Hirdman Introduction

BSPC/Helsinki/2011-08-30Ambassador Sven HirdmanThe Future of Parliamentary Cooperation in the Baltic Sea AreaLadies and Gentlemen,My name is Sven Hirdman and I will moderate this session. In the past I have, among other things, been Ambassador of Sweden to Russia for ten years 1994 – 2004. For 35 years I have focused on the security situation in the Baltic Sea areaLet me first introduce my co-panelists:- Mr. Paulius Saudargas, MP, Lithuania, Vice President of the Baltic Assembly- Mr. Franz Thönnes, MP, Germany, former Parliamentary State Secretary- Mrs. Christina Gestrin, MP, Finland, Chairman of the BSPC- Mr. Ryszard Górecki, Senator, Senate of the Republic of Poland, Chairman of the Polish Delegation to BSPC- Mr. Said Yagya, Representative of the St. Petersburg Legislative AssemblyI will start with a few comments of my own in order to initiate a discussion with all panel members.Looking back at the last twenty years – to 1991 when the Cold War finally ended and the BSPC was formed – one can truly say that a tremendous lot has been achieved in our Baltic Sea region.- The Baltic nations are free and independent States- Poland has become one of the major powers in the EU- Russia has changed fundamentally with St. Petersburg re-asserting itself as the major city at the Baltic Sea- Tourist travelling has increased many times over with the old seaside resorts in northern Germany and Poland and in the Baltic States recovering their old status as favourite destinations. Ferries pile across the Baltic Sea, while buses with Russian tourists come in their hundreds to Helsinki, Stockholm and Copenhagen.- Trade is booming, and new infrastructure projects are carried out, such as the Nord Stream gas pipeline from Russia to Germany.We are, however concerned with the future. Let me therefore indicate three areas where I believe cooperation must be strengthened and where Parliaments and NGOs have important roles to play to secure lasting results.My first point concerns the concept of security. Yes, the Cold War is over, and no one expects armed hostilities in the Baltic Sea area. Still, the past has left its scars among nations and individuals. There are still some fears and prejudices around. I do believe that most security concerns in our area and in Europe have their roots in a lack of confidence and trust, which can only be overcome by closer personal contacts and deeper integration, including through cross-border twinning contacts between regional entities. There are still too many obstacles to such contacts, particularly between Russia and the other Baltic Sea states.In my view, the best way to improve the security well-being in the Baltic Sea area would be to abolish visa restrictions between Russia and the Schengen countries and establish a free trade zone between the EU and Russia. This will strengthen personal contacts and reduce unfounded fears. One should keep in mind that visa restrictions very well can be abolished unilaterally. The best diplomacy is often unilateral – acting in one’s own interest and not making oneself hostage to the action or non-action of the other side. Thus, it was an excellent step by Russia to abolish visas for three day visits by ferry passengers to St. Petersburg recently. Another good example is the recent proposal in the Kirgiz Government to abolish visa for visitors from developed countries. One should keep in mind that tourism is a forceful mover of change in old mentalities.The Schengen accord and free trade negotiations, surely, fall within the competence of the EU bodies. My question to my parliamentarian co-panelists is, therefore, what they can do in their Parliaments and in their contacts with NGOs and public opinion in their countries to promote more personal contacts and freer trade across national borders and overcome the bureaucratic opposition from the ministries of interior and of finance in their respective countries.My second question concerns cross-country infrastructure projects. Remembering that the EU started out as the Coal and Steel Union, I believe that such cooperation is very important and has lasting effects. I certainly remember and understand the concerns that the Nord Stream project first evoked. However, now that the gas pipeline is being completed, these concerns seem to have lessened. For years there have been talks about a Baltic Energy Ring, a concept first raised by the former CEO of ASEA/ABB, Percy Barnevik. A long-distance electric cable is now being laid across the Baltic between Lithuania and Sweden. Still, much remains to be done to realize this project, across and along the Baltic Sea.Several years ago, the CBSS adopted a ruling that the time for a commercial transport to cross a land border in the Baltic Sea area should not take more than two hours. We are at many border points still very far from that target. Trans-national highways, border infrastructure and, not least, bureaucratic regulations have to be improved. What is now the state of the proposed motorway from Berlin through Warsaw, Kaliningrad and the Baltic capitals to St. Petersburg? The Fehmarn Bridge – or tunnel – between Denmark and Germany will, when completed, be of epochal significance. Sweden and Norway will no longer be islands. Scandinavia and Germany will be bound more closely together. The realization of these projects should not just be left to national Governments. Pressure by informed public opinion is much needed. We have to better integrate our Baltic Sea region in order to be a winner in the harsh world of international competition.My last point concerns maritime safety in the Baltic Sea. The significant safety and environment problem in the Baltic Sea is not the Russian-German seabed gas pipeline but the shipment of 100 million tons of Russian oil across the Sea and through the Baltic Straits. LNG shipments are now being developed also for the Baltic Sea, with, incidentally, a port close to Stockholm. Imagine the situation if an oil tanker and a LNG ship collides in the Baltic Sea. Add to this the risks of the autumn and winter storms which took such a terrible toll with the passenger ferry Estonia in 1994.Since several years there is a system of well-functioning maritime safety cooperation between Russia, Finland and Estonia in the Gulf of Finland, the GOFREP. Why cannot this be extended to comprise all the Baltic Sea States with a multinational 24 hours/7 days centre permanently located for instance in Gotland? I have a suspicion that there still is too much infighting between nations and, particularly, inside States between individual administrations which all wish to assert themselves. Again what can national Parliaments and public opinion do?So much for my introduction. May I now first ask Mr. Saudargas for his comments?