Absurdity of the Finnish conscription debate pt.1
As I mentioned in the introduction, Finland still has mandatory conscription and that I was going to write about it. Actually, one of the main reasons for starting this blog was so I could bitch about that topic. You see, this system has received major criticism from human rights organizations and it can be considered as one of the most questionable aspects about my dear homeland. You can probably already guess that I'm strongly against this system, but before we can go to the reasons why, we have to look at how the system works.
First of all, the system only applies to men. Every able-bodied man is required to serve either in the military or in alternative civil service, which is what I personally chose. People living in the autonomous and demilitarized region of Åland are exempt from service, though they are allowed to volunteer. In total, about 75% of men complete some form of service, about 7% choosing civil service. Couple of dozen people also refuse both forms of service. These so called "total objectors" are given up to six months in jail, or nowadays, mostly electronically monitored house arrest. Their numbers annually are somewhere between 40-80 people. Women are also allowed to volunteer, however, very few of them actually do. I mean 2017 was a record year as bit over 1 100 women applied for service and some of those probably won't actually even star their service. Considering the total number of people in service is somewhere around 20 000 a year, women make up a pretty small minority.
The idea of military service is training troops for the reserves. In case of a conflict, around 95% of the fighting force would be formed by trained reservists. In an effort to maximize troop productions military service can last 165, 255 or 347 days, depending on the training you receive. After finishing your service, you are part of the reserves until the age of 50 or 60, depending on your rank. This results in one of the most absurd facts about this system. Since the overwhelming majority serves in the military and you remain a part of the reserves for so long, around 900 000 people are in the reserves. Considering that the population of Finland is only around 5.5 million, this means that about 1/6 of the population has military training and is theoretically ready to be called to fight, if a war were to break out. At the same time, the plans only call for 280 000 people to fight meaning that realistically, only about 1/3 of this massive force would ever see combat. Also, that number includes non-combat roles, meaning that in practice the numbers are even more lopsided. And since exemptions for medical reasons only apply during times of peace, theoretically a large percentage of the remaining population could still be called up if needed, meaning the situation is even more absurd.
Now we get to the darker side of this system. Civil service lasts 347 days, which is over twice the length of the shortest term of military service, which is 165 days. According to UN Human rights Committee, UN Human rights Council and Amnesty International the length of civil service is punitive and thus, violates human rights by punishing conscientious objectors for their convictions. All these organization have demanded the length to be shortened. Now, you may object to this since some people in the military serve for 347 days, which is a fair point to make. However, since the service times in the military are based on the training you receive, the percentage of these people is limited. Basically, the more specialized the training, the longer your service lasts. As a result, the shortest term is mostly reserved for the average soldiers, who make up the backbone of the military, meaning they make up the largest percent of conscripts. On the other hand, people serving for the longest become officers or part of the special forces. Because of this, the military listens to your wishes about your service the best they can, in order to get the best people for the specific task. In other words, if you make it clear from the beginning that you are not motivated whatsoever and just want to get your service out of the way as fast as possible, you will most likely get away with the shortest term. On the other hand, if you are motivated and let them know about it, you will most likely get the specific training you want. In civil service this is not a possibility. There, after a month long training period, where you do learn skills that actually are useful in the future, you spend the rest of your service doing cheap labor for an organizations deemed to benefit the public, for example, schools, hospitals, some charities or in my case, our local library here in Kotka. During my time I worked the same shifts as the full time employees but got next to no money. Thankfully, I still lived with my parents at the time so my financial situation was pretty good. Not everybody is that lucky though. There have actually been studies conducted suggesting that up to 39% of conscripts fall into financial problems during their service.
