The Ukrainian Lioness Will Defeat Vladimir Putin’s Army

Happy Finnish Mother’s Day to all mothers!

People say that mothers fight for their children like lionesses. In the same way, the Ukrainians have acted by stretching Vladimir Putin’s three-day “special military operation” into a war that has now lasted for more than four years.

As a result, the Russian army had to settle for a rather modest Victory Day parade yesterday. Unlike in previous years, there were no missiles on display — nor even the T-34 tank designed in the 1930s, which was still present in 2023. Perhaps the last of those is already on its way to Ukraine as well?

* * *

In one respect, however, Vladimir Putin may well be right. In his speech, he stated that the war “is moving toward its conclusion, but it nevertheless remains a serious matter.”

Unfortunately for Putin, the war has reached its culmination point, and his army’s offensive has stalled much like Hitler’s forces at Stalingrad in 1942. Nor does the future appear any brighter for him, because Ukrainian technical ingenuity is set to reverse the course of the war: new drones and missiles are already pounding Russia’s arms and oil industries, while armed robots have begun supporting — and when necessary even replacing — Ukrainian soldiers on the battlefield.

* * *

Many Russians who have supported Putin up to this point have noticed this as well. But for now, fear of failure has reportedly prevented a coup.

This too is familiar from Hitler’s Germany, where the Austrian corporal remained in power so long that he ultimately chose to end his own life. By then, the Red Army had already reached Berlin, meaning Germany’s defeat in the war had been obvious for quite some time.

Putin’s advantage, of course, is that he ultimately has nuclear missiles at his disposal, and fear of them undoubtedly prevents the Ukrainians from attempting to conquer Russian territory. Thus, he cannot end up in a situation similar to Adolf Hitler’s in 1945 — even though such an outcome would undoubtedly be viewed by many as roughly equally positive for humanity as a whole.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony
Russia’s Spring Offensive: Gains Unclear, Losses Undeniable
Concern About the Future Is Growing in Russia

Finnish Immigration Policy Limits Freedom of Expression

According to the national security review published by the Finnish Security Intelligence Service on Tuesday, homeschooling may, in the long run, increase security threats related to the fragmentation of society. This risk is heightened by the fact that it is extremely difficult for authorities to monitor the teaching that takes place in homeschooling and in informal homeschooling institutions.

The parliamentary parties also share concern about these security threats. Their proposed solutions range from more effective oversight of homeschooling to an unambiguous compulsory school attendance requirement, with exceptions granted only for extremely compelling reasons.

It is therefore likely that the next government programme will include more or less radical restrictions on children’s homeschooling. At the same time, this would reduce people’s freedom of choice regarding the upbringing of their children.

In practice, this change is occurring as a result of the immigration policy pursued in Finland, because it has brought both radical Islamism and—partly as a reaction to it, as well as to other forms of “wokeism”—far-right extremism into our society. According to the head of the Finnish Security Intelligence Service, Juha Martelius, these are precisely the kinds of undesirable phenomena that are increasingly being promoted in homeschooling environments.

It remains to be seen, however, how well the negative impact of immigration on people’s freedom will be recognized in Finnish public debate. That is, on the constitutional right which states that “everyone has the right to life, personal liberty, integrity and security.”

The debate about compulsory schooling described above is, of course, only part of this process. It is also connected to, for example, threats and fears related to safety—especially for women but also for young people—as well as restrictions on freedom of speech in accordance with an Orwellian understanding of language.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Jimmie Åkesson Is Sweden’s Most Widely Accepted Politician
On Freedom, Debate, and the Murder of Charlie Kirk
Finally, Honest Reporting on Immigration and Crime

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Maahanmuuttopolitiikka rajoittaa ihmisten valinnanvapautta

Putin on His Knees Before Xi — and Running Out of Money

The Finnish Institute of International Affairs’ senior researcher Jussi Lassila commented on Russian dictator Vladimir Putin’s trip to China, and in doing so, he also summarized his position in world politics remarkably well. He noted that “Putin is on his knees before Xi, which suits China. Xi can present agreements to Russia that greatly benefit China, while Russia is forced to accept deals that are unfavorable to itself.”

