Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

TV Interview for Finnish TV Yleisradio (Swedish service)

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: No.10 Downing Street
Source: Thatcher Archive: COI transcript
Journalist: Carita Blom, Finnish TV
Editorial comments:

Broadcast in the Yleisradio Swedish service on 29 August; Carita Blom was its London correspondent.

Importance ranking: Minor
Word count: 964
Themes: Foreign policy (Middle East), Defence (general), European Union (general), Foreign policy (Western Europe - non-EU), Foreign policy (Central & Eastern Europe), Conservatism

Interviewer

Prime Minister, there was much talk about a short surgical strike against Iraq. Now, we seem to be in for the long haul. What has changed?

Prime Minister

I don't think anything very much has changed since we got the United Nations Resolutions.

First, once Kuwait was invaded, we had to act very quickly through United Nations Resolutions and got a clear Resolution: “This invasion is illegal, Iraq must leave Kuwait and the legitimate Government must be restored to Kuwait.” That we all agreed and, of course, we put our own forces there very quickly into Saudi Arabia so that there was no further invasion beyond Kuwait. So our first thing was to defend and deter anyone from going into the other countries.

Second, when the Iraqis did not withdraw from Kuwait, we got the Sanctions Resolution and the enforcement of that Resolution, so that is the way we shall being pressure to bear on Iraq and the [end p1] stranglehold - the noose - will gradually tighten until they have withdrawn from Kuwait.

Interviewer

Nevertheless, the hostages are a problem aren't they, the western hostages? Who will now speak up for them in a “no-negotiation” situation?

Prime Minister

But we all speak up for them and just let us be absolutely clear!

There is a problem because you have a ruthless Saddam Husseindictator who is prepared to use human beings in that way and to hide behind women and children and use them as pawns in his whole scheme of things. That is the real trouble and because we have people like that, we have to take the Sanctions and Enforcement Resolutions that we have got. We are all speaking up for them and after all, the United Nations has fundamental human rights - they are not observed in Iraq.

Interviewer

Apart from the UN, the European Community fell swiftly into line. Would this have been possible if neutral EFTA countries like Finland, Sweden and Switzerland already had been part of a greater Europe of your own vision?

Prime Minister

The European Community had its Resolutions and agreed those fairly quickly. It did not fall quickly into line with regard to [end p2] sending troops at all and forces there. We did immediately - the others, I am afraid, took rather longer. For EFTA countries, it is just as much in their interest to be involved in carrying out the United Nations Resolutions as the European countries. After all, this is a matter which involves the whole world and do not forget that people beyond the European Community can help in dealing with this matter and the Sanctions Resolution involves all countries.

Interviewer

How do you see the integration of EFTA into the European Community? Should Finland apply for membership now or is it being beaten to it by some former East Bloc countries?

Prime Minister

I think that is for them to decide, whether they wish to join. At the moment, as you know, we have said: “Please let us get the Single Market complete, the end of 1992! That is really an enormously big change for the European Community and after that, we will be in a position to consider further applications!” And beyond that we have said that although it will take a time for the East European countries to come to a market economy - the economics of freedom is another way of putting it - when they have, I think that we should make it clear that we would welcome them if they wished to join the Community. I think it would be very good for them and a step forward but if Finland, Norway or others wish to join it is a matter for them to consider. [end p3]

Interviewer

Finally, Prime Minister, you are one of the very few who have had an “ism” attached to your name. How do you yourself define “Thatcherism”?

Prime Minister

“Thatcherism” existed long before I was born. It is, of course, the politics of liberty and justice backed up by the economics because unless you have things like private property and limitation of the actions of government and maximisation of freedom on the part of the citizen within certain rules which we must all observe, then freedom will not long last and what we did was to restore that fundamental structure of democracy and political liberty backed up by economic liberty.

I suppose Adam Smith was one of the earliest proponents of it. It is interesting that he was not an economist - he was a professor of moral philosophy and that was his first book and he knew that unless in fact you honour and uphold the rights of the individual, then give them the ways to express their enterprise, their work, their self-reliance, their duties to others, you will never in fact get your economic systems right and you will never get the combination of freedom and enterprise giving you the prosperity and dignity.

So it is not new. I am very honoured that my name should be associated with it, but the world went in the wrong way when it started to play with socialism and communism which denied fundamental human rights and said what matters is the economic system and the citizens must conform. Why we ever played with [end p4] it … I did not because it was always wrong &dubellip; but now we are back to the Government is there to serve the liberty and justice of the citizen and that is what “Thatcherism” is.

Interviewer

And you obviously think you have changed the mood of the country then, so will it continue after you decide to retire?

Prime Minister

Oh my goodness me, it is far more fundamental than I am and I hope that now we have seen the crumbling of communism - and socialism is of course a form of communism - more and more countries will openly take the road and accept the principles which I think are vital to a free society.