Now, how about total objectors? Well, all of the previously mentioned human rights groups have demanded them to be released. Amnesty International actually considers them prisoners of conscience, making Finland alongside Greece one of only two countries in the EU to have internationally recognized prisoners of conscience. Apart from this, the European Court of Human Rights, has made decisions regarding Greece and Turkey, about imprisoning conscientious objectors and declared this practice to violate human rights. The court has yet to make decisions regarding Finland, but this will change in the future. Now, you'd think this kind of criticism would make the Finnish government change the system, but you'd be wrong. Actually, it seems that they don't care about it and having been following the discussion, some politicians have been throwing around ideas that would make the human rights situation even worse. I actually have gotten in small scuffles with some of them on Twitter. I'll leave the specifics to my next post since this one is getting a bit long. Weird thing about that is, that they actually used to care. You see, back in the 80s, they actually gave an exemption to a specific group because of international criticism. Namely, Jehovah's witnesses.
You see, back in the day Jehovah's witnesses were practically the only organized group of total objectors and they were able to cause a bit of a scandal with their actions. Back in the 60s, the Finnish government decided to re-open an old POW-camp and turned it into a labor camp for total objectors. The problem: the Jehovah's witnesses sent there refused to work and since they made up something like 90% of people sent there, the government had to hire more people, so the tasks given to the inmates got done. As a result the witnesses naturally were given longer sentences, but this would not change their mind and they kept refusing to work. By all accounts the camp resembled a concentration camp, so when a Swedish magazine was able to expose the situation there, the government quickly closed the camp and began seriously trying to find ways of solving the problem caused by total objectors. It took until 1985 until they decided to create a special procedure to allow active Jehovah's witnesses to skip their service, in hopes of ending the criticism of the system. This ended up backfiring as exempting witnesses simply increased the number of total objectors outside the group as people viewed this as unfair. Now, the numbers of total objectors are still lower than they were back then, but I think it's still fair to say this plan backfired.
Now, what does the future look like? Well as I mentioned, at the moment there really in no will to actually abolish this system. On the other hand, the ideas that would make the situation even worse have no real support either. So for now, it seems that the status quo remains. However, ultimately I'm hopeful for positive change. Earlier this year, there was a case of a total objector, who was defended in court by the non-discrimination ombudsman. Yes a state official defended a total objector in court. He argued that the exemption given to Jehovah's witnesses is discriminatory in nature and thus unconstitutional. And it definitely is. Back in 2007 the parliaments constitutional committee reviewed the law exempting witnesses and declared that it in fact is discriminatory in nature and therefore, unconstitutional and demanded that something be done. Up to this point, nothing has changed. In previous cases about total objectors, arguments about the law being discriminatory have been disregarded for some reason, but in this particular case it really can't be, since it involves the state official tasked with fighting discrimination. Theoretically, this case could at least end the special treatment given to Jehovah's witnesses by either expanding the exemption to everybody or forcing witnesses to service. Previously mentioned human rights groups have demanded the exemption to be expanded. Now, I have to point out that at the moment, I don't know what happened with that case. The court was supposed to give it's decision months ago, but I haven't been able to find anything regarding it, apart from a few stories before the court date. If I hear something, I will update you. (Update: In late February 2018, the Helsinki Court of Appeals dropped charges towards the total objector.)
Also, international criticism for the system will increase in the future. The Union of Conscientious Objection has began a campaign of filing complaints about the treatment of total objectors to international human rights bodies, namely the previously mentioned European Court of Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee. The idea is that individual cases could do better job at presenting these problems than periodical reviews about the situation in Finland, thus increasing the criticism. Apart from this, the human rights court can actually order a country to pay compensation to those whose rights have been violated. At the moment I know about two complaints that have been filed, one for each organisation. However, the number is probably higher than that, but there are only two I know for certain. Decisions on these cases may take years to come out but when they do, I'm pretty sure the Finnish government has to take us seriously. In the mean time, you can sign a petition aimed at the same result. It has failed to cause much attention but it still online, so I'll leave the link in the end of this post. You can also help abolishing these kinds of systems all across the world, not just Finland, by supporting War Resister's International. They have affiliate groups in multiple countries, so you can either choose to help your local affiliate or if you don't have one in your country, you can donate directly to War Resister's International, or buy their products. I'll leave a link for that as well.