At the same time, Lassila reassured ordinary people worried about the growing closeness between China and Russia. He pointed out that “Of course, opposition to the United States remains the common denominator here, but I don’t see any truly unified anti-Western alliance emerging between China and Russia”—and he explained, quite rightly, that “China has benefited enormously from the prevailing global order, which is why its continuity is in its interest.”

Lassila’s comments are both credible and fact-based—and therefore most likely accurate.

Another recent piece of news certainly does nothing to improve Putin’s situation: Russia’s state coffers are beginning to run dry. The liquidity of the National Wealth Fund, calculated in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP), has fallen below 155 billion euros. At the central bank, the state has net reserves of 200 billion euros (PPP). In other words, Russia’s assets are sufficient to cover the budget for only about one year—until August 2026.

In that situation, hard facts will catch up with Putin’s so-called “special operation.” After all, you cannot draw something out of nothing, and waging war is not free. It may, therefore, very well be that the fate of Tsar Nicholas II will begin to haunt the dictator who imagines himself omnipotent—sooner or later.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Free World Needs America’s Leadership Now
Number of Predators is Increasing in Russia
The Price of Xi´s and Putin's Game Is Paid by Ordinary Russians

Russian Oil Giants Suffer, But the Real Reasons Remain Hidden

According to a recent report, the results of all Russia’s major oil companies collapsed in the first half of the year. A year ago, the country’s largest oil producer Rosneft reported half-year earnings of 773 billion rubles, equivalent to 85 billion euros. Now the result was only 245 billion rubles, or 27 billion euros.

Lukoil’s profit fell from last year’s 65 billion euros to 31.5 billion euros. Gazprom Neft’s earnings dropped by more than half to 16.5 billion euros. Tatneft’s and Russneft’s profits declined even more sharply, but the worst result came from Surgutneftegas, whose performance turned into a loss of 50 million euros.

The companies cite as their problems, among other things, oil overproduction resulting from OPEC countries’ policies, the overvaluation of the ruble, and Russia’s high interest rates. However, their financial statements make no mention at all of the drone strikes by Ukrainians against Russia’s oil industry or the sanctions imposed by Western countries.

It remains unclear whether this silence stems from fear of Vladimir Putin, from Russian dishonesty — or perhaps both.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Deep Roots of Violence and Disregard for Human Dignity in History
Russian Soldier in Finland – A Sign of Crumbling Morale?
Russia’s Economy Set to Slow, Says Bank of Finland

Border Residents Concerned Over NATO’s Article 5 Interpretation

According to a Polish news site, U.S. President Donald Trump intends to make a six-point proposal to Russian leader Vladimir Putin to end the war in Ukraine. Under this plan, the first step would be to agree on a ceasefire, after which Russia would be allowed to keep the territories it has seized from Ukraine for at least the next 49 years.

Once the ceasefire had taken effect, the U.S. government would remove most of the sanctions imposed on Russia and, after some time, once again permit the export of Russian oil and gas. In return for these concessions, Trump is also expected to present demands to Putin.

The first of these would require Russia to accept the further enlargement of NATO beyond its current membership. In addition, military aid to Ukraine would continue.

The claims made by the Polish news site have not been confirmed by other sources, but neither have they been denied. Therefore, for the time being, they should be taken seriously.

* * *

As a citizen of a country bordering Russia, Trump’s plan concerns me, as it would result in Vladimir Putin being rewarded for his aggression against Ukraine. In other words, it would support his policy that any geographical areas once under Russian control should belong forever to Moscow’s sphere of influence.

In Europe, this particularly concerns Finland and the Baltic states, all of which have at some point in their history been part of Russia (or the Soviet Union). In Finland’s case, this was from 1809 to 1917, when my homeland formed an autonomous grand duchy ruled by the Russian tsar.

