Civil society organizations as drivers of

cross-border interaction

On whose terms, for which purpose?

Jussi Laine

BANG workshop “Cross-border mobility and citizenship,” Rovaniemi, October 12th, 2010
 Which civil society?
• Concept open to diverse interpretations: normative, loaded, complex & context
dependent

• Not a stand-alone concept: paired historically with the concept of the state

• “Product of the West” (Kocka 2004, 65)

• An “unintended outcome” of the efforts of statemakers (Tilly 1975, 633).

• Assumption that Russia would follow problematic

• Inadequacy of Western models to Russia: Is there a civil society in Russia?

• Western aid: “[A]ll ‘Western’ planted into our [Russian] soil bears fruits which
differ considerably from the seed.” Basina (1997, 104, cited in Alapuro 2005, 8)

• Western vs. Eastern understanding (liberal vs. statist model)

 Finland-Russia
• Strong standing and deep roots
• “Promised land” of associational activity
• Significant volunteer input
• High level of social trust
• Over 20 million “members”
• State and society part of the same system;
civil society completing the state
• Increasingly expressive
• Social capital vs. influence on society
• USSR: social networks, unorganized,
non-political, often underground
• Perestroika: sense of euphoria
• Ghost of communism
• Tense State-CS relations
• Limited societal influence
• Proliferation and popularization of
associational activities…
• Yet, an isolated community of civic
activists
Finland-Russia
 CSOs in cross-border
interaction

• Basis of ties: Soviet era paradiplomatic links

• Under the state-level bilateral agreements and “exchange” – official friendship
• City twinning

• Good Neighbourliness and Co-operation treaty (1992)

• Neighbouring Area Co-operation
• Finnish (welfare state) working model stretched to cover CBC

• Europeanization of Co-operation (1995)

• CBC part of the broader dynamics of international politics and EU-Russia relations
• Broadened approach to manage its transnational space – CSOs
 Why civil society?
• Qualities emphasizing CSOs aptitude for CBC:
• Flexible, innovative, realist and, hence, able to react to local issues fast
and effectively
• Less bureaucratic and less constrained by long-term strategies
• less restricted from entering into transnational cooperative relationships
• Inherently based on the idea of cooperation
• logically suitable for promoting civil society
• form a kind of a safety net when higher politics go sour

• Bottom-up integration: social construction

neighbourhood
“Genuine and productive co-operation between
different countries and different cultures also calls for
interaction and dialogue between ordinary people.
Non-governmental organisations do extremely
important work in increasing dialogue and developing
a wide range of cross-border co-operation between
civil societies”.

President of the Republic of Finland, Tarja Halonen at Forum on civil

society co-operation of European Union and Russia, 17.11.2006 in
Lahti, Finland
“[B]ecause our work doesn’t take place at the official level,
it is not like, as you know, ministers, members of the
parliament or heads of the councils, who are there [in
Russia] against their will, because they are forced to go
there… we [NGOs] go to meet these people in a face-to-
face situation, that’s the best way to have an impact, on
both sides. It influences the attitudes, personal relations,
working methods, everything. At this level we learn to
know each other”.

Interview # 32 FIN
 Motives for CBC
• When individual citizens meet citizens of another country in an everyday, informal
setting, it influences the attitudes. …this is the best security policy there can be
(Interview #32 FIN).

• If we did not cooperate with the Russians, with whom could we co-operate? (Interview
#46 FIN)

• Our geographical situation is what it is; why not make good use of it? (Interview #45)

• It [CBC] is extremely important… important as hell, in many, many ways. If we could get
the Russian civil society to work, at the moment it doesn’t work at all… No other
organizations than NGOs can bring this up… We have to deliver the message that
citizens have to be able, and allowed to make their voices heard… and this way to plant
the seed of democracy… it does not matter in which sectors the work is done as long as
it includes volunteering, input and voices of individual citizens. Extremely important
work, extremely. (Interview #32 FIN)
 Purpose

• From humanitarian work based on goodwill towards co-operation to the advance of both?
“…this is not development co-operation, but the idea is that the border is only a titular one… we need to
co-operate with our closest neighbour at all possible levels”. (Interview #48 FIN)
[T]here are no immediate benefits [for us]… the better everything works [in Russia], the better it is in the
end for us. (Interview #18 FIN)
• Cooperation guided by Russian interests but an EU/Finnish agenda
• Strengthening the prerequisites of the Russian people to build better preconditions for their own well being
• Short term benefits for Russia, long term benefits for Finland
• In Russia, CBC an activity that helped to put specific issues on civil society agendas
• Russian CSO, whose operations and agenda match the best the agenda of the Finnish CSO seeking for
partner gets often chosen
“Preferences? What preferences? Whoever wants to help us, please, whoever wants to work with us, please! If
somebody needs us, we are ready to help as well. We have no preferences.” (Interview #52 RUS).
 EU’s and the civil society

• CSOS engaged mainly in democracy promotion in Russia

• Normative approach: civil society as a basis of democracy

• Involves an agenda for reshaping state institutions?

• Encourages democratization, rule of law, interdependence, stability and

political accountability

• Supports the operation of the “free market”

• Promotes human rights including gender equality

 Europeanization of CBC

• EU trying to extend itself in a non-territorial manner

• Takes place in two levels - which do not meet: intellectual, elitist level vs. pragmatic level

• Russia a “key partner in the EU immediate neighbourhood”

• Can the offer of co-ownership provide a feasible alternative to membership?

• EU as a facilitator (financier) – cannot set the agenda

• lacks in actual political will and resource allocation behind the statements and official
commitment

• Inclusion/Exclusion: confirms the existing differences

• EU favoring large CSOs, marginalizing smaller ones

• Complex, bureaucratic, unapproachable, confusing

 Negotiating between local,
national and European levels of
action
• EU operates on a variety of scales and often brings together diverse
influences operating locally, nationally and transnationally.

• CS associated with a “Governance-beyond-the state” or

“transnational” level involving EU, international CSOs and national
states

• State governance level (EU norms and agendas meditated thru states)

• Local and regional level (CSO activity driven by exigency of the actual
state border)

• Scale-jumping: CSOs may bypass their respective national levels and

directly petition or lobby European level institutions for support.
 Impacts at the local level

• Relations between EU and neighbours neglects regional/local

levels, privileges state actors, centres of power

• Centralising logics: civil society elites privileged at the expense

of locally based organisations

• New opportunities for transnational networks

• But local/regional cross-border cooperation faces reduced

incentives and securitisation of the external borders
 Conclusions
• Active CS cannot be created by the state, arises from people
• The state can act in different ways in steering the development

• The domestic agenda of states heavily influences civil society CBC

• CBC mutually beneficial: issues seen in surprisingly similar manner

• CBC dependent on key network actors, requires special skills and knowledge
• Local/regional CSOs in line with, yet separate from geopolitical visions – a blessing?
• Civil society vital for the overall success of deeper the integration
• Social construction of Neighborhood: CBC is not only a means to an end

• International vs. transnational cooperation: Border confirming vs. border breaking

• Limits of integration: Practical concerns rather than geopolitical visions, Border a

barrier as it signifies where one set of rules end and another begins