn 2005

Autumn 2006

Autumn 2007

Autumn 2008

Autumn 2009

Autumn 2010

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 201850

60

70

80

90

100

%

Whole population Women Men

Autumn 2003

Autumn 2004

Autumn 2005

Autumn 2006

Autumn 2007

Autumn 2008

Autumn 2009

Autumn 2010

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

Whole population Under 25 years 25-34 yearsYes -answers

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

%

"If Finland were attacked, should Finns, in your opinion, take up arms to defendthemselves in all situations, even if the outcome seemed uncertain?"

11


Personal will to defend the nation remains strongWhen asked ‘Would you be ready to take part in national defence duties to the best of your abilities?’ eighty-four per cent (87% in 2017) answered in the affirmative, or 89 per cent (90%) of men and 80 per cent (84%) of women.

A total of ten per cent (10% in 2017) answered in the negative, with 13 per cent (13%) of women and seven per cent (8%) of men expressing this view. Six per cent (3%) had no opinion. (Figures 3 and 4)

Support for general conscription has declined from last yearThe current system of general conscription for men enjoys support from three quar-ters or 74 per cent (81% in 2017) of respondents, or 75 per cent (80%) of women and 72 per cent (81%) of men. Eighty-four per cent (88%) of those over 50 years of age feel this way, as do 75 per cent (76%) of those between 35 and 49, 58 per cent (71%) of those between 25 and 34 and 56 per cent (77%) of respondents between 25 and 34.

Ninety-one percent (97% in 2017) of Centre Party supporters answered this question in the affirmative, along with 81 per cent (84% and 77%, respectively) of SDP and Finns Party supporters, 77 per cent (84%) of Coalition Party supporters, 55 per cent (67%) of Left Alliance supporters and 51 per cent (67%) of Green Party supporters.

When asked if they would be in favour of more selective military service, 13 per cent answered in the affirmative (9% in 2017), or 13 per cent (9%) of men and 12 per cent (9%) of women. Of those younger than 25 years of age, 21 per cent (10%) support this model, as do 20 per cent (11%) of 25–34-year-olds, 13 per cent (10%) of 35–49-year-olds and seven per cent (8%) of respondents over 50.

Increased selectiveness is supported by 28 per cent (13% n 2017) of Green Party supporters, 21 per cent (16%) of Left Alliance supporters, 15 per cent (17%) of SDP supporters, 12 per cent (8%) of Coalition Party supporters, seven per cent (7%) of Finns Party supporters and three per cent (2%) of Centre Party supporters.

Nine per cent (9% in 2017) are in favour of switching to professional armed forces, with 11 per cent (8%) of men and eight per cent (9%) of women taking this view. Support for a professional army was expressed by 17 per cent (18%) of Green Party supporters, 16 per cent (16%) of Left Alliance supporters, eleven per cent (8%) of Finns Party supporters, eight per cent (8%) of Coalition Party supporters, six per cent (0%) of Centre Party supporters and three per cent (6%) of SDP supporters. Four per cent (1% in 2017) had no opinion. (Figures 5 and 6)

12


Figure 6A and 6B: General conscription

conscription"Based on a general, compulsory military service for men, Finnish military defence providesmilitary training for as many of the same age group as possible, thus producing a large reserve personnel. Should the current system be retained or should we change over to a selectiveconscript service where only a part of the same age group receives military training? Or should we change over to a professional army?"

Retain the current system

Autumn 2003

Autumn 2004

Autumn 2005

Autumn 2006

Autumn 2007

Autumn 2008

Autumn 2009

Autumn 2010

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 201850

60

70

80

90

100

%

Whole population Women Men

Autumn 2003

Autumn 2004

Autumn 2005

Autumn 2006

Autumn 2007

Autumn 2008

Autumn 2009

Autumn 2010

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

Whole population Under 25 years 25-34 yearsRetain the current system

50

60

70

80

90

100

%

13


Current general conscription model still viewed as best for Finland’s defence systemFor the third time now, interviewees were asked what Finland’s defence system should be based on. The alternatives are as follows: 1) the present-day system where men are subject to general conscription and women can serve on a volun-tary basis; 2) general conscription for men and women alike; 3) voluntary military service for men and women and 4) fully professional armed forces.

More than half of respondents, or 59 per cent (65% in 2017), support the current conscription system, with 61 per cent (63%) of men and 57 per cent (66%) of women expressing this view. Of those over 50 years of age, 69 per cent (70%) feel this way, as do 60 per cent (65%) of respondents between 35 and 49 years of age and 45 per cent of both 25–34-year-olds and 15–24-year-olds (56% and 57%, respectively).

Of the supporters of the Centre Party, 82 per cent (87% in 2017) are in favour of the current system, along with 70 per cent (61%) of SDP supporters, 66 per cent (73%) of Coalition Party supporters, 60 per cent (68%) of Finns Party supporters 47 per cent (41%) of Green Party supporters and 34 per cent (55%) of Left Alliance supporters.

Seventeen per cent (16% in 2017) of respondents, or 18 per cent (15%) of women and 16 per cent (18%) of men, support conscription for men and women. The re-sponses to this question did not vary significantly based on age group.

Thirty-four per cent of Left Alliance supporters (17% in 2017) are in favour of con-scription for men and women, along with 16 per cent (28%) of Green Party support-ers, 15 per cent (16%) of Coalition Party supporters, 12 per cent of Centre Party and Finns Party supporters (8% and 14%, respectively) and 11 per cent (15%) of SDP supporters.

Thirteen per cent (11% in 2017) of the respondents feel the best model would be voluntary conscription for men and women alike, with 14 per cent (11%) of women and 12 per cent (10%) of men sharing this opinion.

This view was expressed by twenty-one per cent of the Finns Party and Left Alliance supporters (22% and 12%, respectively), 16 per cent (17%) of SDP supporters, 15 per cent (5%) of Finns Party supporters, nine per cent (6%) of Coalition Party sup-porters and one per cent (2%) of Centre Party supporters.

14


Eight per cent are in favour of professional armed forces (7% in 2017), or 10 per cent (8%) of men and six per cent (7%) of women.

Three per cent of respondents (1% in 2017) had no opinion, or four per cent (1%) of women and one per cent (1%) of men. (Figure 7)

General civic service sees an increase in popularityIn 2008, 2010 and 2018, the ABDI asked the following question: “How would you feel if Finland switched to general civic service for men and women that could be com-pleted as either civil or military service?”

More than half of respondents, or 55 per cent (45% in 2010), have favourable views of general civic service, with 56 per cent (45%) of men and 53 per cent (44%) of women answering in the affirmative.

Sixty-four per cent of Finns Party and Green Party supporters (48% and 48%) view this idea favourably, along with 58 per cent (41%) of Left Alliance supporters, 55 per cent (48%) of SDP supporters and 52 per cent of Centre Party and Coalition Party supporters (39% and 41%, respectively).

One third of respondents, or 32 per cent (52% in 2010), have negative views on this model; the figure was the same for men (51%) and women (53%).

