Rüdiger Strempel, Executive Secretary of HELCOM, reflects on Finland’s special connection with HELCOM and the organisation’s regional efforts to protect the Baltic Sea
On 18th March 1974, the Finnish Postal Service issued a stamp and first-day cover to commemorate the Diplomatic Conference on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area. Four days later, the Conference adopted the Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, or Helsinki Convention. This was a milestone in a process in which Finland has continuously played a pivotal part. In this article, I would like to recall why a story that began more than fifty years ago still matters – and the special role of Finland in writing it.
The commemorative stamp depicted a flock of seagulls above a deep blue sea and bore the inscription “The Baltic Sea – our environment” in Finnish and Swedish. Sadly, however, by the 1970s, that environment was severely compromised, and the Baltic Sea was considered the most polluted sea in the world. Without decisive action on the part of the Baltic Sea states, it was at risk of spiralling into the abyss of ecological apocalypse.
Regional efforts to protect the Baltic Sea since 1972
In 1972, Finland spurred those states to action. An initiative that Finland, due to its special role in the bipolar Cold War world order, was uniquely well-placed to take and that matched the overall fabric of the country’s foreign policy. In the course of 1973, it hosted and chaired three intergovernmental expert meetings on the Baltic Sea in Helsinki, bringing together the then-seven Baltic Sea states: Denmark, Finland, the German Democratic Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, Poland, the Soviet Union, and Sweden.
These efforts were crowned with success, and by early 1974, the process was brought to a successful conclusion at the Diplomatic Conference.
It took another six years for the agreement, a front- runner in international marine environmental law as the first international treaty globally to protect a regional sea from all sources of pollution, to enter into force. During that time, the governing body provided for in the Convention, the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM), met six times in a provisional format, the so-called Interim Commission (IC).
Finland hosted and chaired all six of those meetings, as well as roughly one-fourth of the meetings of the technical Working Groups established by the IC. It also provided an interim Secretariat. In 1980, the Commission’s first regular meeting occurred in Helsinki, and the permanent HELCOM Secretariat was established. It became the first international organisation to permanently establish its headquarters in the Finnish capital, where it is still located today.
And Finland’s close involvement with HELCOM continued beyond the inception phase. As the organisation’s host country, it has continuously supported HELCOM work both financially and substantively. Finland has hosted four HELCOM Ministerial Meetings – more than any other country. Moreover, when the geopolitical changes of the late 1980s and early 1990s and advancements in international environmental law and policy necessitated a revision of the Convention, Finland again played a key role in facilitating this process and ensuring that HELCOM remained fit for purpose.
In April 1992, Helsinki’s iconic Finlandia Hall was the venue of another Diplomatic Conference under Finnish chairmanship, which adopted the revised Helsinki Convention. The 1992 Convention has ten Contracting Parties, all Baltic Sea States, and the European Union, reflecting the geopolitical realignment following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. In force since 2000, it has stood the test of time and remains the basis of HELCOM’s work to this day.
And that work is crucially important. Water knows no boundaries, and no one country can achieve marine protection on its own. For five decades, HELCOM has provided Baltic Sea states with a platform for the regional exchange, dialogue and cooperation required to tackle the formidable challenges faced by their common sea. It is a multilateral success story, leading to improvements in the state of the Baltic Sea environment and thereby benefitting nature and people across the region.
Yet, it has not been an unqualified success. The condition of the Sea remains deplorable, as documented by the third Holistic Assessment of the State of the Baltic Sea (HOLAS 3), published by HELCOM in 2023. Already ailing, our sea is severely affected by the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution. But the assessment also offers hope. Decades of monitoring and assessment under the auspices of HELCOM have vastly expanded our knowledge of the Baltic Sea.
Moreover, HOLAS 3, the most comprehensive assessment of its kind to date, also shows that if duly implemented, regional measures will lead to an improvement in the sea’s condition.
HELCOM’s 2021 Baltic Sea Action Plan (2021 BSAP) lays out a broad range of such measures, along with a roadmap for their implementation, clearly indicating what needs to be done and by when. While the costs of such measures may seem daunting, the high cost of inaction, also evidenced by HOLAS 3, makes them a critically important long-term investment that we cannot afford not to make.
Achieving good environmental status for the Baltic Sea
Fifty years after HELCOM’s establishment, the organisation’s job is far from done, and protecting the Baltic Sea requires continued, sustained multilateral efforts. It can, therefore, reasonably be said that if HELCOM did not exist, it would need to be invented. Fortunately, however, it does exist.
While the current challenging geopolitical situation has forced the organisation to modify its operational procedures, it remains largely on track in implementing the 2021 BSAP. In line with the bold vision that originated in Finland over half a century ago, HELCOM is poised to continue catalysing and crystallising joint regional efforts towards achieving good environmental status for the Baltic Sea – our environment.
This article was first published in Open Access Government. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of HELCOM or its Contracting Parties.