As a side note, I really got the idea to write about this topic now thanks to a specific total objector whose story went kinda viral in Finland. As a part of a campaign to increase knowledge about the alternatives for military service, The Union of Conscientious Objection has been uploading videos about the experiences from conscientious objectors. Recently they uploaded a video in which a non-binary total objector named Elsa told about their experiences while waiting for their sentence. The video was uploaded about a week ago and currently has over 100 000 views and 1500 comments on Facebook, a lot of them negative. Now, in Finland the treatment of trans- and non-binary people is so bad that the previously mentioned human rights groups have criticized the government and demanded actions to fix it. The situation here is even worse, since there actually is a ready made bill that would fix all the perceived problems about their treatment. Only political will to push it through is needed. Now, Amnesty International has a petition going on, where they are trying to get these changes through. So, if you're interested in shaming the Finnish government even more, I'll leave the link to that as well.
This is simply a extensive overview about the problems with the Finnish conscription. My next post will be more about deconstructing the actual discussion and going through some of the more outlandish ideas people have been throwing around as they simply are not practical.
Link to part two:
http://helvetinpastori.blogspot.fi/2017/11/absurdity-of-finnish-conscription_13.html?m=1
Part three: http://helvetinpastori.blogspot.fi/2017/11/finnish-conscription-pt3-militarization.html?m=1
Part three: http://helvetinpastori.blogspot.fi/2017/11/finnish-conscription-pt3-militarization.html
Part four: http://helvetinpastori.blogspot.fi/2017/12/finnish-conscription-pt4-how-reserve.html
Link to the petition about ending conscription: https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Alexander_Stubb_Prime_Minister_of_Finland_End_Finnish_Conscription_and_Imprisonment_of_Conscientious_Objectors/
War Resister's International website:
https://www.wri-irg.org/en
Amnesty Internationals petition on trans rights in Finland:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/get-involved/take-action/stand-with-finland-transgender-human-rights-defender-sakris/
Elsa's video on experiences as total objector (in Finnish only) :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PiqjJSe9zg&t=26s
And my Twitter:
https://twitter.com/HelvetinPastori
First of all, the system only applies to men. Every able-bodied man is required to serve either in the military or in alternative civil service, which is what I personally chose. People living in the autonomous and demilitarized region of Åland are exempt from service, though they are allowed to volunteer. In total, about 75% of men complete some form of service, about 7% choosing civil service. Couple of dozen people also refuse both forms of service. These so called "total objectors" are given up to six months in jail, or nowadays, mostly electronically monitored house arrest. Their numbers annually are somewhere between 40-80 people. Women are also allowed to volunteer, however, very few of them actually do. I mean 2017 was a record year as bit over 1 100 women applied for service and some of those probably won't actually even star their service. Considering the total number of people in service is somewhere around 20 000 a year, women make up a pretty small minority.
The idea of military service is training troops for the reserves. In case of a conflict, around 95% of the fighting force would be formed by trained reservists. In an effort to maximize troop productions military service can last 165, 255 or 347 days, depending on the training you receive. After finishing your service, you are part of the reserves until the age of 50 or 60, depending on your rank. This results in one of the most absurd facts about this system. Since the overwhelming majority serves in the military and you remain a part of the reserves for so long, around 900 000 people are in the reserves. Considering that the population of Finland is only around 5.5 million, this means that about 1/6 of the population has military training and is theoretically ready to be called to fight, if a war were to break out. At the same time, the plans only call for 280 000 people to fight meaning that realistically, only about 1/3 of this massive force would ever see combat. Also, that number includes non-combat roles, meaning that in practice the numbers are even more lopsided. And since exemptions for medical reasons only apply during times of peace, theoretically a large percentage of the remaining population could still be called up if needed, meaning the situation is even more absurd.