A total of 37 per cent (58%) of Coalition Party supporters expressed negative views, along with 36 per cent (59%) of Left Alliance supporters, 35 per cent (56%) of Centre Party supporters, 33 per cent (49%) of Finns Party supporters, 31 per cent (48%) of SDP supporters and 30 per cent (51%) of Green Party supporters.

Thirteen percent (3% in 2010), or 14 per cent (3%) of women and 12% (3%) of men, had no opinion. (Figure 8)

Women less confident in the management of foreign policySeventy per cent of the respondents (73% in 2017) think that Finnish foreign policy is managed well, with 75 per cent (73%) of men and 66 per cent (72%) of women taking this view.

15


Of the supporters of the Coalition Party, 83 per cent (87%) think that Finnish for-eign policy is managed well, as do 82 per cent (91%) of Centre Party supporters, 81 per cent (75%) of SDP supporters, 67 per cent (82%) of Green Party supporters, 59% (50%) of Finns Party supporters and 51 per cent (71%) of Left Alliance supporters.

A total of 21 per cent (20% in 2017) feel that Finland’s defence policy is poorly man-aged; 21 per cent (18%) of women and 20 per cent (22%) of men. This view is shared by 35 per cent of Finns Party and Left Alliance supporters (42% and 28%, respec-tively), 18 per cent (3%) of Centre Party supporters, 17 per cent (8%) of Green Party supporters, 17 per cent (23%) of SDP supporters and 11 per cent (11%) of Coalition supporters.

A total of nine per cent (7% in 2017), or 13 per cent (10%) of women and eight per cent (4%) of men, had no opinion. (Figures 9 and 10)

Support for military non-alignment remains unchangedMore than half of the respondents, or 58 per cent (58 % in 2017), support Finland’s military non-alignment, with this view expressed by 63 per cent (59%) of men and 54 per cent (58%) of women.

Among respondents older than 35 years of age, 63 per cent (60% in 2017) support military non-alignment, as do 53 per cent (60%) of 25–34-year-olds and 42 per cent (49%) of persons under 25 years old.

Seventy-one per cent (69%) of SDP supporters support military non-alignment, along with 69 per cent (69%) of Centre Party supporters, 67 per cent (68%) of Left Alliance supporters, 54 per cent (70%) of Finns Party supporters, 50 per cent (37%) of Coalition Party supporters and 41 per cent (52%) of Green Party supporters.

One quarter of respondents, or 25% (29% in 2015), support Finland’s military non-alignment, with 27 per cent (32%) of men and 22 per cent (27%) of women tak-ing this view.

This view is shared by 36 per cent (35% in 2017) of respondents under 25 years of age, 24 per cent (25%) of 25–34-year-olds, 23 per cent (29%) of 35–49-year olds and 22 per cent (29%) of respondents over 50 years of age.

16


Thirty-eight per cent (31%) of Green Party supporters support military non-align-ment, as do 35 per cent (52%) of Coalition Party supporters, 25 per cent (24%) of Finns Party supporters, 24 per cent (19%) of Centre Party supporters, 18 per cent (26%) of SDP supporters and 16 per cent (29%) of Left Alliance supporters.

A total of 17 per cent (12% in 2017), or 24 per cent (16%) of women and ten per cent (9%) of men, had no opinion. (Figures 11 and 12)

Increased uncertainty about Finland’s NATO membershipWhen asked if Finland should seek NATO membership, 59 per cent (62% in 2017) answered in the negative, with 62 per cent (63%) of men and 56 per cent (61%) of women expressing this view.

Seventy-eight per cent (81% in 2017) of Left Alliance supporters answered in the negative, as did 73 per cent (70%) of Centre Party supporters, 65 per cent (73%) of SDP supporters, 61 per cent (72%) of Finns Party supporters, 48 per cent (49%) of Green Party supporters and 43 per cent (41%) of Coalition Party supporters.

One fifth of respondents, or 20 per cent (22% in 2017) feel that Finland should seek NATO membership, with 25 per cent (26%) of men and 16 per cent (18%) of women responding in the affirmative.

Of the Coalition Party supporters, 37 per cent (44% in 2017) support membership in NATO, as do 23 per cent (15% and 26%, respectively) of SDP and Green Party supporters, 19 per cent (10%) of Finns Party supporters, 17 per cent (20%) of Centre Party supporters and six per cent (16%) of Left Alliance supporters.

One fifth of respondents, or 21 per cent (17% in 2017) had no opinion, with 28 per cent (22%) of women and 13 per cent (12%) of men taking this view. (Figures 13 and 14)

Confidence over the future of the European Union remains unchangedThe ABDI asked interviewees about their confidence in the future of the Euro-pean Union in its 2005, 2016, 2017 and 2018 surveys. This year, more than half of respondents, or 58 per cent (58% in 2017), indicated that their support for the

17


European Union had remained unchanged, with 60 per cent (58%) of women and 57 per cent (58%) of men expressing this view.

This opinion was shared by 69 per cent (61% in 2017) of Green Party supporters, 66 per cent (58%) of SDP supporters, 65 per cent (62%) of Centre Party supporters, 62 per cent (58%) of Coalition Party supporters, 48 per cent (62%) of Left Alliance sup-porters and 37 per cent (45%) of Finns Party supporters.

One third, or 34 per cent (37% in 2017) of respondents feel that their confidence in the future of the European Union has weakened, with 36 per cent (38%) of men and 33 per cent (37%) of women expressing this opinion. This view is shared by 53 per cent (53%) of Finns Party supporters, 44 per cent (37%) of Left Alliance supporters, 32 per cent of Centre Party and Coalition Party supporters (38% and 33%, respec-tively), 29 per cent (34%) of SDP supporters and 25 per cent (33%) of Green Party supporters.

Four percent (3% in 2017) feel their confidence in the future of the European Union has strengthened, with five per cent (4%) of men and three per cent (2%) of women taking this view.

Three per cent (1% in 2017), or four per cent (2%) of women and two per cent (1%) of men, had no opinion. (Figure 15)

Decrease in sense of insecurityAround half of respondents, or 49 per cent (60% in 2017), believe that Finland and Finns will be living in a more insecure world over the next five years when com-pared to today. This view was held by 56 per cent (68%) of women and 42 per cent (52%) of men.

Some differences could be seen between different age groups, with middle-aged and older respondents viewing the future as somewhat less secure than younger ones. A total of 54 per cent (58%) of respondents between 35 and 49 years of age view the future as insecure, as do 52 per cent (61%) of respondents aged 50–79 years, while 48 per cent (63%) of respondents aged 25–34 years and 33 per cent (56%) of those younger than 25 expressed this view.

