Finnish Opinions on Security Policy and National Defence 2006

This annual survey charted Finnish public opinion on foreign and defence policy, security, and military alliances. The respondents were asked how well Finland had managed its foreign policy and defence policy, and should Finland take up arms to defend itself if it were attacked. Opinions on defence forces funding were surveyed. One theme pertained to what kind of impact certain factors have on the security of the Finns and Finland (e.g. EU or NATO membership of certain countries, Finland's potential NATO membership, USA's, Russia's or the EU's fight against terrorism, Finland's neutrality). Views were probed on whether the EU has the right to carry out a military intervention in an EU member state or a non-member state, and on what grounds (e.g. for humanitarian help or to prevent genocide). Further questions covered opinions on Finland's participation in the European Rapid Reaction Force, Finland's defence system (universal conscription or professional army), and what kind of military tasks the country's armed forces should undertake. Attitudes towards NATO were studied with questions pertaining to Finland's participation in NATO-led crisis management operations, and making armoury and command structure compatible with the NATO standards. The respondents were asked whether Finland should join NATO, and should Finland enter a military alliance or remain non-aligned. One topic covered how concerned the respondents were about the future because of certain issues (e.g. use of nuclear power in Finland, Israel-Palestinian conflict, situation in Iraq, international terrorism, nuclear weapons.) Questions also explored what would be the best option if Finland decided to enter a military alliance or the EU developed a common defence. Opinions were charted on Finland's decision to send peacekeepers to join UN forces in southern Lebanon, and what should the role of UN peacekeepers be there. Background variables included the respondent's gender, age, economic activity and occupational status, type of neighbourhood, age(s) and number of children, level of education, employment status, household income, household composition, region of residence (NUTS3), economic activity and occupational status of the household's main earner, who in the household was responsible for everyday shopping, which political party R would vote for if the parliamentary elections were held at that time, and which political party R had voted for in the last parliamentary election.

本年度调查描绘了芬兰公众对于外交与国防政策、安全及军事同盟的观点。受访者被询问芬兰在外交与国防政策管理方面的表现，以及若芬兰遭受攻击，是否应采取武装自卫措施。调查还涉及了对国防经费的看法。其中一主题探讨了某些因素（例如，某些国家加入欧盟或北约、芬兰潜在的北约成员国身份、美国、俄罗斯或欧盟对恐怖主义的打击、芬兰的中立性）对芬兰及芬兰人安全的影响。调查还探究了欧盟是否有权对欧盟成员国或非成员国进行军事干预，以及干预的依据（例如，出于人道主义援助或防止种族灭绝）。进一步的问题涵盖了芬兰是否应参与欧洲快速反应部队、芬兰的国防体系（普遍征兵制或职业军队），以及国家武装力量应承担何种军事任务。通过一系列问题研究了受访者对北约的态度，涉及芬兰参与北约主导的危机管理行动，以及使军备和指挥结构符合北约标准。受访者还被询问芬兰是否应加入北约，以及是否应加入军事同盟或保持中立。一主题探讨了受访者因某些问题（例如，芬兰使用核能、以色列-巴勒斯坦冲突、伊拉克局势、国际恐怖主义、核武器）对未来的担忧程度。问题还探讨了如果芬兰决定加入军事同盟或欧盟发展共同防御，最佳方案是什么。调查了芬兰决定派遣维和部队加入联合国在黎巴嫩南部的行动，以及联合国维和部队在那里的角色。背景变量包括受访者的性别、年龄、经济活动及职业状况、居住区域类型、子女的年龄和数量、教育程度、就业状况、家庭收入、家庭构成、居住地区（NUTS3）、家庭主要收入者的经济活动及职业状况、谁负责日常购物、若议会选举在此时举行，受访者将投票支持哪个政党，以及在上次议会选举中，受访者支持了哪个政党。