The literature on parliamentary war powers has focused on the veto rights of legislatures. This case study on the Finnish Eduskunta adopts a more comprehensive approach. Based on parliamentary documents and statistics, it reconstructs parliamentary involvement in decision-making on individual crisis management operations, laws on crisis management, and ‘grand strategy’ documents since the mid-1990s. The findings underscore the importance of politicisation, with conflicts over legislation and the Government Security and Defence Policy Reports enabling political parties and the Eduskunta to set parameters for subsequent decisions on individual operations. The politicisation of crisis management facilitated stronger participation rights for the Eduskunta and created ‘ownership’ of troop deployments among members of parliament (MPs). Debates have nonetheless become less intense, with broader cross-party support for participation in crisis management and for European Union (EU)-led operations in particular.
ArenaPPalmerG (2009) Politics or the economy? Domestic correlates of dispute involvement in developed democracies. International Studies Quarterly53(4): 955–975.
2.
BäckHDabusM (2016) Political Parties, Parliaments and Legislative Speechmaking. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
3.
BaumMAPotterPBK (2015) War and Democratic Constraint: How the Public Influences Foreign Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
Chaqués-BonafontLMárquezLMM (2016) Explaining interest group access to parliamentary committees. West European Politics39(6): 1276–1298.
5.
ClareJ (2010) Ideological fractionalization and the international conflict behavior of parliamentary democracies. International Studies Quarterly54(4): 965–987.
6.
De WildePLeupoldASchmidtkeH (2016) Introduction: the differentiated politicisation of European governance. West European Politics39(1): 3–22.
7.
DieterichSHummelHMarschallS (2010) Parliamentary war powers: a survey of 25 European parliaments. Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, Occasional Paper no. 21. Geneva: DCAF.
8.
ForsbergT (2000) Finland and the Kosovo crisis: at the crossroads of Europeanism and neutrality. Northern Dimensions2000: 41–49.
9.
HäkkinenT (2015) Parlamentaarinen päätöksenteko ja asevoimien käyttö: Tarkastelussa Britannian ja Suomen poliittisia keskusteluja asevoimien käytöstä 1990- ja 2000-luvun konteksteissa. Politiikka57(1): 1–17.
10.
JakobsenPV (2006) Nordic Approaches to Peace Operations: A New Model in the Making?Abingdon: Routledge.
11.
JoenniemiP (1978) Political parties and foreign policy in Finland. Cooperation and Conflict13(1): 43–60.
12.
JokelaJ (2011) Europeanization and Foreign Policy: State Identity in Finland and Britain. Abingdon: Routledge.
13.
KoivulaTSipiläJ (2011) Missing in action? EU crisis management and the link to domestic political debate. Cooperation and Conflict46(4): 521–542.
14.
LordC (2011) The political theory and practice of parliamentary participation in the Common Security and Defence Policy. Journal of European Public Policy18(8): 1133–1150.
15.
MartinLL (2000) Democratic Commitments: Legislatures and International Cooperation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
MelloPA (2014) Democratic Participation in Armed Conflict: Military Involvement in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
17.
MelloPAPetersD (2018) Parliaments in security policy: involvement, politicisation, and influence. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations20(1): 3–18.
18.
MilnerHVTingleyD (2015) Sailing the Water’s Edge: The Domestic Politics of American Foreign Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
19.
PalmerGLondonTReganP (2004) What’s stopping you? The sources of political constraints on international conflict behavior in parliamentary democracies. International Interactions30(1): 1–24.
20.
PalosaariT (2011) The Art of Adaptation: A Study on the Europeanization of Finland’s Foreign and Security Policy. Tampere: TAPRI Studies in Peace and Conflict Research.
21.
PooleKTRosenthalH (1991) Patterns of congressional voting. American Journal of Political Science35(1): 228–278.
22.
ProkschS-OSlapinJB (2015) The Politics of Parliamentary Debate: Parties, Rebels and Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23.
RathbunBC (2004) Partisan Interventions: European Party Politics and Peace Enforcement in the Balkans. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
24.
RaunioT (2012) Semi-presidentialism and European integration: lessons from Finland for constitutional design. Journal of European Public Policy19(4): 567–584.
25.
RaunioT (2016) Refusing to be sidelined: the engagement of the Finnish Eduskunta in foreign affairs. Scandinavian Political Studies39(4): 312–332.
26.
RaunioTWagnerW (eds) (2017a) Challenging executive dominance: legislatures and foreign affairs. West European Politics40(1).
27.
RaunioTWagnerW (2017b) Towards parliamentarization of foreign and security policy?West European Politics40(1): 1–19.
28.
Salonius-PasternakC (2010) Kriisinhallinnan Rajamailla: Kansanedustajat varauksellisia Afganistanin operaation nykytilanteesta. The Finnish Institute of International Affairs Briefing Paper 64, 5October. Helsinki: The Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
29.
SchusterJMaierH (2006) The rift: explaining Europe’s divergent Iraq policies in the run-up of the American-Led war on Iraq. Foreign Policy Analysis2(3): 223–244.
30.
StamnesE (ed.) (2007) Peace support operations: Nordic perspective. International Peacekeeping14: 4.
31.
TiilikainenT (2008) Toward an active participation in foreign policy: the role of the Finnish parliament in international conflict prevention and crisis management. In: O’BrienMStapenhurstRJohnstonN (eds) Parliaments as Peacebuilders in Conflict-Affected Countries. Washington, DC: The World Bank, 213–223.
32.
VesaU (2007) Continuity and change in the Finnish debate on peacekeeping. International Peacekeeping14(4): 524–537.
33.
WagnerWHerranz-SurrallésAKaarboJOstermannFet al (2017) The party politics of legislative-executive relations in security and defense policy. West European Politics40(1): 20–41.