18


Just under one fifth of respondents, or 18 per cent (14% in 2017) view the future as more secure, with 20 per cent (18%) of men and 15 per cent (10%) of women ex-pressing this view. This view is shared by 26 per cent (16%) of respondents under 25 years of age, 19 per cent (22%) of 25–24-year-olds, 17 per cent (10%) of 50-79-year olds and 12 per cent (16%) of 35-49-year olds

Just under one third of respondents, or 31 per cent (25% in 2017) saw no difference compared to the present, with 35 per cent of men (29%) and 27 per cent of women (20%) giving this response. (Figures 16 and 17)

Finland’s participation in Nordic and EU defence cooperation increases the security of Finland and FinnsStarting from 2004, the ABDI has asked a question listing 15 different factors for the respondents to assess based on whether they believe that they improve or weaken the security of Finland and the Finnish people or have no effect at all.

Factors that are believed to improve security are the following: Finland’s participation in Nordic defence cooperation; 81 per cent of respondents (83% in 2017) felt it increased security, one per cent (1%) said it decreased security and 12 per cent (13%) said it had no effect.

Finland’s participation in organising the European Union’s defence cooperation; 72 per cent (70%) said it increased security, four per cent (6%) said it decreased secu-rity and 17 per cent (20%) said it had no impact.

Finland’s membership in the European union; 62 per cent (62%) felt it increased security, nine per cent (11%) said it decreased security and 25 per cent (25%) said it had no effect.

Finland’s increasing international economic interaction; 59 per cent (52%) said it had a positive effect on security, six per cent (6%) felt the effect was negative and 29 per cent (37%) felt it had no impact at all.

Finland’s participation in international crisis management duties; 50 per cent (51%) felt it increased security, 10 per cent (9%) felt it decreased security and 34 per cent (36%) felt it had no effect.

19


Finland’s military non-alignment; 46 per cent (46%) felt it had a positive impact, 17 per cent felt (16%) felt the impact was negative and 25 per cent (30%) felt it had no impact.

Finland’s possible NATO membership; 25 per cent (29%) said would increase secu-rity, 40 per cent (42%) felt it would decrease security and 19 per cent (17%) felt it would have no effect on security.

Increasing share of foreign ownership in the Finnish economy; eight per cent (8%) felt it increased security; 62 per cent (49%) felt it had a decreasing effect and 22 (37%) felt it had no impact. (Figures 18, 19, 20 and 21)

The European Union, the UN and the OSCE have positive effects on Finland’s securityInterviewees were asked to assess the effects of the EU, the OSCE, China, NATO, Rus-sia, the United States and the UN on Finland’s security. The question was asked for the seventh time this year, and for the first time, respondents felt that the European Union had a more positive impact on Finland’s security than the UN. Respondents’ views on the impact of both the EU and the UN have become more positive since last year.

When asked if the European Union had a positive effect on Finland’s security, 65 per cent (60% in 2017) agreed with the statement, while 14 per cent (16%) felt it did not impact security at all and 12 per cent (13%) felt the impact was both positive and negative. Five per cent (3%) viewed the European Union’s impact as negative.

When asked about the effects of the United Nations (UN) on Finland’s security, 64 per cent (61% in 2017) said they were positive. One fifth of respondents, or 19 per cent (23%), felt the UN had no impact on Finland’s security, while eight per cent (9%) felt the impact was both positive and negative, and one per cent (3%) viewed it as negative.

When asked about the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe OSCE, 47 per cent (44% in 2017) felt it had a positive impact on Finland’s security, while one fifth or 21 per cent (26%) did not see any impact and 20 per cent (11%) felt its impact was both positive and negative.

20


Regarding the effects of NATO on Finland’s security, 26 per cent (25% in 2017) felt they were negative, 26 per cent (30%) viewed them as both positive and negative and 24 per cent (24%) felt they were positive. A total of 13 per cent (13% in 2016) felt NATO had no impact on Finland’s security.

When asked about the impact of the United States on Finland’s security, 32 per cent of respondents (35% in 2017) felt it was both positive and negative, 27 per cent (22%) viewed it as negative, 18 per cent (16%) viewed it as positive and 14 per cent (21%) did not feel the United States had any impact on Finland’s security.

Concerning the impact of Russia, 39 per cent of respondents (37% in 2017) viewed it as negative, 30 per cent (31%) felt it was both positive and negative, 13 per cent (14%) viewed it as positive and 11 per cent (13%) felt Russia had no impact on Fin-land’s security.

Just over one third of respondents, or 35 per cent (44% in 2017), felt that China had no impact on the security of Finland, while 21 per cent (22%) viewed its impact as both positive and negative. Sixteen per cent (11%) felt China had a negative impact and 12 per cent (13%) felt its impact was positive. (Figures 22 and 23)

Decreased confidence in the management of defence policy Three quarters of respondents, or 75 per cent (79% in 2017), feel Finland’s defence policy is managed well, with 78 per cent (79%) of men and 73 per cent (81%) of women taking this view. Eighty-one per cent (74%) of those between 35 and 49 years of age feel this way, as do 79 per cent (86%) of those over 50 years of age, 67 per cent (74%) of those between 25 and 34 and 65 per cent (78%) of respondents younger than 25.

Of the supporters of the Centre Party, 93 per cent (87% in 2017) feel Finland’s de-fence policy is well managed, along with 85 per cent of Coalition Party and SDP supporters (90% and 79%, respectively), 67 per cent (83%) of Green Party support-ers, 61 per cent (76%) of Finns Party supporters and 50 per cent (76%) of Left Alli-ance supporters.

21


Fourteen per cent (13% in 2017) of respondents feel Finland’s defence policy is poorly managed, with 16 per cent (16%) of men and 11 per cent (10%) of women expressing this view.

This view was shared by 28 per cent (21% in 2017) of Left Alliance supporters, 27 per cent (21%) of Finns Party supporters, 11 per cent (8%) of Green Party support-ers, 10 per cent (17%) of SDP supporters, seven per cent (9%) of Coalition Party sup-porters and three per cent (6%) of Centre Party supporters.

A total of 11 per cent (7% in 2017), or 16 per cent (9%) of women and ten per cent (5%) of men, had no opinion. (Figures 24 and 25)

Support for export of defence materiel under current regulationsThis year’s survey included a new question about the export of defence materiel manufactured by Finnish companies.

Half of respondents, or 49 per cent, felt that the export of defence materiel should continue in line with the current practices and regulations, with 59 per cent of men and 38 per cent of women taking this view.

This was the opinion of 62 per cent of Centre Party supporters, 58 per cent of Finns Party supporters, 57 per cent of SDP supporters, 55 per cent of Coalition Party sup-porters, 46 per cent of Green Party supporters and 19 per cent of Left Alliance sup-porters.

Slightly less than one third, or 31 per cent, feel that the criteria for granting export licences should be stricter, with 39 per cent of women and 23 per cent of men tak-ing this view.

Forty-eight per cent of Green Party supporters, 40 per cent of Left Alliance support-ers, 30 per cent of Centre Party supporters, 28 per cent of SDP supporters, 26 per cent of Coalition Party supporters and 13 per cent of Finns Party supporters were in favour of stricter criteria.

