Paternal Cousin Beats Maternal Cousin as a Spouse

Marriage between close relatives—or, more precisely, the inbreeding among children born as a result of such unions—is harmful. This is because offspring are more likely than usual to inherit the same gene variant from both parents.

In such cases, recessive genes become expressed in the children's phenotype, causing recessively inherited diseases to manifest. As a result, children born to related parents face a higher risk of congenital structural abnormalities, developmental disabilities, deafness and blindness, as well as infant and child mortality. In addition, inbreeding reduces the cognitive ability of offspring born from such relationships, which has a negative effect on their success in life.

If marriages between relatives occur within the same family or community over several consecutive generations, genetic diversity decreases and the genetic risks increase further. Despite these disadvantages, marriage between cousins is common in many cultures.

More than 10 percent of the world's population enters into such marriages—this has also become increasingly common in Finland and other Western countries in recent years as a result of increased humanitarian immigration. For this reason, it has been suspected that such marriages may be associated with some benefit that has caused this—in itself highly harmful—cultural practice to become established in some cultures.

* * *

One such benefit was identified in a study published by French researcher Olympia L. K. Campbell. It concerned the effect of kinship relationships on conflicts within the household, i.e. domestic violence.

The study was based on two competing hypotheses. According to the first, blood kinship would align spouses' interests and increase monitoring by relatives, thereby reducing men's incentives and opportunities to use coercion. According to the second hypothesis, close kinship networks would place family unity above women's autonomy, suppressing help-seeking and making it easier to control women.

Campbell compared these hypotheses using data collected from approximately 36,000–46,000 women in Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, and Turkey. In this dataset, marriage to a first cousin was associated with a 2.5-percentage-point lower probability of physical intimate-partner violence compared with marriages in which the spouses were not blood relatives.

For a woman, this corresponds to an approximately 11 percent lower relative risk of violence. In addition, the researcher found a similar reduction in coercive controlling behavior toward wives.

Interestingly, marriage to a paternal cousin reduced the risk of physical violence more than marriage to a maternal cousin. Thus, it appears that the protective effect stems from the authority of the man's relatives over men, rather than from the spouse's kinship itself. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Blame the Philanthropist Or Understand the Facts
Society, Genetics, and the Impact of Consanguineous Marriages: At the Intersection of Education and Heredity
Cousin is not just a delicacy, but also a hindrance to social success

The Overlooked Factor Behind Finland’s Falling PISA Scores

The PISA results published yesterday, which measure schoolchildren’s academic performance, showed that the performance level of Finnish, and many other European, schoolchildren had declined since the previous assessment. The reasons for this have been discussed in the pages of one Finnish media outlet after another, and at least the obvious impact of social media on children’s ability to concentrate has not been downplayed.

However, one factor that has quite evidently contributed to the decline in our schoolchildren’s performance has received remarkably little attention. Namely, the indirect effect of poorly performing immigrant children and young people on other pupils.

Of course, it is impossible to say anything with certainty about this without proper research, but even common sense suggests that the disruption these pupils are known to cause, and the special attention they require from teachers—which comes at the expense of the time available for teaching other schoolchildren—would seem to be plausible candidates for explaining, for example, the [surprising decline] in the learning outcomes of children from socioeconomically advantaged families.

* * *

I was particularly surprised when Professor Mari-Pauliina Vainikainen, who commented on the issue on  television —and was wearing a rather striking floral decoration on her head—explicitly denied that immigration has an impact on learning outcomes (at around the 15-minute mark in this recording). She justified this by saying that the gap in academic performance between immigrant young people and native Finnish young people had narrowed since the previous assessment.

Her reasoning is, of course, factually correct in itself, but her conclusion seemed odd given that the impact of immigration is known to have significantly worsened the conditions for maintaining order and concentration in school classrooms. Even more peculiar was the realization that I could not easily find a Finnish source to link to documenting this phenomenon, which is familiar to the parents of children in all kinds of ethnically diverse classrooms.

In any case, it is clear that if pupils from the majority population have to study in a more disruptive environment than in previous years, this will affect their learning. The same applies if, because of the additional attention required by immigrant children, they receive less time and instruction from their teachers than they did in the past.

It would therefore be good if researchers and funding could also be found for studying these factors. Above all, we should develop a pedagogical solution that would eliminate these problems from Finnish school classrooms.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish Families Flee Immigrant-Dominated Areas Over School Safety Concerns
Finnish Immigration Policy Limits Freedom of Expression
Attitudes Toward Immigrants Are a Problem in Schools

Israeli Ministers’ Statements Are a Victory for Hamas

Last night’s news reported that Israeli ministers had hardened their rhetoric concerning Palestinians. Foreign Minister Israel Katz, who represents the Likud, the main governing party, said that Israel would empty Gaza of its inhabitants as soon as the United States identifies a place to which they can be deported.

Such statements are not in accordance with any international law; quite the contrary. Even so, they are less extreme than the fantasies voiced by Katz’s ministerial colleague and leader of the Otzma Yehudit party, Itamar Ben-Gvir, about assassinating 30–40 Gazans every night.

* * *

In both cases, the ultimate consequence of the ministers’ publicly voiced thoughts for international politics is unambiguous: they weaken Israel’s position. And by doing so, they strengthen sympathy for Palestinians elsewhere in the world, thereby empowering activism that supports them.

It is of course clear that Katz’s statements are in reality much more serious than Ben-Gvir’s fantasies about assassinations. This is so simply because he represents the ruling Likud rather than some small extremist party.

Furthermore, Katz’s statements are made more credible by the fact that no solution guaranteeing Israel’s security has been found to the problem of Gaza even over the course of decades—as the terrorist attack of October 7, 2023 clearly demonstrated. This undoubtedly frustrates even those decision-makers in the Jewish state who would like to find a peaceful and lasting solution to the problem of the two peoples of the so-called Holy Land.