Now we get to the darker side of this system. Civil service lasts 347 days, which is over twice the length of the shortest term of military service, which is 165 days. According to UN Human rights Committee, UN Human rights Council and Amnesty International the length of civil service is punitive and thus, violates human rights by punishing conscientious objectors for their convictions. All these organization have demanded the length to be shortened. Now, you may object to this since some people in the military serve for 347 days, which is a fair point to make. However, since the service times in the military are based on the training you receive, the percentage of these people is limited. Basically, the more specialized the training, the longer your service lasts. As a result, the shortest term is mostly reserved for the average soldiers, who make up the backbone of the military, meaning they make up the largest percent of conscripts. On the other hand, people serving for the longest become officers or part of the special forces. Because of this, the military listens to your wishes about your service the best they can, in order to get the best people for the specific task. In other words, if you make it clear from the beginning that you are not motivated whatsoever and just want to get your service out of the way as fast as possible, you will most likely get away with the shortest term. On the other hand, if you are motivated and let them know about it, you will most likely get the specific training you want. In civil service this is not a possibility. There, after a month long training period, where you do learn skills that actually are useful in the future, you spend the rest of your service doing cheap labor for an organizations deemed to benefit the public, for example, schools, hospitals, some charities or in my case, our local library here in Kotka. During my time I worked the same shifts as the full time employees but got next to no money. Thankfully, I still lived with my parents at the time so my financial situation was pretty good. Not everybody is that lucky though. There have actually been studies conducted suggesting that up to 39% of conscripts fall into financial problems during their service.
Now, how about total objectors? Well, all of the previously mentioned human rights groups have demanded them to be released. Amnesty International actually considers them prisoners of conscience, making Finland alongside Greece one of only two countries in the EU to have internationally recognized prisoners of conscience. Apart from this, the European Court of Human Rights, has made decisions regarding Greece and Turkey, about imprisoning conscientious objectors and declared this practice to violate human rights. The court has yet to make decisions regarding Finland, but this will change in the future. Now, you'd think this kind of criticism would make the Finnish government change the system, but you'd be wrong. Actually, it seems that they don't care about it and having been following the discussion, some politicians have been throwing around ideas that would make the human rights situation even worse. I actually have gotten in small scuffles with some of them on Twitter. I'll leave the specifics to my next post since this one is getting a bit long. Weird thing about that is, that they actually used to care. You see, back in the 80s, they actually gave an exemption to a specific group because of international criticism. Namely, Jehovah's witnesses.
You see, back in the day Jehovah's witnesses were practically the only organized group of total objectors and they were able to cause a bit of a scandal with their actions. Back in the 60s, the Finnish government decided to re-open an old POW-camp and turned it into a labor camp for total objectors. The problem: the Jehovah's witnesses sent there refused to work and since they made up something like 90% of people sent there, the government had to hire more people, so the tasks given to the inmates got done. As a result the witnesses naturally were given longer sentences, but this would not change their mind and they kept refusing to work. By all accounts the camp resembled a concentration camp, so when a Swedish magazine was able to expose the situation there, the government quickly closed the camp and began seriously trying to find ways of solving the problem caused by total objectors. It took until 1985 until they decided to create a special procedure to allow active Jehovah's witnesses to skip their service, in hopes of ending the criticism of the system. This ended up backfiring as exempting witnesses simply increased the number of total objectors outside the group as people viewed this as unfair. Now, the numbers of total objectors are still lower than they were back then, but I think it's still fair to say this plan backfired.