Five per cent of respondents, or eight per cent of men and three per cent of women, felt that all companies should be permitted to export defence materiel. This view

22


was shared by 18 per cent of Finns Party supporters, 10 per cent of Coalition Party supporters, eight per cent of Left Alliance supporters, two per cent of Centre Party supporters and one per cent of both SDP and Green party supporters.

Six per cent of respondents felt that the export of defence materiel should be pro-hibited altogether, with seven per cent of women and four per cent of men express-ing this view. This opinion was shared by 21 per cent of Left Alliance supporters, nine per cent of SDP supporters, seven per cent of Finns party supporters, two per cent of Coalition Party supporters and one per cent of Centre Party supporters. No Green Party supporters were in favour of prohibiting all defence materiel exports.

Nine per cent of respondents, or 14 per cent of women and five per cent of men, had no opinion. (Figures 26 and 27)

Finland’s defence cooperation viewed positivelyNinety-five per cent of respondents (94% in 2017) have a positive view on military cooperation with all Nordic countries. Ninety-four per cent (94%) have a positive view on cooperation with Sweden.

Nine out of ten respondents, or 90 per cent, have a positive view of Finland’s mili-tary cooperation with the European Union (89% in 2017).

Fifty-five percent (61%) of respondents take a positive view on military cooperation with NATO, while 35 per cent (32%) have a negative view.

The same number, fifty-five per cent (59%) of respondents, take a positive view on military cooperation with the United States, while 36 per cent (35%) view it nega-tively. (Figures 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32)

Military situation in Finland’s surroundings not expected to changeThe last time the ABDI asked interviewees about the military situation Finland’s surroundings over the next ten years was in the 2016 survey. Now the question was asked for the seventh time.

23


Nearly half of respondents, or 48 per cent, feel that the military situation in Finland’s surroundings over the next ten year will remain about the same as it is now (48% in 2016), with 52 per cent of men (54%) and 45 per cent (43%) of women taking this view.

This opinion was shared by 59 per cent of SDP supporters (50% in 2016), 54 per cent of Coalition Party supporters (50%), 53 per cent of Finns Party supporters (40%), 48 per cent of Green Party supporters (53%), 47 per cent of Centre Party supporters (47%) and 37 per cent of Left Alliance supporters (56%).

Forty-one per cent of respondents (44% in 2016), or 47 per cent (49%) of women and 35 per cent (40%) of men, felt the situation would become more threatening over the next ten years. This view was expressed by 52 per cent of Left Alliance sup-porters (31% in 2016), 44 per cent of Centre Party supporters (47%), 41 per cent of Coalition Party supporters, 40 per cent of Green Party supporters (42%), 37 per cent of Finns Party supporters (51%) and 33 per cent of SDP supporters (49%).

Six per cent of respondents (5% in 2016) felt that the military situation in Finland’s surroundings would become less threatening over the next ten years, with nine per cent of men (5%) and four per cent of women (5%) expressing this view.

Ten per cent of Finns Party supporters felt this way (8% in 2017, along with eight per cent of Centre Party and Left Alliance supporters (5% and 11%, respectively), six per cent of Green Party supporters (2%), five per cent of SDP supporters (1%) and two per cent of Coalition Party supporters (3%).

Four per cent (2% in 2016) had no opinion, with the same figure obtained for both women and men. (Figures 34 and 35)

Decline in support for increased defence appropriations Forty percent (47% in 2017) of the respondents support increasing defence appro-priations, with 48 per cent of men (51%) and 34 per cent of women (44%) express-ing this opinion.

Sixty-one per cent (55% in 2017) of Finns Party are in favour of increasing appropri-ations, as are 49 per cent (60%) of Coalition Party supporters, 45 per cent (60%) of

24


Centre Party supporters, 41 per cent (41%) of SDP supporters, 28 per cent (32%) of Green Party supporters and 20 per cent (28%) of Left Alliance supporters.

Forty per cent (40% in 2017) are in favour of keeping defence appropriations at the current level, or 46 per cent (41%) of women and 34 per cent (38%) of men.

This view was held by 53 per cent of Centre Party supporters (37% in 2017), 47 per cent (42%) of SDP supporters, 45 per cent (48%) of Green Party supporters, 37 per cent (34%) of Coalition Party supporters, 35 (53%) of Left Alliance supporters and 21 per cent (35%) of Finns Party supporters.

A total of 12 per cent (8% in 2017) would decrease the amount of defence appropri-ations, with 15 per cent (9%) of men and nine per cent (7%) of women expressing this view.

Thirty-three per cent of Left Alliance supporters (17% in 2017) are in favour of de-creasing the amount, along with 22 per cent (13%) of Green Party supporters, 10 per cent of Coalition Party and Finns Party supporters (5% and 6%, respectively), six per cent of SDP supporters (13%) and two per cent (3%) of Centre Party supporters.

A total of seven per cent (5% in 2017) of respondents, or 10 per cent (8%) of women and four per cent (3%) of men, had no opinion. (Figures 36 and 37)

Climate change, international terrorism and the global refugee situation cause the greatest concernThe ABDI has been asking interviewees about factors causing concern since 2004. The list has varied somewhat, but some of the factors have remained the same every year. A new factor added to this year’s survey was fake news reporting di-rected at Finland. The list consisted of 15 different phenomena or factors. In sum, it can be stated that respondents’ concerns about nearly all of the factors have increased since the 2017 survey. The strongest increase in concern could be seen when interviewees were asked about cyber threats (+16%), climate change (+14%) and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (+14%).

25


Factors causing much or some concern:

− Climate change (global warming) 89 per cent (75% in 2017) − International terrorism 88 per cent (81% in 2017) − The global refugee situation 87 per cent (83% in 2017) − Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction 82 per cent

(68% in 2017) − Political extremist movements 82 per cent (72% in 2017) − Threats against information networks (cyber threats) 79 per

cent (63% in 2017) − Racism 78 per cent (69% in 2017) − The situation in the Middle East 77 per cent (the situation in

Syria in 2017 64%) − Social inequality in Finland 76 per cent (67% in 2016) − The security situation in the Baltic Sea area 76 per cent (64%

in 2017) − Developments in the United States 72 per cent (63% in 2017) − Developments in Russia 71 per cent (63% in 2017) − The employment situation in Finland 71% (71% in 2017) − State-sponsored fake news reporting directed at Finland 62

per cent (new item in this year’s survey) − Development in the European Union 52% (52% in 2017)

(Figures 38, 39, 40, 41 and 42)

26


Research Branch of ABDI in 2015–2019Chair Harriet Lonka, PhD

Deputy Chair Unto Vesa, Researcher Emeritus

Members Soili Haverinen, Doctoral Student of Theology

Anna Jungner-Nordgren, Public Relations Secretary

Johanna Kelhu, Parliamentary Secretary, MSocSc

Sari Rautio, Director of Unit as of 24 June 2018

Lieutenant Colonel Niclas von Bonsdorff, Director, Public Relations and International Affairs as of 6 September 2018

Antti Koskela, Expert in Economic Affairs

Esko Kurvinen, CEO

Anni Lahtinen, Secretary General

Juha Mäenpää, Vocational Special Needs Teacher

Timo Perälä, Senior Inspector

Jussi Salonranta, Analyst

Jenna Simula, Parliamentary Assistant, BBA

Heli Viiri, Doctor of Agriculture and Forestry, Special Researcher

Branch-specificExperts Teija Mankkinen, DSocSc, Head of Research and Development

Teemu Tallberg, PhD, Professor of Military Sociology

Chairs of the ABDI Chair Sofia Vikman, MP

Deputy Chair Petteri Leino, Special Adviser to the Minister of Defence

Deputy Chair Markku Pakkanen, MP

Secretariat of the ABDI Heli Santala, Secretary General

Markus Kinkku, Assistant Secretary General

27


Figure 1. The will to defend the nation

"If Finland were attacked, should Finns, in your opinion, take up arms to defend themselves in all situations, even if the outcome seemed uncertain?"