The fear, then, is that once Russia has recovered from the war in Ukraine, Putin or his successor might decide to see whether the West — and especially the U.S. — would also be willing to accept possible conquests from a future military campaign against a NATO country. That is, for example, the subjugation of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania to Moscow’s power, either partially or entirely.

In this matter, the key question becomes NATO’s commitment to defending the sovereignty of its northeastern members. The central issue here is how to interpret Article 5 of the treaty, which states that "The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."

What especially concerns me here is the interpretation of the above-emphasized word “necessary.” Does it mean that the amount of assistance is to be calibrated so that the aggressor is certain to be defeated? Or can it also be interpreted — as the Polish news site claims is now happening in Ukraine (which is not a NATO member) — to mean that, as a war drags on, hostilities could be ended in such a way that the conqueror gets to keep the territories it has occupied?

For this reason, I believe it would be good for NATO and its member states — especially the United States — to clarify this interpretation and reassure those of us who live next to Russia that aggression against NATO member states would under no circumstances be allowed to result in rewarding the aggressor — as in the case of the war in Ukraine — but that NATO would, in every case, use sufficient force until the situation between Russia and the victim of its attack had been restored to what it was before the war, and the Muscovite army had returned behind its own borders.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Oily Trap for Putin
A Growing Sino-Russian Threat to the West
AI Drones: Ukraine’s New Edge in the War?

Fear Lurks in Vladimir Putin's Mind as He Celebrates on the Wrong Date

Tomorrow, Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, along with his cronies and subordinates, will celebrate the so-called Victory Day in honor of the end of World War II. However, the timing isn’t quite accurate, as World War II is generally considered to have ended with Japan’s surrender—first with the Emperor’s announcement on August 15, 1945, and officially with the signing of the surrender documents on September 2. Of course, the European war had already ended 80 years ago, in May 1945.

It’s also worth remembering that the Soviet Union didn’t stop fighting when the war in Europe ended. Instead, it entered the war against Japan on August 8, 1945, in accordance with what had been agreed among the Allies at the Yalta Conference earlier that year. This happened at a point when Japan’s defeat was all but inevitable, though no formal surrender had yet occurred. The Soviet offensive in Manchuria, southern Sakhalin, and the Kuril Islands continued through late August and even into early September.

As a consequence of these events, the Korean Peninsula ended up divided into Soviet and American occupation zones—and remains split into two nations to this day. In addition, Japan and the Soviet Union, and later Russia, have never signed a formal peace treaty due to the ongoing dispute over four of the Kuril Islands.

These facts are unlikely to dampen Putin’s celebratory mood. What may trouble him more—like a squirrel tormented by a frozen nut—is the persistent fear, lurking in the back of his mind throughout the festivities, that a Ukrainian drone could strike directly in Red Square. Even if Ukraine likely lacks the capacity to cause large-scale destruction in such an attack, that doesn’t guarantee peace of mind inside the Kremlin.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
When the War Comes Home to Moscow
Bless Ukrainian Soldiers With the Spirit That Once Defined the Celebrated Finnish Veterans
Ukraine’s Situation Mirrors Finland in 1944

Should Finland Heed the Warnings of a Left-Wing Idealist?

The American scholar John Mearsheimer has commented on Finland’s NATO membership in an extremely negative tone. According to him, joining the alliance has weakened Finland’s security situation, and furthermore, the decision was made at the worst possible time.

In Mearsheimer’s view, instead of joining NATO, Finland should have continued its post-World War II policy of "Finlandization," where the country refrained from criticizing the Soviet Union's actions, no matter what they were. During that time, politicians and the media lied directly to the Finnish people about the conditions, human rights issues, and ambitions of their eastern neighbor.

However, it is noteworthy that despite all this, most Finns lived in constant fear, day and night, that Russia would occupy the country — a country with no allies to come to its aid in times of crisis. In other words, people feared a repeat of the Winter War.

Mearsheimer has also stated that Finland joined NATO at a completely wrong moment, as the alliance is now facing deep problems. He even speculated that U.S. forces might withdraw from Europe and that NATO’s Article 5 — the obligation to assist a member state under attack — would lose its significance.