Now, what does the future look like? Well as I mentioned, at the moment there really in no will to actually abolish this system. On the other hand, the ideas that would make the situation even worse have no real support either. So for now, it seems that the status quo remains. However, ultimately I'm hopeful for positive change. Earlier this year, there was a case of a total objector, who was defended in court by the non-discrimination ombudsman. Yes a state official defended a total objector in court. He argued that the exemption given to Jehovah's witnesses is discriminatory in nature and thus unconstitutional. And it definitely is. Back in 2007 the parliaments constitutional committee reviewed the law exempting witnesses and declared that it in fact is discriminatory in nature and therefore, unconstitutional and demanded that something be done. Up to this point, nothing has changed. In previous cases about total objectors, arguments about the law being discriminatory have been disregarded for some reason, but in this particular case it really can't be, since it involves the state official tasked with fighting discrimination. Theoretically, this case could at least end the special treatment given to Jehovah's witnesses by either expanding the exemption to everybody or forcing witnesses to service. Previously mentioned human rights groups have demanded the exemption to be expanded. Now, I have to point out that at the moment, I don't know what happened with that case. The court was supposed to give it's decision months ago, but I haven't been able to find anything regarding it, apart from a few stories before the court date. If I hear something, I will update you. (Update: In late February 2018, the Helsinki Court of Appeals dropped charges towards the total objector.)
Also, international criticism for the system will increase in the future. The Union of Conscientious Objection has began a campaign of filing complaints about the treatment of total objectors to international human rights bodies, namely the previously mentioned European Court of Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee. The idea is that individual cases could do better job at presenting these problems than periodical reviews about the situation in Finland, thus increasing the criticism. Apart from this, the human rights court can actually order a country to pay compensation to those whose rights have been violated. At the moment I know about two complaints that have been filed, one for each organisation. However, the number is probably higher than that, but there are only two I know for certain. Decisions on these cases may take years to come out but when they do, I'm pretty sure the Finnish government has to take us seriously. In the mean time, you can sign a petition aimed at the same result. It has failed to cause much attention but it still online, so I'll leave the link in the end of this post. You can also help abolishing these kinds of systems all across the world, not just Finland, by supporting War Resister's International. They have affiliate groups in multiple countries, so you can either choose to help your local affiliate or if you don't have one in your country, you can donate directly to War Resister's International, or buy their products. I'll leave a link for that as well.
As a side note, I really got the idea to write about this topic now thanks to a specific total objector whose story went kinda viral in Finland. As a part of a campaign to increase knowledge about the alternatives for military service, The Union of Conscientious Objection has been uploading videos about the experiences from conscientious objectors. Recently they uploaded a video in which a non-binary total objector named Elsa told about their experiences while waiting for their sentence. The video was uploaded about a week ago and currently has over 100 000 views and 1500 comments on Facebook, a lot of them negative. Now, in Finland the treatment of trans- and non-binary people is so bad that the previously mentioned human rights groups have criticized the government and demanded actions to fix it. The situation here is even worse, since there actually is a ready made bill that would fix all the perceived problems about their treatment. Only political will to push it through is needed. Now, Amnesty International has a petition going on, where they are trying to get these changes through. So, if you're interested in shaming the Finnish government even more, I'll leave the link to that as well.
This is simply a extensive overview about the problems with the Finnish conscription. My next post will be more about deconstructing the actual discussion and going through some of the more outlandish ideas people have been throwing around as they simply are not practical.
Link to part two:
http://helvetinpastori.blogspot.fi/2017/11/absurdity-of-finnish-conscription_13.html?m=1
Part three: http://helvetinpastori.blogspot.fi/2017/11/finnish-conscription-pt3-militarization.html?m=1
Part three: http://helvetinpastori.blogspot.fi/2017/11/finnish-conscription-pt3-militarization.html
Part four: http://helvetinpastori.blogspot.fi/2017/12/finnish-conscription-pt4-how-reserve.html
Link to the petition about ending conscription: https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Alexander_Stubb_Prime_Minister_of_Finland_End_Finnish_Conscription_and_Imprisonment_of_Conscientious_Objectors/
War Resister's International website:
https://www.wri-irg.org/en
Amnesty Internationals petition on trans rights in Finland:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/get-involved/take-action/stand-with-finland-transgender-human-rights-defender-sakris/
Elsa's video on experiences as total objector (in Finnish only) :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PiqjJSe9zg&t=26s
And my Twitter:
https://twitter.com/HelvetinPastori
Kommentit
Lähetä kommentti