Other partiesLeft Alliance

Green LeagueSocial Democratic P.

Coalition PartyThe Finns

Centre Party

East Finland/Oulu/LaplandWest Finland

South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €

Salaried emp./Self-emp./Management

Working class

UniversityPost-secondary

Lower education

50-79 years35-49 years25-34 years

Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Yes Cannot say No

66

6270

49626972

706462

7461

626468

666369

80736571365576

11

148

12111211

101113

913

131511

101212

66

118

15157

23

2322

38281918

202525

1726

252122

232419

15212421493017

28


Figure 2. The will to defend the nation

"If Finland were attacked, should Finns, in your opinion, take up arms to defend themselves in all situations, even if the outcome seemed uncertain?"

In the year 1970In the year 1971In the year 1982In the year 1986In the year 1987In the year 1988In the year 1989In the year 1990

April 1991October 1991

In the year 1992In the year 1993In the year 1994

Autumn 1995Autumn 1996Autumn 1997

July 1998October 1998

June 1999November 1999December 2000

Autumn 2001Autumn 2002Autumn 2003Autumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

667271787671767674747277777780737879817575777676798077757770757467617368674342

116855456646435266547756455767577

1311688

127

232221161925191820222219201718221716141818181820151517191625191920282124254551

Yes Cannot say No

29


Figure 3. The will to defend the country (personal level)




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

84

8089

75868885

828487

8889

757692

838586

92869183848087

6

75

13863

648

64

1092

666

1025

1277

10

137

1266

12

12125

67

15165

1188

7147

134

136

"If Finland is attacked, would you personally be ready to take part in national defence tasks according to your competences and skills?"

Yes Cannot say No

30


Figure 4. The will to defend the country (personal level)

November 1995

In the year 1996

In the year 1997

October 1998

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Yes Cannot say No

84

87

87

84

85

87

85

84

82

86

6

3

3

3

3

3

5

4

3

5

10

10

11

12

12

10

10

12

14

9


31


Figure 5. General conscription




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Retain thecurrent system

Reduce selectivelythe number of those

Cannotsay

Abolish generalconscription and

74

7572

56587584

787269

7271

717573

727675

91817781515581

13

1213

2120137

91516

1415

139

15

131212

37

1215282117

4

54

4653

436

34

733

427

0132471

9

811

191585

91010

1010

9129

1196

61183

17162

"Based on a general, compulsory military service for men, Finnish military defence providesmilitary training for as many of the same age group as possible, thus producing a large reservepersonnel. Should the current system be retained or should we change over to a selective conscript service where only a part of the same age group receives military training? Or should we change over to a professional army?"

professional armyreceiving military trainingchange over to a

32


Figure 6. General conscription

Spring 2001Autumn 2001Autumn 2002Autumn 2003Autumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

74817975756872636372747371787779807976

139

11131120172627161517191315119

1313

4112212211111102213

999

101211999

111099878877

"Based on a general, compulsory military service for men, Finnish military defence providesmilitary training for as many of the same age group as possible, thus producing a largereserve personnel. Should the current system be retained or should we change over to a selective conscript service where only a part of the same age group receives military training? Or should we change over to a professional army?"

Retain thecurrent system

Reduce selectivelythe number of those

Cannotsay

Abolish generalconscription and

professional armyreceiving military trainingchange over to a

33


Figure 7. Finland's defence system

"In your view, should Finland's defence system be based on... "




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

59

5761

45456069

645257

5855

566059

556166

82606670473452

17

1816

17191617

171816

1919

181519

172111

12121511163434

13

1412

2124145

81815

1415

151712

167

13

1159

16212112

8

610

151285

889

711

769

1094

5692

1392

3

41

2124

332

21

521

225

0721321

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

The current system withgeneral conscription formen and voluntarymilitary service for women

The current system withgeneral conscription formen and voluntarymilitary service for women

General conscriptionfor both menand women

Voluntary militaryservice for bothmen and women

A professionalarmy

Cannotsay

59

65

69

17

16

11

13

11

14

8

7

6

3

1

1

General conscriptionfor both menand women

Voluntary militaryservice for bothmen and women

A professionalarmy

Cannotsay

34


Figure 8. General civic service

"Finland is instituting a general civic service for both men and women. The civic service could be completed as military or non-military service"


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Positive Cannot say Negative

554542




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Positive Cannot say Negative

55

5356

61535354

545754

5852

545555

634943

52645255645860

13

1412

139

1315

17119

1110

139

11

101321

133

111466

12

32

3232

26383331

283237

3037

333634

273836

35333731303628

1338

325251

35


Figure 9. The conduct of Finnish foreign policy




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Extremelywell

Fairlywell

Cannotsay

Fairlypoorly

Extremelypoorly

9

612

45

1111

9118

410

1249

9107

181014619

28

61

6063

62545965

566368

5764

536865

605867

63496975664257

9

134

181195

1158

114

1186

89

10

2652

16141

17

2013

16261813

171815

2319

201715

191513

16311017162413

4

17

1446

741

63

425

473

24101

111

"In your opinion, how well or how poorly has Finnish foreign policy been conducted inrecent years?"

36


Figure 10. The conduct of Finnish foreign policy

"In your opinion, how well or how poorly has Finnish foreign policy beenconducted in recent years?"