He further claimed that Finland’s President Alexander Stubb has been wrong about Ukraine from the very beginning because Stubb believes in discredited ideas promoted by Western liberal imperialists since the end of the Cold War.

* * * 

After reading Mearsheimer’s views, I found myself reflecting on his words. His credibility is bolstered by the fact that already in 1993, he predicted that Ukraine should not give up its nuclear weapons the following year.

First, I concluded that neither I nor almost any other Finn — except for some on the far left — want in any way to return to the era of Finlandization. That’s why I deeply support Finland’s NATO membership and the DCA agreement with the United States, to ensure we are never again left alone if Russia attacks.

Second, I fully understand that if NATO and the DCA were to lose their significance, it would be impossible for a country of five and a half million people to maintain its independence in the event of a full-scale Russian assault. Finland’s only option would be to make the price of conquest unbearably high for Russia — just as happened in the Winter War of 1939–40 (as a result of which Finland lost about 10 percent of its territory), during which Soviet casualties reached 321,000–381,000 in about one hundred days, despite Finland's lack of modern weaponry and allies.

* * *

In light of the threat posed by Putin, I have advocated here on this blog that Western European states must build sufficient military strength and commit — within the EU framework or otherwise — to each other’s defense. Many leading European politicians, including Germany’s new Chancellor Friedrich Merz, currently share this view.

Thus, it seems to me that by the time Russia and Vladimir Putin find a way out of Ukraine, Western Europe — including Finland — will have grown militarily strong enough that Russia will no longer have the capacity even to threaten its security. This is something Mearsheimer should be aware of as well.

Therefore, I found it puzzling and decided to look more closely into this scholar. I discovered that in 2019, he supported the far-left Bernie Sanders for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Considering the historical record of socialists worldwide, this revealed to me that Mearsheimer is completely incapable of rational thinking.

Thus, I asked myself how much weight should really be given to Mearsheimer’s views on Finland’s security policy — and I concluded: not very much after all.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
From Finnish Neutrality to Russian Ruins
Donald Trump’s Reliability as an Ally Has Proven to Be Questionable
Finally, Finland Speaks the Truth Without Fear!

Message from Finland's President to Vladimir Putin

The Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) is a UK-led international rapid response force focused on crisis management, involving ten nations. The assembly of the forces began in 2012, and currently, besides the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, and the Netherlands contribute troops to the initiative.

Currently, a summit of JEF member state leaders is underway in Tallinn, the capital of Estonia. Topics on the agenda include supporting Ukraine, increasing defense spending, and enhancing defense cooperation.

According to Finland’s President Alexander Stubb, “Before we can start discussions on peace negotiations and a ceasefire, we must continue to support Ukraine. And the support must be very practical. This means providing weapons and ammunition so that Ukraine can win the war on the battlefield.”

He also added, “As Finns, we know what we are talking about. After the Winter War and Continuation War, we paid the price for our independence, losing territory and sovereignty. We must ensure that this does not happen in Ukraine.”

Reporters also asked Finland's president for a message to Russian President Vladimir Putin. His response was brief and to the point: “Withdraw!”

President Putin, however, is unlikely to heed his Finnish counterpart’s advice. This makes it all the more significant that Ukraine’s security service recently reduced the ranks of Putin’s army by one general—right in Moscow. This demonstrates that even Russia’s military leaders must fear for their safety while moving around the nation’s capital, and it may well leave them privately hoping that Putin unexpectedly orders the lowering of arms.

At the same time, ordinary Moscow residents who support the war are forced to confront the reality that Ukraine can now strike even their home city. For the smartest among them, it might occur that Finland’s president’s advice was unusually spot on.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
On the Consequences of Russian Inability in Syria
Anecdotes and Jokes About Vladimir Putin
Ukraine can and will stop Putin

Anecdotes and Jokes About Vladimir Putin

Today, a few anecdotes and jokes about the beloved leader of our neighboring country came to mind. Since they are fresh in my memory, I decided to share them with you, my dear readers. So, here you go!