On the other hand, it is quite clear that the publicly voiced thoughts of the ministers mentioned above are like winning the lottery for Hamas, whose position had already weakened after the terrorist attack of October 7, 2023, and its consequences. After all, no significant Western politician can defend or support genocidal statements—or even calls for the forced displacement of a population—coming from ministers of a democratic government. Not now, and not in the future.

* * *

It therefore remains to be seen how the situation between Israel and the Palestinians will develop in the future. The positions we have now heard did not arise out of nowhere, but reflect the deep frustration among Israeli Jews with the unresolved Palestinian issue, which has continued for decade after decade, and with its terrorist consequences.

Unfortunately, solutions are in short supply in a situation where neither side trusts the other. Nor did the Palestinian leadership accept independence at the time, even though it was offered.

Moreover, at least Hamas still has no genuine desire today to give up its dream of extending its rule—as they themselves put it—“from the river to the sea,” meaning over the entire territory of present-day Israel. And at the same time, to remove all Jews from the area.

That is why it seems to me that the confrontation and violence between the populations of the Holy Land will continue for decades, if not for centuries. And I would not be surprised at all if the solution—whenever it inevitably comes—were to follow the ideas expressed by the Israeli ministers discussed here. Or, alternatively, the dreams of Palestinian terrorists of driving the Jews into the Mediterranean Sea.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland’s Foreign Minister Explained Why the States That Have Recognized Palestine Are Well-Meaning Fools
Optimism and Reality of the Gaza Peace Proposal
Palestine’s Statehood and International Law

Hamtramck: A Test Case for Mass Immigration

Surrounded by Detroit, Hamtramck is America’s first Muslim-majority city, although as recently as 1970, Poles made up nearly 90% of its population. In other words, Hamtramck is an example of a European-descended population changing from Christians to Muslims.

This ethnic and religious transformation has not taken place without visible consequences. One example is the decision by the city council, consisting entirely of Muslim men, to rename Holbrook Avenue—one of Hamtramck’s main thoroughfares—as Palestine Avenue.

At the same time, the city’s streetscape has changed. Women no longer walk the streets in miniskirts or with their hair uncovered, but are instead covered from head to toe in black niqabs. Shop signs, too, are written in the scripts used in the new population’s countries of origin, and schools have replaced the Easter holiday with time off to mark the end of Ramadan. And, of course, the soundscape has acquired the Islamic call to prayer, heard several times a day.

The consumption of alcohol has also been banned, while the religious slaughter of animals at home is permitted. And something that members of Europe’s sexual minorities in particular might want to take note of: the all-Muslim male city council has banned the public display of the Pride flag.

* * *

It remains to be seen, then, whether Hamtramck is an example of the future of Western countries—including Europe, which readily welcomes immigrants—or merely a uniquely American curiosity. But whichever it turns out to be, people should be aware of the changes that have taken place there—especially when they support liberal immigration policies.

In Finland, the possibility of taking a position on a future like Hamtramck’s will next arise in the parliamentary elections next spring. After all, we will then have both candidates and political parties whose immigration policies will sooner or later lead to a way of life resembling that of present-day Hamtramck, as well as political movements opposed to such a future. The same applies to other European democracies as well.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Lessons from the Abdul Ballout Case
The Forgotten Empire That Shaped Modern Europe
Reflections on the Terrorist Attack in Australia

Lukashenko Plays It Safe as Putin Fails in Ukraine

Belarus is one of the last dictatorships in Europe. The country is ruled by President Aleksandr Lukashenko, whose hold on power is supported by Putin’s Russia.

On the other hand, Lukashenko is trying to avoid getting entangled in Putin’s disastrous war in Ukraine, especially now that it is clear that no quick victory is forthcoming. And apparently for that reason – undoubtedly after carefully considering the matter – he congratulated Ukraine on the country’s 35th Independence Day.

* * *

This act appears, at least according to a Finnish political media, Verkkouutiset, to have been too much for many Russian so-called war bloggers. According to them, Russia’s main problem is not its enemies but its allies – who are unwilling to go along with all of Putin’s stupidities.

Lukashenko has acted in much the same way. In 2022, he understood that it was unwise to throw himself wholeheartedly into Putin’s three-day “special operation.” Whether the reason was a lack of capability, an understanding that Russia’s invasion would not go well, or something else, the failed attempt to seize Kyiv in the very first days of the war showed that this was fortunately the right decision for Belarus.

* * *

The war itself has produced no decisive outcomes since then, either. Of course, both sides have achieved small victories and suffered considerable losses. One such development is just unfolding north of the city of Lyman, where thousands of Russian troops are being encircled.

It is, of course, quite a catastrophe for the Russian army, but on its own it will no more decide the war in Ukraine’s favor than the much more devastating Battle of Raate Road decided the Winter War in Finland’s favor. For dictators like Lukashenko, however, it is a clear sign that they should not sink too deeply into Putin’s pocket, but instead try, as far as possible, to maintain some distance from their most important supporter.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is This the Start of Putin’s Final Countdown?
Do Belarusians Have the Will and Ability to Preserve Their Independence?
Turning Points in the War in Ukraine: New Threats and Unexpected Allies

2,731 Years to Conquer Ukraine

At least for me, it has been difficult to understand exactly what has happened in the war between Ukraine and Russia during the current year. Of course, it is clear that the Ukrainians have destroyed Russian infrastructure with drone attacks, while the Russians have continued to destroy Ukrainian civilians in Kyiv and other major cities.

What I have seen less information about, however, is how the situation on the front has developed. Yesterday morning, though, I noticed on social media that Volodymyr Zelenskyy had said: “At the moment, the enemy has captured 990 square kilometres since the beginning of the year, while we have regained control of 820 square kilometres. By the end of 2026, however, we will achieve a balance between these areas.”