In the year 1964In the year 1969In the year 1970In the year 1971In the year 1972In the year 1973In the year 1974In the year 1975In the year 1978In the year 1979In the year 1980In the year 1981In the year 1982In the year 1983In the year 1984

January 1986November 1986In the year 1987In the year 1988In the year 1989

May 1990December 1990

In the year 1991In the year 1992In the year 1993In the year 1994

June 1995November 1995In the year 1996In the year 1997

October 1998June 1999

November 1999July 2000

December 2000Spring 2001

Autumn 2001Autumn 2002Autumn 2003Autumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Well Cannot say Poorly

707370637073757680817984818284867987898189858877727173877873736279677585909193959493938786848585878696958790

976554555453542463462547686146456977643343368

1067772155

2120243225232119151616131413141114107

139

109

1621202213182124331423188554425476698672485

37


Figure 11. Military alignment or non-alignment

November 1995

In the year 1996

In the year 1997

October 1998

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Yes Cannot say No

84

87

87

84

85

87

85

84

82

86

6

3

3

3

3

3

5

4

3

5

10

10

11

12

12

10

10

12

14

9


"In your opinion, should Finland remain militarily non-aligned or shouldFinland aim to ally itself militarily?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Remainnon-aligned

Cannotsay

58

5463

42536363

615955

5960

546061

566160

69545071416765

17

2410

22231415

171419

1613

211815

161916

7211511211822

25

2227

36242322

222626

2526

252224

282023

24253518381613

38


Figure 12. Military alignment or non-alignment

Aim toally itself

"In your opinion, should Finland remain militarily non-aligned or should Finland aim to ally itself militarily?"

In the year 1996In the year 1997


June 1999November 1999

July 2000December 2000

Spring 2001Autumn 2001Autumn 2002Autumn 2003Autumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

%

585857545867686967615869675861657079686671687460646769

17121212887

1068

113795

1185

1098

118

11108

11

252931333425252127313127263234242216212520211829272520

Remainnon-aligned

Cannotsay

39


Figure 13. Nato membership

"In your opinion, should Finland seek membership in Nato?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Yes Cannot say No

20

1625

31141920

212119

1922

181521

241717

17193723236

22

21

2813

27211820

192223

2115

242616

192223

11202012291616

59

5662

42656360

615758

6063

585863

576160

73614365487862

40


Figure 14. Nato membership

"In your opinion, should Finland seek membership in Nato?"

Autumn 2005

Autumn 2006

Autumn 2007

Autumn 2008

Autumn 2009

Autumn 2010

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Yes Cannot say No

20

22

25

27

30

21

18

20

25

28

28

26

26

28

21

17

14

15

10

10

10

10

7

10

12

5

10

9

59

62

61

58

60

70

71

70

68

62

60

69

65

63

41


Figure 15. Confidence in the future of the European Union

"What kind of con�dence do you have in the future of the European Union? In the last two years,has your con�dence been strengthened, weakened or has it remained the same?"

4

3

2

8Autumn 2005

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Strengthened Remainedthe same

Cannotsay Weakened

3

1

2

1

58

58

45

53

34

37

52

39




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Strengthened Remainedthe same

Cannotsay Weakened

4

35

3725

444

25

733

632

136466

11

58

6057

72546453

566260

5458

535560

565962

65376266694847

3

42

3214

521

21

631

333

1702114

34

3336

22383338

343335

4237

343836

353532

32533229254438

42


Figure 16. A more secure or more insecure future

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

SaferNo di�erenceto the present

Cannotsay Less safe

18

1520

26191217

201416

1414

231515

201813

13102016191927

31

2735

39323028

293232

3231

283132

263337

35273536312020

2

23

2133

331

23

232

312

2401331

49

5642

33485452

475151

5352

475151

514847

50594547475852

"Considering the present world situation as a whole, do you believe that during the next�ve years Finland and Finns will live in a safer or in a less safe world comparedto the present?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

43


Figure 17. A more secure or more insecure future

"Considering the present world situation as a whole, do you believe that during the next�ve years Finland and Finns will live in a safer or in a less safe world comparedto the present?"

SaferNo di�erenceto the present

Cannotsay Less safe

May 1990October 1990


April 1992November 1992

April 1993November 1993


June 1995November 1995

Autumn 1996Autumn 1997

In the year 1998In the year 1999In the year 2000

Spring 2001Autumn 2002Autumn 2003Autumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

1814131014202017272818242029173022263719262822221523181618151828291825

3125272328363340303031293123402625242736473031264327213122282216222530

21111111112122123322224425577565457

4960596556434642414049464746424251463342253943483944574653525451455238

44


Figure 18. Factors affecting security

"How do you assess the following phenomena and factors?How do they a�ect the security of Finland and Finns?"

Increase of foreign ownershipin Finland's economy

Finland’s possible membership in Nato

Finland’s military non-alignment

The participation of Finnish troops incrisis-management tasks

Finland’s economic cooperationincreases internationally

Finland’s membership in the EU

Finland participates in the commondefence of the EU

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Increasessecurity

Has noe�ect

Cannotsay

Lessenssecurity

81

72

62

59

50

46

25

8

12

17

25

29

34

25

19

22

5

6

4

6

7

12

16

8

1

4

9

6

10

17

40

62

Finland's participation in Nordicdefence cooperation


Figure 19. Factors affecting security (I)

Autumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

Finland’s membership in the EUAutumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

Finland participates in the common defence of the EU

Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

Finland's participation in Nordic defence cooperation

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Increasessecurity

Has noe�ect

Cannotsay

Lessenssecurity

81837974757466

727062566153495269616469555954

626254505447455371586360495652

12131619202127

172024262531323122232322282130

252533353742413422342933353336

5344333

657645554663443

422322222331221

1124224

468

12101114124

1076

131613

911111179

12105566

139

11

"How do you assess the following phenomena and factors? How do they a�ect the security of Finland and Finns?"

46


Figure 20. Factors affecting security (II)



Finland’s military non-alignmentAutumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

The participation of Finnish troops in crisis-management tasks*Autumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

Finland’s economic cooperation increases internationally

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Increasessecurity

Has noe�ect

Cannotsay

Lessenssecurity

595248454539363952404948433837

505146404135161722212325262420

464645384235384141384245424340

293739404046484037453741424447

343640414449534640424645483946

253030343145393433353034383643

655565655674464

734443456574352

1297665786674563

66799

1010166977

111213

109

10141113273132332426243232

171618232215171720212217151515

*) 2004-2012 The participation of Finnish troops in crisis-management tasks in war zones

47


Figure 21. Factors affecting security (III)


Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

Increase of foreign ownership in Finland's economy


Finland’s possible membership in Nato

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Increasessecurity

Has noe�ect

Cannotsay

Lessenssecurity

252932353732242835343437313637

8877758958

1411

191721182031312932272323302724

223745423438363735333841

161212111068

1078

105864

867554555635

404236363330373327323335313134

624941465453514956534543

48


Figure 22. The impact of various factors on Finland's security

"How do you assess the impact of the following factors on Finland's security?"

China

Russia

USA

Nato

OSCE

The UN

The EU

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Positivee�ect

Noe�ect

Cannotsay

Negativee�ect

Both positiveand negativee�ects

65

64

47

24

18

13

12

14

19

21

13

14

11

35

5

8

22

12

8

7

15

5

1

0

26

27

39

16

12

8

10

26

32

30

21

49


Figure 23. The impact of various factors on Finland's security

"How do you assess the impact of the following factors on Finland's security?"

Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

ChinaAutumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

RussiaAutumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

USAAutumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

NatoAutumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

OSCEAutumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

The UNAutumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010

2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

The EU

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

65605857696059

64616164777072

47443846555046

24242621282323

18162114257

11

131469

164

11

121387

1069

14162115131315

19232722151820

21263325242429

13131926211622

14212633323533

11131520191819

35445554545150

5332221

8542221

22181711101010

12875663

8553433

7554532

1510106875

5757465

1311111

0122232

26252521223228

27221917112223

39375028274034

16111011111414

12131319122020

897

11597

10111116101314

26302428222223

32352833283331

30312440333534

21221722182223

Positivee�ect

Noe�ect

Cannotsay

Negativee�ect

Both positiveand negativee�ects

50


Figure 24. The conduct of defence policy in Finland

"In your opinion, how well or how poorly has Finland’s defence policy been conducted in recent years?"

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Extremelywell

Fairlywell

Cannotsay

Fairlypoorly

Extremelypoorly

7

68

624

11

885

55

556

857

108

104206

68

6770

59657768

676671

6373

657472

696868

83537581655087

11

166

221688

111013

118

128

10

101410

41184

22222

12

1013

12161011

111411

1812

161211

111014

3266

1010215

2

13

1113

320

32

201

131

0110170Other parties

Left AllianceGreen League

Social Democratic P.Coalition Party

The FinnsCentre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

51


Figure 25. The conduct of defence policy in Finland

"In your opinion, how well or how poorly has Finland’s defence policy beenconducted in recent years?"

Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

710764457

1010788

14

6869726865656874667573757563

117655657545244

1212141923221911181013141017

21222230111122

Extremelywell

Fairlywell

Cannotsay

Fairlypoorly

Extremelypoorly

52


Figure 26. Export of defence material

Cannot say

Export of defence materialshould be permitted anywhere

Export of defence materialshould be entirely banned

Criteria for granting exportlicences should be tightened

Export of defence material shouldtake place in accordance with the

current practice and regulations

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

49

31

6

5

9

"Which of the following alternatives re�ects best your view on the exports ofdefence material by Finnish companies?"

53


Figure 27. Export of defence material

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Export of defencematerial should bepermitted anywhere

Export of defence material should take place in accordance with the current practice

Criteria for grantingexport licencesshould be tightened

Export of defencematerial should beentirely banned

5

38

8593

646

49

327

662

21810118

16

49

3859

54444949

525143

5347

484948

474753

62585557461941

9

145

1116106

1278

95

9116

87

14

55755

117

31

3923

25273035

223540

2836

333433

333227

30132628484035

6

74

2827

933

54

645

584

17290

211

"Which of the following alternatives re�ects best your view on the exports of defence material by Finnish companies?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

and regulations

Cannotsay

54


Figure 28. Military cooperation


With the United StatesAutumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

With NatoAutumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

In the European UnionAutumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

With SwedenAutumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

With all Nordic countries

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Verypositive

Ratherpositive

Cannotsay

Rathernegative

Verynegative

53555050484740

5660525552

32352923242116

1416171717109

121415

42394444464651

3834423942

58545861626363

41454341393936

434549

3232222

32322

4443324

11766567

976

2324435

23244

568

11101216

26222727303336

262524

1000011

10110

1111111

9106

109

1211

10106

"Finland conducts military cooperation with Sweden, other Nordic countries,Nato and the European Union. What is your view on cooperation?"

55


Figure 29. Military cooperation with all Nordic countries

PS

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Verypositive

Ratherpositive

Cannotsay

Rathernegative

Verynegative

53

4956

55475154

475658

4359

514954

614447

69416752623260

42

4639

40494540

444240

5339

414343

355344

27573245355838

3

41

2233

422

21

441

226

2012331

2

13

2212

310

30

441

213

3201062

1

01

0011

100

01

001

010

0000000

"Finland conducts military cooperation with all Nordic countries. What is your view on cooperation?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

56


Figure 30. Military cooperation with Sweden

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

56

5359

56535160

506160

4461

565258

644849

70456763644171

38

4136

39424234

423535

5036

364238

314643

26513032304928

3

52

2343

423

22

552

236

2012640

2

22

3222

311

41

411

222

2413062

1

01

0011

100

01

001

010

0010010

"Finland conducts military cooperation with Sweden. What is your view on cooperation?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

Verypositive

Ratherpositive

Cannotsay

Rathernegative

Verynegative

57


Figure 31. Military cooperation in the European Union

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

32

2639

32273035

293435

2540

282835

392526

37235026341852

58

6552

61626353

575960

6555

575960

536463

59624867616443

4

62

4335

533

21

761

337

1012554

5

47

3836

833

73

773

474

215140

122

1

01

0011

200

11

101

110

0000000

"Finland conducts military cooperation with the European union.What is your view on cooperation?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

Verypositive

Ratherpositive

Cannotsay

Rathernegative

Verynegative

58


Figure 32. Military cooperation with Nato

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

14

819

178

1316

141115

1216

151414

17129

8132912135

16

41

4042

43404538

374642

4244

323746

403747

57325046352146

11

165

15108

11

109

12

97

1696

91212

3435

23149

26

2824

20312924

282723

2827

293527

233126

18411528304225

9

810

6125

11

1177

87

857

1196

14102

100

193

"Finland conducts military cooperation with Nato. What is your view on cooperation?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

Verypositive

Ratherpositive

Cannotsay

Rathernegative

Verynegative

59


Figure 33. Military cooperation with the United States

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

12

619

2078

14

151011

1110

141512

16118

1117258

1327

43

4540

37405141

404147

4248

343648

414049

53365447342254

9

125

13859

87

10

95

1485

8109

2313

20147

26

2626

23342724

253224

3029

263526

262726

26361835303128

10

119

7108

12

1298

98

127

10

9138

98274

313

"Finland conducts military cooperation with the United States. What is your view on cooperation?"




Centre Party


South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

Verypositive

Ratherpositive

Cannotsay

Rathernegative

Verynegative

60


Figure 34. The military situation in Finland’s near environs

"What is your estimate of the military situation in Finland’s near environs during the next decade?"

6

49

71046

846

68

486

864

81025685

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Lessthreatening

More or lessthe same

Cannotsay

More

48

4552

58454847

534445

5144

524750

494651

47535459483765

4

44

3653

534

34

463

426

1033534

41

4735

32404344

354845

4044

393941

394639

44374133405226Other parties





South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population

threatening

61


Figure 35. The military situation in Finland’s near environs

6

5

6

7

9

10

8Autumn 2004

Autumn 2005

Autumn 2007

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2018

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Lessthreatening

More or lessthe same

Cannotsay

More

4

2

1

2

1

2

2

48

48

46

70

68

70

67

41

44

46

21

22

17

24

"What is your estimate of the military situation in Finland’s near environs duringthe next decade?"

threatening

62


Figure 36. Defence appropriations

"What is your opinion on funds allocated to the Defence Forces?"