* * *

A high-ranking officer who fought in Vladimir Putin's army led his unit so effectively that the Ukrainians were forced to retreat several kilometers. Naturally, the president was pleased and invited the officer to the Kremlin.

There, he told the hero that he could ask for anything as a reward for his actions. The man replied, "I don’t want anything. I just ask that you don’t mention this to my friends."

* * *

God was angry about the hostility humans held toward each other and decided to destroy all of creation. After some thought, however, He chose to give humanity one last chance to see if there was still kindness, goodness, and love within them.

So, He appeared to a Frenchman and told him of His plan to destroy humanity the next day. He also asked what the man intended to do before then. The man replied that he would get some fine wine and prepare a delicious meal to enjoy with his wife, and then make love to her.

God was pleased and decided to also appear to a Finnish man and share His plans. The Finnish man thought for a moment and said he would first go to the sauna with his wife, enjoy some good beer and sausages afterward, and then make love to her.

God began to doubt the idea of destruction but decided to also ask Vladimir Putin what he planned to do before the end of the world. Putin thought for a moment and declared that he would immediately order his army to invade Georgia so that Russia could conquer it before the apocalypse.

* * *

Vladimir Putin believes he has made himself indispensable to Russians and the world. Because of this, he has been deeply concerned about what would happen to the world, Russia, and his wealth if he were to die.

One day, he summoned his trusted lawyer and expressed his concerns. The lawyer opened his laptop and asked the president to dictate his will. Putin began: “If I ever die…”

* * *

In early September, President Vladimir Putin set a goal for the Russian forces: the expulsion of Ukrainians from Russian soil by the beginning of October.

However, it is now early December, and Ukrainians are still holding large areas in the Russian Kursk region. Clearly, the goal Putin set in September has not been achieved. His position is, therefore, reminiscent of his role model Joseph Stalin, who in 1939 issued a guide for Soviet soldiers on how to reach Helsinki in two weeks — only to fail completely in capturing the city.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Did You Know That 1952 Was a Turning Point in World Eras?
Putin Set a Goal — Failure Would Be an Embarrassment
Tractor course for Ukrainians

How Will Israel Benefit on the Explosions of Hezbollah's Communication Devices?

The Islamist Hezbollah operating in Lebanon has been the target of an interesting attack. First, their beepers were blown up, and today it was the turn of their walkie-talkies.

Both times, the organization lost a small number of people killed, but many more were more or less injured. However, the biggest impact is likely to be that from now on, Hezbollah members will probably fear handling any kind of electronic devices - and this will certainly weaken their ability to plan and especially carry out their operations against Israel.

It remains to be seen how Israel will take advantage of the advantage it has gained. Will it launch a military attack on southern Lebanon - as they seem to plan - or do they have some other operation in mind? In my view, it is clear that Israel’s ultimate goal - assuming it is behind the explosions - is to calm northern Israel from Hezbollah’s rocket attacks.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
What Does the Failure of Hezbollah's Attack Tell Us?
According to the Israeli army, Hamas cannot be defeated
The first casualty of war is the truth - but whose truth?

The Lenin Museum Will No Longer Serve as a Reminder of the Dangers of Political Correctness

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin was the leader of the Russian Revolution and the first dictator of the Soviet Union. Among his most notable achievements in this position was the starvation of at least five million people due to his idiotic agricultural policies.

Less well known, however, is Lenin's history in my home country. During his exile, he often operated from Finland.

Lenin first expressed his support for Finland's independence at meetings held in Tampere in 1905 and 1906, in the building that now houses the Lenin Museum. The Soviet dictator did not do this out of goodwill but rather to weaken Tsarist Russia.

After his revolution, Lenin hoped that newly independent Finland would fall into a revolution that would bring it back into the fold of Soviet Russia. To this end, he incited the left, which indeed launched a bloody rebellion in 1918.