* * *

It therefore appears that the success of the two fighting armies varies across different parts of the front. In terms of the overall picture, however, the changes are small, if not downright minimal, since Ukraine has a total area of 603,628 km². In other words, the Russians have managed to capture 0.213 percent of the territory of their victim in just under eight months, while the Ukrainians have recaptured 0.177 percent elsewhere.

Thus, the net extent of Russian advances during this period amounts to 0.037 percent of Ukraine’s territory. Or, to put it another way: at this rate, it would take the Russians 2,731 years to take control of the whole of Ukraine—that is, until the year 3757. Admittedly, they would accomplish it “already” in 2495 if Putin’s army managed to prevent Zelenskyy’s forces from recapturing any territory.

* * *

In my view, all of this underscores the absurdity of the war that has been going on in Europe for years. The casualty figures of the armies involved provide equally stark evidence: according to Wikipedia, almost 1.5 million Russians have been killed or wounded, while the corresponding figure for Ukrainians is also close to half a million.

That means that more than one percent of both Russia’s and Ukraine’s populations have been killed or wounded as a result of Putin’s “special military operation.” The former while taking part in a raid on a foreign country, and the latter while defending their homes and families.

This raises the question: how on earth could Vladimir Putin be made to understand the horror of all this, when hardly anyone would dare—even in Russia, at least—to present him with the figures I have set out here? Would it even be enough if Zelenskyy’s prediction, mentioned at the beginning of this piece, that the situation would be balanced out by the end of the year were to come true?

* * *

The situation is not entirely hopeless, however. Perhaps the Ukrainian attacks on Russian infrastructure will eventually lead—through the worsening everyday misery they cause—to a revolution in Russia. And surely it is not impossible that the relatives of Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine will eventually have had enough of seeing their sons and other family members sent to their deaths.

Unfortunately, I always remember in this context the view expressed by an older Estonian colleague of mine: Russians will never rise up in rebellion. This is because they are far too accustomed to their poor living conditions, and because they have potato plots to ensure that they have at least the food they need to survive. Thus, according to my colleague, even Putin can count on the support of his people during his senseless military adventure, however long it may last—decades, centuries, or even thousands of years.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Ukraine: Putin's Waterloo, China's Opportunity—and Finland's Headache
Putin's Growing Crisis in Ukraine and an Uncertain Endgame for Russia
Russia's Predicament Awakened the Trolls and Increased the Risk of Nuclear War

AI and E. coli, side by side — what a ride!

The Finnish media Helsingin Sanomat (HS) reported this morning that artificial intelligence, or language models, reflect the values of their developers. The article was based on the same questions that HS has asked candidates from different political parties in connection with elections. This made it possible to compare the language models with the parties and their values.

Most language models lean toward value liberalism and the left – among Finnish political parties, the closest equivalents are mainly the Social Democratic Party (SDP), the Greens, and the Swedish People’s Party (RKP). The Finns Party (Perussuomalaiset), by contrast, is the furthest away.

When reading this news story, it is worth remembering that people probably do not ask language models very much about values, but rather about various facts. As far as those are concerned, current language models are, at least in my own experience, quite reliable.

* * *

Yesterday, I also happened to read a scientific paper about a completely new kind of AI-based approach in which Paul Ahavi and his colleagues used E. coli bacteria as a living information processor by analyzing their natural growth responses in plasma samples from COVID-19 patients. This was done without genetic modification or specialized equipment.

In practice, the researchers classified early-stage plasma samples from COVID-19 patients according to how severe the disease subsequently became. The classification was based solely on bacterial growth data and was analyzed using machine learning, or artificial intelligence.

The study showed that AI could analyze the effects of metabolites in patients’ plasma on the growth of E. coli and link those effects to the subsequent progression of the disease. In other words, by analyzing bacterial growth, it was able to distinguish a disease that would develop into a mild case from one that would become severe – essentially determining who would recover from the infection on their own and who would require treatment.

Based on their results the researchers concluded that “these findings position biological reservoir computing as a robust, scalable, and low-cost platform for intelligent biosensing, diagnostics, and hybrid bio-digital computation, while providing new mechanistic insights into the computational capabilities of living systems.”

The ability of the combination of E. coli and AI to predict the progression of COVID-19 was roughly as accurate as what can be achieved with precise – and extremely expensive – biochemical measurements. This means that the combination would seemingly offer a vastly cheaper way of analyzing large numbers of patients in connection with a wide variety of epidemics – and potentially even in developing countries.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Rain Scald: The Future of a New Sexually Transmitted Disease
Gender Reassignment May Not Help—and Could Even Worsen Mental Health
AI Drones: Ukraine’s New Edge in the War?

How Immigration Has Reshaped European Politics

As my esteemed reader knows, Europe has been undergoing rapid change since at least 2015. It is therefore interesting to see how this change is reflected in opinion polls.

For this reason, I decided to share a few images this Sunday showing the development of party support in different countries. The source of the images is Politico.eu’s Poll of Polls.

* * *

Let us begin with Germany.

The chart clearly shows how, as recently as 20 years ago, Germany’s political landscape was dominated by two major parties, CDU/CSU and SPD. In 2013, a new, small, immigration-critical party, AfD, appeared on the scene. Over the course of the past roughly 13 years, its support has risen in waves to its current level of around 28 percent, making it the largest party in Europe’s largest economic area.

Another significant change is the division of the SPD’s traditional support base between the party and the Greens. At the moment, the Greens are even more popular than the old dominant party of the left.

* * *

Next, France.

The chart beginning in 2017 shows the rise of the immigration-critical National Rally from a medium-sized party to France’s most popular political movement. Two other significant developments have been the consolidation of the previously fragmented left, which has made it the country’s second-largest political movement, and the gradual decline in support for Emmanuel Macron’s centrist party.

