The defense of the nation arises from the loyalty of the people towards their own community (the integrity principle). The forest is answered as it is called, and it is also remembered in those countries where there are no more forests. In human thinking, state existence is identified by geographical boundaries and different symbols. The secondary common denominator is the perception of citizens' history, the experience of the present reality, and the vision of the future that unites people.
Identifying threat images
Threat images are either indigenous or come from outside the country. In the defense debate, domestic threats to defense are not identified or openly identified. The experiences of childhood in the growth and development process are one that affects the individual's commitment to national defense. The development of loyalty is similarly a learning goal as a cognitive mathematics and digital literacy in current education. Loyalty and ethical perceptions are always created through personal experiences.
The role of the state in the creation and maintenance of external threats is also emphasized by foreign policy / information. Attitudes and awareness of things are largely caused by foreign policy and mass media. Finland is not a state comparable to North Korea in terms of information, although there is a parallelism in our post-World War II history. In its history, Finland has adopted the norms of the French annalistic school historiography, where scientific and societal elements are added to conventional writing history. A description of the world is like a reality.
As a resource, communality
How well the official system (state) succeeds in eliminating the fears and threats of individual citizens and gives the individual the desire to defend his country. Threats are created and identified either as internal or external phenomena in the country. The interests of individual citizens must coincide with the interests of the state. Individual rights and their realization must be in harmony with the interests of the Community. When the state sees in its field of action and implements the community of interests, it redeems the right to defend the citizens, the state and the community.
Communality, in which the common resource is integration, goes beyond the ideal of democracy. Democracy as a concept is built on the fact that the thing and the dynamics therein are shared and out of somebody or someone. The natural system of nature (ecology) does not know democracy. It only knows the connection and the new thing, the birth of wealth. Democracy-based world order needs regulation and rules to make it work. There is no need for overheads in diversity and integration to make the ensemble work - it is a functional code in the structure of communality.
The role of dynamics in choices
The current state system is the result of a long development process as a result of natural laws and regulations created by people. Religious states represent the elemental stage in this development. Religious communities still exist. There are also states based on philosophical and political thinking. The climax of these is the constitutional concept of the state, which began in the United States at the end of the 18th century and spread to Europe and the rest of the world after the French Revolution.
The constitutionality recognizes both individual and state rights. It makes compromises between the individual and the state as a rule at the expense of the individual with a fixed-term life. The means to reconcile the interests of the individual and the community are the use of force and knowledge. In the development of communality, the use of force may play a too strong role in the development of the present state. The rights-based model of society is problematic without state dynamics in coordinating interests. Ecology and energy-based coexistence make it easier to coordinate interests because of interaction mechanisms.
Two defense mindsets
In the force-driven world order, the vision of the strongest is realized and creates counterforces. The United States, China, France, England, Germany, Russia and India have chosen this road in their international activities. The countries listed above produce most of the world-wide production, which has, since colonialism, been the subject of an international approach based on force, in which countries have been involved in different roles. The use of force and wealth increased in these countries, resulting in the creation of a world-wide arms industry complex that continues to dominate the global economy.
Countries that do not belong to the countries described above have been left to “act you, I’m involved” on a global scale. Only individual innovations and limited productive activities have been realized in small industrialized countries for their own needs since the 18th century. Another common denominator as an alternative to the arms industry is the knowledge and exploitation of renewable resources and the growth of service activities in mutual commercial and economic cooperation. This new structure is of great importance in directing industrial activity on the planet. Knowledge has become an alternative to power-based economic policies.
The limits of growth as a catalyst for change
In international co-operation after World War II and led by international organizations, action has mainly taken place through rule-based state systems without the individual's role in international co-operation. Intra-state conflicts of individual concern may not appear at international level. Similarly, the adherence to the power politics of the countries of the socialist camp and their presence as "wolf in sheep's clothing" prevented the spread of crisis thinking and the shift of focus from power politics to knowledge in global cooperation.
The strengthening of the knowledge component in the global economy and ecological thinking was born and spread in industrialized western countries since the 1960s. The Club of Rome, represented by a secured social elite, together with young people from industrialized countries, created new kinds of threats to the future of the world. There was a new way of thinking about managing threats across the globe, spreading through universities to other parts of the world.
The development has continued to be the same, and the front lines have formed or are forming within the normal states and great powers about the consequences of human quality of life. We must be able to change our way of life. Knowledge and awareness have made their mission and the world has a new dimension of national defense as part of sustainable development.
New knowledge in defense
When the framework of defense thinking is outlined in a new way, the next step is to formulate activities to function so that life continues on Earth. There has been a preservation of the idea that not all eggs can be placed in one basket. It is also suitable for shaping new national defense thinking.
The first step in implementing a new kind of thinking in defense thinking is the quality control of information and intelligence that supports one's own activities. When we give up the power doctrine and its use as the primary means of defending our country, we must demand more of the available information than the use of the information component in this degree. The only requirement is that the information that serves the defense is reliable and corresponds to the reality around it.
The information that serves the administration and the business world must be just as reliable as that of military intelligence. It has two requirements - reliability and object portability as in science. In information about personal data, the primary purpose of the activity is the correctness of the information. No institutional entity in your own country and / or allied country can stand above the subject in verifying the correctness of the information. Human rights treaties are irrelevant if the government or other third party holds this right for the individual. The Roman legal principle was updated in the 1960s on the state of the environment. As far as personal data is concerned, this is still the case. The GDPR Code does not start from the correctness of the information.
Public discussion in the world
In Finland and in other countries, there is a public debate on defense issues in connection with the new air defense fighter jets’ procurement and the law on intelligence. It is a good thing. Just wondering why the latter one was not discussed earlier, when it was needed in the 1970s / 1980s. Better late than never.
Fighter purchases are not a question of the number of fighters to be acquired and the country of supply.
If Finland does not have an overall view of how to defend itself against an external threat, it is useless to discuss various options, for example in air defense. It can already be seen that electronic warfare with the use of radars goes to the side of traditional use of force. Finnish fighters do not matter if there is no radar signal available in our area due to harassment during the crisis. Eggs must not be placed in one basket in a knowledge-based defense strategy and thinking. Transparency should replace secrecy in the preparation phase.
Transparency is a value that is as important to the future of our country as the new intelligence agency. There have been cases in Finland where false claims have been made by experts in the field of intelligence, when the poor command of the English language in the country's leadership has spoiled things through mixing spying and intelligence issues. There are still claims about cyber issues in Finland without evidence of reality. There are different criteria for the use of force and defense. Arranging defenses can only be done with reliable information at home and with external threats.
© 15.06.2019/Heikki K. Auvinen/Asumer Oy