Today, it was reported in the Finnish press that the Lenin Museum, which I mentioned earlier, has seen more visitors this summer than in a long time. The reason is likely that the museum is set to close on November 3rd.

Thus, one monument to a time when Finland sought to secure its independence by avoiding provoking the eastern superpower is closing. This strategy was quite successful in that Finland remained independent, but the price was the eventual withering of Western-style democracy and the media's descent into the "woke" phenomenon of its time, where all opinions critical of the Soviet Union were condemned as politically incorrect and heretical.

This fate eventually befell even the largest right-wing party, the National Coalition Party, which subsequently joined the ruling center-left in adhering to the same policy of silence on certain facts. In doing so, it had to abandon the virtues of open democracy and freedom of speech.

All of this is relevant in the current world, where there are also attempts to condemn views based on people's own experiences and understanding as politically incorrect, regardless of their truth. In this sense, it is a shame that the Lenin Museum is closing, as it serves as a reminder of a time when Finland gradually slid into its own "truth," where black was white if the country's political leadership decreed it so in fear of the Soviet Union.

If my dear reader notes similarities in this writing to recent events in the United Kingdom or Ireland, Olympics or the changes in the workplace experienced in many Western countries, they may very well be on the right track.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
A young woman skiing in a swimsuit caused a controversy among women
Nightwish and the Disney Company

Russian Tax Overhaul: Citizens to Bear the Burden of War Losses

A recent news report indicated that Russia's war in Ukraine will increasingly impact the wallets of its citizens. This is because President Vladimir Putin has been forced to overhaul taxes to finance his country's army, which has suffered significant material losses.

In total, Russian citizens will have to pay an additional 27 million euros in new taxes. This burden will be distributed according to people's wealth, with the wealthiest bearing a greater relative share. In other words, the previous flat tax system will change to a progressive one.

It remains to be seen how Russians will react to the reform. It would, of course, be desirable for them to reject it and launch widespread rebellion against the pointless war in Ukraine and the man who started it, Vladimir Putin.

This possibility is supported by the fact that tax increases have often sparked popular uprisings. For example, this was the case in Finland at the end of the 16th century and this year in Kenya, where the government has been increasingly pressured.

On the other hand, Putin's administration has taken a page from Stalin's book and keeps the country's citizens in fear and strict obedience. Therefore, any possible dissatisfaction among the people might remain at the level of grumbling—just as the lamentation of the families of the over half a million Russian casualties in Ukraine has.

Nevertheless, Ukrainians should not lose hope. There is always a limit to what people will endure from their leaders. Thus, it is possible that the newly decided tax increases are the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Ukraine can and will stop Putin
Finnish weapons are being tested against the Russians in Ukraine
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people

Even a brutal murder didn't stir the Swedes

The Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle reported on the tragedy that occurred in Stockholm, where 39-year-old Mikael, cycling with his 12-year-old son, was shot in an underpass. The murder began when young gang members first shouted something inappropriate at the duo.

As a result, Mikael returned to confront the hecklers, to which a gang member responded by brutally shooting him in front of his son. However, according to the news, no one has been arrested.

* * *

We Finns - at least the most clear-headed among us - have long been aware of the slide of Swedish society into an immigrant hell. Yet the descendants of the Vikings have resigned themselves to the current state of the former Nordic powerhouse.

This was starkly demonstrated by the victim's sister's comment, in which she remarked, "Couldn't they have shot him in the leg at least? Who shoots someone in the face like this?" As if the act of shooting itself were somehow natural or even acceptable!?!

In the article, a Swedish criminologist also stated, "The incident leads to even greater uncertainty in intervening in disturbances in residential areas," because people no longer dare to intervene in the despicable actions of immigrant youth as much as before.

In a video captured by Yle, an agitated woman says, "We should be able to walk outside without fear of death. People are afraid to go out." But she doesn't make a concrete suggestion about what should be done about it.