* * *

Third, the old world power, the United Kingdom.

The chart shows that the country’s two traditional major parties held their ground for a long time, but that the political landscape has since evolved into a three-party contest involving three medium-sized parties. At the moment, the Labour Party is in the lead, but the Reform UK party, led by Nigel Farage and having risen on the back of concerns about immigration, as well as the Conservatives, are breathing right down its neck. In recent months, however, support for the old major parties has been rising, while Reform UK’s upward trajectory appears to have peaked sometime last year.

* * *

Overall, these party polls tell us a great deal about the enormous impact of immigration on the political landscape of Western Europe’s largest countries. The same has happened in Finland and Sweden — and Italy is governed by the immigration-critical Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. When we add to this the fact that modern mass immigration is not wanted in the countries of Eastern Europe either, it becomes clear that this is a pan-European view among the peoples of Europe.

This view, however, is reflected rather poorly in European politics. The European Union has failed to close its borders, and there is still an open route for harmful immigration in the form of the so-called right to apply for asylum. In addition, there are spontaneous waves of illegal immigration, most recently in Spain’s Ceuta.

It remains to be seen whether the changing views of EU citizens will affect European immigration policy. And if they do, how.

Will the right to asylum, which emerged in the aftermath of Nazi Germany’s atrocities, be abandoned because of excessive abuse? Will European states begin effectively returning the people who have flowed across their borders over the past ten years and who are unwilling to integrate into their societies? And even their descendants born within the EU?

* * *

From the perspective of us ordinary citizens, the important thing is to lay the foundations for a better future for Europe by voting in elections for parties and candidates through whom the population and culture of our continent can preserve their vitality. The development I have described above shows that many Europeans have understood this, but also that not everyone has.

The future is, of course, unpredictable, so let this entry remain as one snapshot of the current situation. And at the same time, let it serve as a reminder to all of you — my esteemed readers — that ultimately, every democratic society becomes what the people living in it want it to become. At least when the people living in these countries understand what is in their own best interests and exercise their right to vote.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish Families Flee Immigrant-Dominated Areas Over School Safety Concerns
Lessons for EU Citizens from the Ceuta Episode
Lessons from the Abdul Ballout Case

Finnish Families Flee Immigrant-Dominated Areas Over School Safety Concerns

The Finnish newspaper Iltalehti published an article about a Helsinki family’s experiences with immigration. According to the article, the parents decided to move away from Helsinki because their son refused to start lower secondary school at a comprehensive school in eastern Helsinki. The reason for this was the sense of insecurity caused by immigrant children, predominantly Muslims and children of African background.

The school in question has a large immigrant population and has also been in the news recently for other reasons, as Helsinki decision-makers have changed school admission catchment areas in order to bring not only immigrant children but also native Finnish children into the school. This has sparked opposition among families affected by the decision.

* * *

In the newspaper article, the mother gave her own account of the students at the school who bullied her son. According to her, some children of foreign background would gang up on others, pick fights, and behave violently. She also described an incident in which a group of bullies had been waiting outside the family’s home with sticks so that they could beat up the boy.

The group of bullies had also mocked the boy’s name while his mother was investigating an altercation that had taken place in the residential courtyard. In other words, they showed no respect even towards adults – or at least not towards ethnic Finns.

* * *

Finland’s Minister of Social Affairs and Health, Wille Rydman (Finns Party), commented on the matter on social media. He asked what “open-borders immigration policy,” “tolerance,” and “anti-racism” mean in practice.

He answered that they mean children becoming victims of systematic violence and learning nothing at school, while ethnic Finns are forced to become refugees in their own country. He further stated that “in many cases, immigration also means that your daughter, or in some cases your grandmother, or even you yourself, will be raped.”

* * *

It is clear that this statement by the minister will either be silenced completely or, alternatively, prominently highlighted alongside accusations of racism. For ethnic Finnish families living in eastern Helsinki, however, this is not a matter of political debate but of their children’s future. And that is why those who have the means and understanding to do so are leaving eastern Helsinki altogether.

It therefore remains to be seen how the school involved in the above-mentioned case and its surrounding areas will change in the coming years. It also remains to be seen whether Wille Rydman is right or wrong when he claims that “mass immigration builds nothing. It is a sweeping destructive force that civilizations always succumb to – history demonstrates this unequivocally. For our enemies, migration is a key instrument for weakening us. For the defenders of our civilization, opposing mass immigration and promoting return migration is therefore a fundamental moral duty. European society and civilization will either survive or fall with it.”

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Two Recent Life-Threatening Crimes in Finland
Attitudes Toward Immigrants Are a Problem in Schools
Swedish School Shooting with Automatic Weapon Highlights Nation in Crisis

Swedish Left Politicians Sent Letters to Palestinian Terrorists

The Finnish Broadcasting Company reported that Swedish left-wing politicians had sent letters of encouragement to Palestinian terrorists imprisoned by Israel. One of the recipients was Ahmad al-Moghrabi, who had ordered an attack on a family gathering in which eleven people, including two small children, were killed.

The Swedes had asked Palestinians living in Sweden for a list of people to whom they could send letters, and the Palestinians had provided them with such a list, which included terrorists.

The Swedish politicians are now expressing regret over what happened and blaming the Palestinians for their mistake. The fact remains, however, that even in Israel, people are presumably not imprisoned — at least not for long periods — without good reason. Not even Palestinians.

It remains to be seen whether what happened will have any effect on support for the Swedish left-wing party. And if it does, whether the effect will be positive or negative from their perspective — in other words, whether there is a pro-terrorism sentiment among Swedes of immigrant background who typically vote for green and left-wing parties, or whether they have already adopted the Western view that terrorism is unacceptable under any circumstances.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle Using Taxpayer Money to Mislead?
Burning a Man Alive Led to Life Imprisonment
Who Is Responsible: The Donor or the Recipient of Aid?