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Raisedsigni�cantly

Raisedsomewhat

Remain atpresent level

Cannotsay

Decreasedsomewhat

Decreasedsigni�cantly

9

811

596

13

1584

126

869

10117

10138929

12

31

2637

35302634

323032

3527

323231

303530

35484132261124

40

4634

38295238

374440

3846

344444

403743

53213747453557

7

104

91474

768

86

876

839

09564

120

8

79

111376

59

11

411

11108

897

2295

19187

4

26

3535

534

44

724

453

08113

150Other parties





South Finland

Over 35 000 €25 000-35 000 €

Under 25 000 €


Working class


Lower education


Under 25 years

MenWomen

Whole population


Figure 37. Defence appropriations

"What is your opinion on funds allocated to the Defence Forces?"

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

Should be raised Remain atpresent level

Cannotsay Should be decreased

40474747563233273431273339443138293136444634262635292434313027141517333329263129263236333332324137384142423646564617

40404142365152504550594947455953575652444449595250555850524851525843465047505049574948514849484243384141444842333855

754434333324123122232533333225232224456545335575

10127858437

12

128976

1412191817121412887

11101097

111218121415151517193124382012201813161315121214141312101211998889

16In the year 1964In the year 1969In the year 1970In the year 1971In the year 1972In the year 1973In the year 1974In the year 1975In the year 1978In the year 1979In the year 1980In the year 1981In the year 1982In the year 1983In the year 1984In the year 1985December 1986

January 1986In the year 1987

April 1988December 1988

In the year 1989In the year 1990

April 1991October 1991

In the year 1992April 1993

October 1993May 1994

October 1994June 1995

November 1995In the year 1996In the year 1997


November 1999December 2000

Spring 2001Autumn 2001Autumn 2002Autumn 2003Autumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010

Spring 2011Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

64


Figure 38. Factors causing concern among the citizens

"How would you assess the following phenomena and actors? To what extent do they make you worry about the future?"

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

A lot To someextent

Cannotsay A little Not

at all

55

55

54

48

43

38

38

36

35

24

31

26

25

23

12

34

33

33

34

39

41

40

41

41

52

41

45

46

39

44

0

0

1

1

2

2

0

2

1

1

3

0

3

3

4

7

10

10

14

13

16

18

16

19

16

17

23

20

26

28

3

2

2

3

3

3

5

5

3

6

8

6

7

9

12Development of the European Union

State-sponsored fake news reporting directed at Finland

Development in Russia

The employment situationin Finland

Development in the United States

Security situation in theBaltic Sea area

Social inequality in Finland

Situation in the Middle East

Racism

Threats, in other words cyberthreats against information

networks

Politically extremist movements

Proliferation of weaponsof mass destruction

The refugee situation in the world

International terrorism

Climate change (global warming)

65


Figure 39. Factors causing concern among the citizens (I)

"How would you assess the following phenomena and actors?To what extent do they make you worry about the future?"


The refugee situation in the worldAutumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

International terrorismAutumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

Climate change (global warming)*

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

553126302521211824373351323722

554335463224273237343951475050

544640

344445423836383639394236414145

333840374238393533424138363536

333745

001011000100000

001010001110010

101

71821202628273025151811221925

10162014203024252317169

141111

101411

3778

1014141612772537

224358976642242

223

*) 2004-2015 Global warming

A lot To someextent


at all

66


Figure 40. Factors causing concern among the citizens (II)


Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

Threats, in other words cyber threats against information networks**


Politically extremist movementsAutumn 2004Autumn 2005Autumn 2006Autumn 2007Autumn 2008Autumn 2009Autumn 2010Autumn 2011Autumn 2012Autumn 2013Autumn 2014Autumn 2015Autumn 2016Autumn 2017Autumn 2018

Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

483227343326293539252742353436

433735

3821181921131820222324

343637373535333432424037383842

393539

4142424342373639384245

122111101210110

222

23332232222

142527212329292422252618232321

132019

1629282626353031292524

367689885662343

355

36999

12139995

**) 2008-2012 Cyber threats against information networks

A lot To someextent


at all

67


Figure 41. Factors causing concern among the citizens (III)


Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

Development in the United States

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

Security situation in the Baltic Sea area

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018Social inequality in Finland

Autumn 2006

Autumn 2007

Autumn 2008

Autumn 2009

Autumn 2010

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2018

Situation in the Middle East

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

Racism

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

38

31

31

36

18

22

15

11

12

13

21

24

35

26

27

24

18

19

31

27

40

38

39

41

38

36

34

35

40

37

45

43

41

41

42

52

46

47

41

36

0

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

3

2

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

2

3

2

18

22

22

16

34

29

34

36

35

36

27

26

19

24

23

16

26

24

17

26

5

7

8

5

9

11

16

17

10

11

6

6

3

8

6

6

8

8

8

8

A lot To someextent


at all

68

ABDI BULLETINS AND REPORTS NOVEMBER 1/2018

Figure 42. Factors causing concern among the citizens (IV)


Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018Development of the European Union

Autumn 2018State-sponsored fake news reporting directed at Finland

Autumn 2004

Autumn 2005

Autumn 2006

Autumn 2007

Autumn 2008

Autumn 2009

Autumn 2010

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018Development in Russia

Autumn 2008

Autumn 2009

Autumn 2010

Autumn 2011

Autumn 2012

Autumn 2013

Autumn 2014

Autumn 2015

Autumn 2016

Autumn 2017

Autumn 2018

The employment situation in Finland

0 20 40 60 80 100%

26

28

43

49

49

42

37

31

30

38

20

25

25

27

26

32

10

13

11

10

12

16

20

19

13

20

23

12

11

45

43

41

38

37

41

43

44

41

43

45

46

37

45

43

43

32

36

36

39

36

40

48

38

38

42

39

44

41

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

3

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

1

1

1

2

3

4

3

23

25

13

10

11

15

15

21

23

15

27

20

29

19

23

18

38

31

34

32

35

29

24

31

35

29

26

28

35

6

4

3

3

2

2

5

4

5

4

8

7

8

7

6

6

18

18

17

17

14

13

7

11

12

6

9

12

10

A lot To someextent


at all

The Advisory Board for Defence Information (ABDI)

Set up by the Government, the Advisory Board for Defence Information (ABDI) is a perma-nent Parliamentary Committee, which administratively functions in the Ministry of Defence. In addition to parliamentary members, ABDI’s members represent various expert organisations: the Prime Minister’s Office, Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Defence, Ministry of Education and Culture, Defence Command Finland, Finnish Broadcasting Company, Finnish News Agency (STT), Union of Journalists in Finland, Finnish Media Federation, National Defence University, and Tampere Peace Research Institute (TAPRI).

ABDI investigates, on an annual basis, the opinions and attitudes of Finns towards security policy and the factors influencing them and conducts at least one extensive survey that covers the entire adult population in Finland. The questions cover foreign and security policy and national defence. Some of the questions represent a continuous sequence since the 1960s. The surveys by ABDI are in the public domain and accessible to all.

The Advisory Board for Defence Information (ABDI)

Ministry of DefenceBP 3100131 HELSINKI

www.defmin.fi/abdi

abdi (mts)...abdi (mts) helsinki 2018 finn`s opinions on foreign and security policy the advisory...

Documents