Only the victim's nephew had even a somewhat constructive suggestion for fixing the situation. He demanded, "Bring the army and the police to the streets and take away the guns from the youth. It's just talk here and there, but nothing is being done. The situation is only getting worse."

Yet still, no one demanded addressing the root causes of the violence plaguing Swedish society - at least not according to the Yle article - such as removing the population causing problems from Sweden. Or even halting the continuous influx of migrants from developing countries that has led to these problems.

* * *

It's certainly convenient for Finland to shout across the Gulf of Bothnia, as we are about ten years behind Sweden in the "progress" of our society. But it would be even better if the Finnish government and parliament found consensus on the fact that by repeating the mistakes of our neighboring country, we will also inherit their consequences.

And no, the often-mentioned differences in housing policy between Finland and Sweden are not enough to prevent the societal development of our western neighbor from recurring on this side of the Baltic Sea. What is needed is a controlled immigration policy that ensures Finland does not create too large of an ethnically and culturally problematic population.

Unfortunately, there is not a single sign of this. Nor will there be in the future, as we have just accepted that in the future, such ethnically and culturally diverse individuals will be dispersed throughout the EU. Essentially, we have transferred decision-making authority on this matter from Helsinki to Brussels.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Rwanda Law of Britain paves the way for the future of Western Europe
100 percent of the violence is related to migration
Sweden already in trouble - Finland following

Fear drove Putin, a follower of Josif, to murder Alexei Navalny

The Russian dictator Vladimir Putin killed his only politically significant challenger - Alexei Navalny - far away in Siberia. In doing so, he demonstrated his faithful adherence to the path paved by his role model, Josif Stalin: it's better to eliminate those who threaten the leader's power before they become a real danger - or preferably at the first suspicion in the sick mind of the dictator.

Navalny's murder was, of course, no surprise considering Russia's previous events involving falling out of windows and various poisonings. It will also not be surprising that Putin commissions a report on Navalny's death, which has no connection to the truth, despite claims to the contrary - это правда.

There have been various reactions to Navalny's case, most notably the statement from U.S. President Joe Biden, who bluntly stated, "Russian authorities tell their own story. But make no mistake, Putin is responsible for Navalny's death."

Biden's Secretary of State Antony Blinken, on the other hand, stated that "His death in a Russian prison and the fixation and fear of one man only underscores the weakness and rot at the heart of the system that Putin has built." And he hit the nail on the head - Vladimir, like his Josif, is also similar in his neurotic fear, so it is not difficult to predict that he will continue to kill people with an even lighter hand in the future.

* * *

It remains to be seen whether Putin's latest operation will be met with any more than previous ones. That is, whether there will be a lot of critical talk directed at him, but only minimal real actions - and even those only temporarily.

However, it is hopeful that Navalny's murder would at least lead to a military awakening in Western countries and such extensive assistance to Ukraine, victimized by Putin, that Russian forces are forced to withdraw from the country.

Of course, it's difficult to extract much from the empty weapon arsenals of European states that have wasted their military capabilities until defense budgets are rectified. But if even the importance of the matter were understood in the U.S. House of Representatives before Ukrainians are forced to retreat from places other than Avdiivka?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Desperate cry of Russians
Victims of Russian leaders
Should Putin´s regime be overthrown by supporting Russian opposition?

Demonstrations cause trouble in Helsinki and Sweden

The University of Helsinki is by far the largest contributor to higher education and research in Finland, enjoying the trust of the entire nation and receiving financial support through tax revenues. In this role, it is institutionally politically neutral, and, for example, protests within its premises are prohibited.

However, this prohibition has recently been violated. A few months ago, a group of students protested against decisions made by the Finnish government, and just a few days ago, a demonstration against Israel was held at the university.

These predominantly politically left-wing orchestrated protests have not been strongly intervened against but have been allowed to take place. Thus, a kind of precedent has been established, which future protesters may also refer to.

It is possible that in the future, there may be different types of demonstrations on the university premises, including those that provoke reactions. In Finland, this practically means far-left counter-protests against socially conservative demonstrators, which often involve violent elements.