Lessons for EU Citizens from the Ceuta Episode

The events in Ceuta have led Europeans to wake up. Or at least almost all of them, since 22 EU countries – Germany, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden – have signed a letter calling for effective protection of the external borders, action to prevent illegal entry, and support for Spain. Finland’s signatory was Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party).

It is regrettable, of course, that five countries have expressed their desire to see the continuation of the modern-day mass migration by refusing to sign the demand. They are Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and Portugal, whose motives are – at least to me – rather difficult to understand, because this is not about immigration in general but specifically about illegal immigration.

* * *

The Finnish Government evidently takes illegal immigration seriously, since Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party) immediately instructed her ministry’s officials to prepare the measures required for closing Finland’s EU internal borders. According to her, the purpose is to ensure that the “decisions required to close the internal borders can, on the basis of this preparatory work, be made very quickly if the need arises.”

In other words, neither Rantanen nor Finland is unilaterally closing the EU’s internal borders, but rather creating the capability to do so quickly if necessary. This is important because, in the absence of both the necessary legislation – and the political will – the Finnish Government was forced in 2015 to stand by helplessly as large numbers of illegal immigrants poured into our country from the western border.

As a result of the preparations now under way, the steps required to close our country’s EU borders will in future already be prepared in advance, meaning that shutting them can be accomplished with a single order from the Government. And as a result, the internal movement of illegal immigrants into our northern land will come to an end.

* * *

It remains to be seen whether Finland will ever need the legislation currently being prepared. In any case, the events in Ceuta turned out to be a brief episode, possibly caused by organized – perhaps even state-sponsored – crime.

This is because there is no way to get from Ceuta to mainland Europe without border checks. Thus, it was not a route that could have led to a repetition of the events of 2015. Consequently, the Moroccans who had rushed there soon returned to their home country.

In the end, the whole Ceuta episode concluded happily, just like a fairy tale. Instead of the modern-day mass migration taking another step forward, it reminded EU politicians that it is better to prepare in advance than to find themselves searching for illegal immigrants all over the Union.

That is why it is difficult to understand the stupidity demonstrated by the power-holders in Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and Portugal by refusing to sign the demand mentioned at the beginning. Perhaps, in their next parliamentary elections, the citizens of those countries will understand that they would be well advised to consider giving their votes to politicians more responsible than their current rulers!

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
From Burden to Benefit: Reforming Immigration in Finland
Sensible Immigration or Moral Posturing?
Why is Somalia unwilling to meet Finland’s conditions for continuing development cooperation?

Forest Growth and Human Stupidity Led to France's Wildfires

Today, the leadership of Finland's Natural Resources Institute (Luke) stated that the increasing number of forest fires in Europe and North America is due not only to global warming but also, to a large extent, to the steadily growing carbon stock that has accumulated in forests over several decades. According to them, this is the result of two main factors: increasingly effective wildfire suppression and reduced use of forests through timber harvesting.

As a remedy, the authors propose increasing the volume of the forest industry, cleaning up logging residues after harvesting, and carrying out prescribed burns. In other words, they advocate many of the same measures that President Donald Trump mentioned several years ago in connection with California's wildfires.

But good heavens—wouldn't that also mean more jobs for people and more taxable income for the public sector? Surely that couldn't be acceptable! Or could it?

In any case, the authors' perspective is like a breath of fresh air in the stale forest policy debate that has long been dominated by nature conservation and environmental advocacy groups. If for no other reason, it would be encouraging to see political decision-makers around the world—or at least in Finland—take their views seriously.

* * *

Luke's assessment is scientifically well-founded, but it is not the whole story. It overlooks one important factor in the ignition of forest fires: human stupidity.

The wildfires that have struck France in recent days provide a clear example. Many of them have been started by people—either deliberately or through carelessness. In fact, the majority of all forest fires are caused by human activity.

There is only one remedy for that: using common sense when spending time in nature. That, in turn, requires both awareness of the risks and the ability to act rationally. It remains to be seen whether the people of France will rise to that challenge—or whether devastating wildfires will become a recurring tragedy there.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Challenging What We Think We Know: Wildfires Reveal the Power of Science
Control of Douglas fir beetles by woodborer beetles
Forests in Indonesia and Finland

Lessons from the Abdul Ballout Case

The Finnish newspaper Iltalehti reported today on the subject of my article from yesterday, namely the criminal history of Abdul B., also known as Abdul Ballout. According to the report, his crimes appear to have become increasingly serious over the years.

In 2020, Ballout was convicted after robbing another person of a pair of headphones. Five years later, he was sentenced in Lebanon to three months in prison for attempting to join the ISIS terrorist organization.

In May of this year, Ballout was given a suspended prison sentence of one year and ten months in Germany for planning an act of violence endangering the state and for publishing ISIS propaganda on social media.

One might have expected this to set off alarm bells within Germany's security and judicial authorities. However, that did not happen. On the contrary, Berlin prosecutors appealed the sentence.

The court, however, stated that it had taken into account Ballout's imprisonment in Lebanon, his lengthy pre-trial detention in Germany, as well as the fact that he had confessed to his crimes and appeared to have distanced himself from the terrorist group.

As a result, the German authorities naively and in good faith allowed him to remain at liberty instead of isolating him from society. We now know the outcome: Ballout killed one person by driving a car into them, while another fifteen people were injured.

* * *

This raises the question of whether Germany—and Western countries more generally—should reconsider how they deal with individuals whose criminal histories point toward increasingly serious offenses and an interest in extremist ideologies connected to terrorism. Should they, by one means or another, ensure that such individuals are prevented from carrying out terrorist attacks that harm other people?

At present, this issue particularly concerns immigrants from Islamic countries. History has, of course, also witnessed similar violence motivated by other ideologies. In Germany, for example, the most recent comparable threat came from far-left extremists during the late twentieth century, while Finland's history includes both the Red Terror and the kidnappings carried out by the far right roughly a century ago.

There is, however, one important difference. Those historical cases involved ethnically European perpetrators, whereas the Islamist threat in Europe has grown alongside modern mass migration. The perpetrators mainly originate from the Middle East and North Africa and therefore do not generally share the worldview of Western societies that have become increasingly secular. Consequently, many of them also have little desire to assimilate into the Western way of life.

Previous articles on the same topic:
"Abdul B" Drove Into a Pride Crowd
Reflections on the Terrorist Attack in Australia
Will European Culture Collapse Under the Weight of Islamic Immigration?

"Abdul B" Drove Into a Pride Crowd

The German Pride community experienced firsthand what it feels like to live as a sexual minority in an Islamist culture when "Abdul B" drove into their celebration and then went on a rampage with a machete. As a result, one woman was killed and at least 15 people were injured.

Abdul B (picture below) was already known to the authorities as someone with Islamist views. Nevertheless, like many others of his kind, he had been allowed to live freely in Berlin.

* * *

The terrorist attack on the Pride event can, of course, be dismissed as an isolated incident—if one wants to. Or rather: because one wants to.

It could just as well be seen as an inevitable consequence of Germany's immigration policy, in which Islamist extremism has not been adequately taken into account. This interpretation is supported by the fact that this was not a one-off event; Islamists have previously carried out terrorist attacks in Germany as well.

Perhaps the most significant consequence of last night's terrorist attack will be a further increase in support for the immigration-critical AfD party in Germany. According to opinion polls, around 28 percent of Germans currently support the party, making it the country's most popular political party.

Germany also has the left-wing BSW party, which is likewise critical of immigration. However, its support has fallen to around three percent after reaching as high as nine percent a couple of years ago. It remains to be seen whether left-leaning voters who favor its economic policies will return to the party thanks to "Abdul B."

* * *

While reading about the events in Berlin, I could not help thinking how beneficial it has been that Finland's immigration policy has become more pragmatic through the measures introduced by the current government, under the leadership of Minister Mari Rantanen (Finns Party). It remains to be seen, however, whether these reforms will continue under the next government or whether it will begin reversing the progress that has been made.

This is a genuine concern, as opinion polls show that support for Prime Minister Petteri Orpo's (National Coalition Party) government has fallen to 39.1 percent, while the Social Democratic Party (SDP), the largest opposition party, has become by far the country's most popular party. One factor contributing to this has been the party's strong support among foreign-language speakers, which, in the author's view, reinforces what is described as the party's irresponsible immigration policy.

For that reason, it would be worthwhile for Finnish Social Democratic voters to pause for a moment and consider what kind of Finland they wish to leave to future generations. Should it be a state governed by the rule of law, rooted in Finnish culture, where law, order, and equality between people prevail?

Or should it become a multicultural hell in which public disorder is a constant reality and the rights of women and sexual minorities are threatened by extremist Islamist ideas rooted in seventh-century beliefs?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Will Tomorrow’s Elections in Germany Be a Turning Point?
Will European Culture Collapse Under the Weight of Islamic Immigration?
Afghan's Rampage in Germany Signals the End of the Value-Liberal Era in the EU

Military Superiority Does Not Guarantee Victory

Nobody cares if a dog bites a man. Consequently, such incidents are not reported in the news, and they certainly do not make headline stories.

It is a different matter if a man bites a dog. That is unexpected and therefore the kind of event that makes headlines.

* * *

This came to mind when virtually all major Finnish media outlets (example, another) reported that Iran's armed forces had succeeded in killing two and wounding four American soldiers. The last time Iran managed to kill an enemy combatant was last March, and over the course of the current war it has reportedly killed a total of fifteen American soldiers.

According to Wikipedia, the Iranians have meanwhile lost 1,221 soldiers. That means the cost of one American soldier amounts to roughly 81 Iranian soldiers. In other words, one American is worth more than eighty Persian Muslims.

This figure can be compared, for example, with the Winter War, during which about five Red Army soldiers were killed or wounded for every Finnish soldier lost. This suggests that the Americans have been about sixteen times more militarily effective against the Iranians this year than the Finns were against the Soviets during the Winter War.

* * *

The essential question, however, is this: if the Finns' fivefold superiority was enough to halt the Red Army's offensive, will the Americans' superiority—sixteen times greater than that achieved by the Finns in the Winter War, amounting to an overall advantage of more than eighty to one—be sufficient to defeat the Iranians?

At the moment, it does not appear so, although the Americans have naturally launched retaliatory strikes in response to these events.

Such strikes, however, do not win wars, nor do they apparently succeed in toppling governments. That would require the deployment of ground forces, which would also mean a substantial increase in American military casualties.

Even President Donald Trump is unlikely to be willing to take that step, as he too remembers the war in Afghanistan, in which 2,328 U.S. soldiers lost their lives. That conflict ended, under pressure from the home front, in the defeat of the Americans—and the Europeans who had supported them.

* * *

Based on the above, it is likely that Trump's war against the Iranians will end in a humiliating defeat for the United States. The greatest victims will be ordinary Iranians, who had hoped to see their government—one guided by medieval values—overthrown. And, of course, people around the world will also suffer if the Strait of Hormuz effectively becomes a trade route controlled by Iran, with transit requiring the payment of tariffs or tolls.

Another significant consequence is that Iranian resistance has demonstrated that American military power may be less formidable than previously believed. This is something that has undoubtedly been noticed in Beijing, which has its own strategic interests in East Asia. For that reason, Taiwan in particular—but Japan as well—has good reason to prepare for the growing assertiveness of Chinese imperial ambitions.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Who Really Rules Iran?
Trump’s War Without Strategy: Why Iran May Come Out Stronger
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony

Ukraine: Putin's Waterloo, China's Opportunity—and Finland's Headache

Putin's three-day "special military operation" has left Russians in dire straits. For example, motorists can obtain fuel only after waiting in long queues, as Ukrainian strikes on the country's oil refineries have significantly reduced Russia's refining capacity. In addition, the war has exacted a staggering human toll in the form of dead and wounded soldiers—leading to speculation that Putin may even be considering a new round of mobilization.

Yet these may not be the most significant consequences of the "special military operation." According to an article published by the Wall Street Journal, China is seeking to turn Russia into something of a vassal state. This would mean a situation in which Russia becomes dependent on China, more closely integrated with it, and increasingly looks to China as a model and a source of modern thinking.

According to the article, the Chinese have therefore been cultivating contacts with Russians whom they believe could rise to positions of influence after Putin. At the same time, they have been slow to accommodate Putin's wishes and have, for example, demanded that any agreement to build the long-discussed gas pipeline from Siberia to China include provisions allowing them to purchase Russian gas at Russia's much lower domestic prices rather than at international market rates.

When one also considers the halt in Russia's military advance—and, in some areas, even its retreat—Ukraine is increasingly emerging as Putin's Waterloo. And China is unlikely to have any qualms about exploiting the situation to the fullest.

* * *

If, as now seems increasingly possible, Russia ends up becoming a Chinese vassal state as a consequence of its war, Finland should finally begin asking what this would mean for Russia's northwestern neighbor. Would growing Chinese influence increase or reduce the security threat that Moscow poses to Finland?

It is, of course, clear that once peace returns, trade across the eastern border is likely to become easier again. But will it resemble the trade that existed before the "special military operation"? Or will it acquire a distinctly Chinese dimension? And if so, would that be beneficial or detrimental to Finland?

I have not noticed experts, civil servants, or politicians giving these questions the attention they deserve. I therefore urge them to do so without delay, so that we can make the most of the opportunities that may emerge while avoiding the pitfalls that lie ahead.

After all, politics is ultimately the art of the possible, where successful anticipation is already half the battle. This has always been especially true of Finland's policy toward its eastern neighbor.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin's Endgame: Deception, Escalation, or Death?
Putin's Growing Crisis in Ukraine and an Uncertain Endgame for Russia
The Taiwan Question: A Conflict That Could Turn Nuclear

The Early Effects of Finland's Tightened Immigration Policy

Finnish immigration policy has led to an increase in sexual and violent crime. A recent example is 29-year-old Munir Suleyman Weyrah, whose sentence was reduced by the Court of Appeal to two years and ten months in prison after the District Court's ruling.

In addition, he was ordered to pay his victim €8,800 in compensation for emotional suffering. The amount is laughable considering that, after the assault, the victim has no longer been able to live in her own home.

Of course, the rape committed by Munir was only one case among many similar ones. Nor do I believe it will change the views of those Finns who have supported previous immigration policies any more than the large number of similar incidents that came before it.

As a result, Munir will undoubtedly have many who follow his example. And Finnish women will continue to "enjoy" forced sexual acts and the small compensation payments that follow from them.

* * *

This will happen despite the fact that Finland's current government has made many changes to immigration-related legislation. Moreover, previous mistakes in immigration policy have also been acknowledged in many other EU countries.

Unfortunately, those decisions are not yet reflected in the asylum statistics. During the past twelve months, the largest groups receiving positive asylum decisions have been 380 Somalis, 301 Afghans, and 140 Iraqis. These figures can be compared with the corresponding statistics from 2023, when the Orpo government took office: asylum was granted to 258 Afghans, 246 Somalis, and 174 Iraqis.

One positive development is that while Finland deported 120 Iraqis, 29 Somalis, and no Afghans in 2023, over the past 12 months deportation decisions have been issued for 214 Iraqis, 40 Somalis, and 26 Afghans. Admittedly, the numbers of deported Somalis and Afghans remain well below the numbers granted asylum, but in the case of Iraqis, the trend has reversed.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Sensible Immigration or Moral Posturing?
Swedish Ministers Condemn Antisemitic Protest Outside Jewish School
Attempted Homicides in Finland Reach Highest Level of the 2000s

Who Really Rules Iran?

The Finnish Broadcasting company Yle has closely followed the funeral of Iran’s dictator, Ali Khamenei. At the same time, it has reported that the new Ayatollah, Mojtaba Khamenei, did not appear at the funeral and has not been seen in public even once.

Messages purportedly issued by Khamenei have, however, been read out in Iran before. In addition, the United States and Israel are said to possess intelligence suggesting that Mojtaba is still alive.

That may, of course, be true—or it may not. What is clear, however, is that a head of state hiding like a rat cannot truly be the one exercising power—not even in Iran. If he remains in hiding, someone else must be wielding authority in his place: someone who does not want their own name mentioned publicly and instead issues orders in Mojtaba’s name.

If, on the other hand, Mojtaba has in fact died, it would be entirely understandable that the real holder of power would not want their own name splashed across the headlines. It would instead be far more advantageous for them to claim that Mojtaba is alive and governing the country from a secret bunker, much like Adolf Hitler was said to be doing in 1945.

* * *

I readily admit that what I have written above contains elements of a conspiracy theory. Time will tell whether Mojtaba returns as Iran’s visible religious leader and head of state once peace finally returns.

For my part, to borrow the late ski jumper Matti Nykänen’s famous expression, I would put the odds at no better than “fifty-sixty.”

Before that, it remains to be seen whether Donald Trump can ultimately disengage from Iran without being seen as having suffered a humiliating defeat.

At the moment, however, it appears that Iran has no intention of giving up either its enriched uranium or its Islamist system of government. Even restoring freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz seems unlikely.

* * *

Since I began with a conspiracy theory, it is perhaps only fitting to end with a dose of hindsight.

Trump and the United States would not be in their current predicament if the U.S. military had continued its extraordinarily successful offensive against Iran in the summer of 2025.

Trump, however, chose not to let it do so. Instead, he halted the offensive, giving Iran time to recover and learn from the experience—which it did. The result was a significant improvement in Iran’s military capabilities and the stalemate now taking shape, in which the Americans can hope, at best, to restore the situation that existed before the offensive began—and perhaps not even that.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Trump’s War Without Strategy: Why Iran May Come Out Stronger
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony
Finnish Ex-Military Chief: U.S. Likely Halted Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program

Putin's Endgame: Deception, Escalation, or Death?

According to Finnish media, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters yesterday evening that Russia had completely captured the Ukrainian city of Kostiantynivka. Meanwhile, the U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW) disputed the claim, stating that while Russian forces have made tactical gains in Kostiantynivka, "the majority of the Russian presence in the town consists of small infiltration groups scattered among Ukrainian positions."

ISW argued that Peskov's exaggerated statements were intended to shape Western media coverage of the war over the weekend, when the United States is celebrating its 250th anniversary. It therefore remains to be seen whether Russia's so-called "special military operation" has genuinely advanced or whether the claims about capturing Kostiantynivka are simply another example of Kremlin propaganda.

* * *

Columnist Lauri Nurmi, for his part, speculated that Vladimir Putin could ultimately meet the same fate as Nicolae Ceaușescu. In doing so, he echoed a point I made some time ago when I argued that Putin would have no political future if Russia were to return from Ukraine having suffered defeat.

Admittedly, it is difficult to follow developments in the war in Ukraine—as the Kostiantynivka case illustrates—because both sides are accompanied by actors spreading disinformation. This is particularly true on social media, where anyone can publish virtually anything.

In any event, it has long been evident that Putin's three-day "special military operation" has fared no better than Stalin's Red Army's planned "two-week march to Helsinki" in 1939. For that reason, it is possible—perhaps even likely—that Putin will eventually have to announce at least a partial mobilization.

The consequences can only be guessed. What is certain, however, is that if compulsory mobilization is implemented, many more Russian families will lose sons, husbands, and fathers. It is difficult to imagine that those affected would thank their country's leader. At the very least, many of them might privately entertain thoughts similar to those expressed by Nurmi—or by myself.

* * *

This may also help explain why the Russian dictator has reportedly been pressuring his Belarusian counterpart to join the war. Such a move could serve two purposes at once: perhaps fewer Russians would be killed in combat, while Ukraine's military position would become more difficult as the front line expanded.

On the other hand, President Alyaksandr Lukashenka undoubtedly understands that Ukrainians would not simply surrender. They would resist with everything they have, increasing the number of Belarusian families mourning fallen relatives.

That, in turn, would heighten the risk of a coup—or at least serious unrest—in a country where dissatisfaction with his rule has existed for years. For that reason, he is likely to continue accommodating Putin in almost every respect except one: sending Belarusian troops across the southern border into Ukraine.

If Putin ultimately succeeds in forcing Belarus into the war, Europe would face a serious test. Would we merely express outrage, or would we take concrete action? Something more substantial than words and continued deliveries of material assistance to Ukraine?

* * *

Adding to these concerns are speculations that the Russian military could launch a strike against Poland via Belarus or Kaliningrad, disguising it as an "accidental" incident. Such scenarios make the overall situation appear even more serious and Europe's security environment increasingly precarious.

The most troubling question is that we do not know how nuclear-armed Russia would respond if it continued to struggle in conventional warfare. Could it resort to its most powerful weapons if its position in Ukraine deteriorated further and Belarus refused to intervene on its behalf?

And what if Polish forces were to destroy a Russian unit that had crossed the border under the guise of a "mistake"? How would Russia respond? And how would Western leaders react?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin's Growing Crisis in Ukraine and an Uncertain Endgame for Russia
Russia's Predicament Awakened the Trolls and Increased the Risk of Nuclear War
Can Ukraine Create Its Own “Winter War Miracle”?

Rain Scald: The Future of a New Sexually Transmitted Disease

The Finnish public broadcaster Yle has reported that a new sexually transmitted infection has begun spreading in Europe. In fact, the disease is one that has long been known to affect horses and cattle: rain scald (also known as dermatophilosis). Previously, it had occurred mainly in people who worked closely with these animals, but it has now started to spread to others as well.

The disease is caused by bacteria and produces scaly skin lesions, raised bumps, and pus-filled blisters on various parts of the body. So far, however, it has responded well to antibiotic treatment, and the situation remains under control.

The infection has not been spreading among people engaging in conventional sexual activity. Rather, according to Yle's report, it "is currently found mainly among men who have visited gay saunas in France, Spain, Germany, and Sweden. Transmission has occurred through sexual contact or other forms of close skin-to-skin contact."

* * *

It remains to be seen whether this emerging disease will develop into a genuine epidemic or remain a passing curiosity. In this regard, bisexual men are likely to play a key role, as they could enable the bacterium to cross the gender barrier from gay men to heterosexual women.

If rain scald does begin to spread more widely, another important question will be whether the pathogen starts adapting to humans. In other words, will genetic changes be selected in bacterial strains that circulate between people, making transmission during sexual contact more efficient than it is today?

Should that happen, the next likely development would be the evolution of antibiotic resistance. As a result, treating the disease would become more difficult than it is at present.

For now, we can only wait and see what the future brings. At present, the only certainty is that abstaining from sex, or having sex exclusively with one faithful partner—and, apparently, also using a physical barrier such as a condom—prevents infection.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland's COVID-19 policy saved approximately 2,600 people from death
A factory of five billion mosquitoes
Evolution in action