Therefore, it would be important for the University of Helsinki to decisively state that it will not allow any political demonstrations on its premises in the future. If such events occur, the university should demand that law enforcement immediately stop the gathering.

By saying this, I do not mean to undermine the importance of people's right to organize protests as a crucial aspect of a democratic society. On the contrary, when organizing such events, respect for the wishes of venue owners and property managers should be observed by ensuring that protests take place in open spaces.

Finally, it is worth noting that Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden initially announced a ban on political demonstrations in all its premises and campuses but later reversed its decision. The fears caused by protesters targeting Jewish individuals were behind the original decision, which the university should, of course, never condone.

It remains to be seen how the situation will unfold at Chalmers University. Will all segments of the population feel safe in the future, or will the situation become untenable again?

It is hoped that Finland and its universities will never find themselves in a situation similar to Sweden's, and that students and all people can live their lives without fear of danger due to their opinions or religious-ethnic backgrounds.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The activists sought excitement and a boost to their self-esteem in the Stockholm Diamond League
The change in the demographic structure of Helsinki
International Master´s degree is an opportunity to be used

Palestinian responsibility

I believe that it is in the interest of both Israel and Palestine to establish lasting peace, a two-state solution, and cooperation between these historically mutually hostile nations. I also think that many, perhaps even the majority of people belonging to these nations, share my view.

So the question remains, why hasn't such an understanding been reached despite more than seven decades having passed? The answer consists of several parts. 

By far the most crucial aspect to understand is that while Palestinians may lose a hundred battles, Israel cannot suffer a single defeat. This is because Israel as a democratic state does not annihilate defeated Palestinians, whereas among the Palestinians, there are millions of people and even numerous organizations, with the most significant being the Hamas controlling the Gaza area, whose sole aim is to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean sea.

As an outcome of what I have written above, the citizens of Israel understandably do not dare to take any unnecessary risks. And since Palestinians occasionally launch minor or major attacks against them, they prefer to rely on their military power rather than peace-oriented agreements, even if backed by any superpower.

The significance of the latter has become even more essential after Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2014, despite the safeguarding of its independence by superpowers. An agreement was made when Ukraine obtained independence, where it agreed to hand over the Soviet nuclear weapons located on its territory to Russia. Without that agreement, Russia would not have dared to invade Ukraine in 2014 or again in 2022.

All of this means that it is specifically the responsibility of the Palestinians to promote peace between Israel and Palestine. It requires actions that inspire trust among the two nations so that even Israel finally dares to agree on the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!
A new Government for Israel, but why doesn´t it solve anything?
Explanation of Finnish attitudes towards Israeli and Palestinians

A Finnish police officer is afraid to speak about the problems of immigration

During this week Petteri Orpo's (National Coalition Party) government of Finland reached a consensus on what constitutes racism and what does not - and distanced itself from it. At the same time, youth violence has continued in our country, with an emphasis on individuals who are ethnically different from native Finns.

This is evident, as the number of crimes committed by young people in Finland has grown significantly compared to last year. The most notable increase has occurred in robberies committed by minors, the number of which has almost doubled. In the first half of last year, there were 484 robberies committed by those under 18, whereas this year, the number has already risen to 735.

According to Kirsi Pimiä from the for Ministry for Internal Security and Migration, "there is now a greater amount of videos being shared on social media, where young people have recorded others in humiliating videos. These videos have been widely circulated and include also content related to sexual crimes."

The same article states that - as also I have previously noted - there are eleven street gangs in Finland, with around three hundred young individuals involved in their activities in the Helsinki metropolitan area and Turku. Thus, organized crime is by no means only isolated incidents.

According to Tom Packalén - former politician and a Chief Inspector of the Helsinki police - who was interviewed by Vantaan Sanomat, a local newspaper, "foreigners' involvement in daily cases is now very significant. This includes those who have entered the country illegally. Strengthening the deportations of those who are in the country illegally will be an important matter. I believe that the new government will initiate deportations with full force."

This would naturally be desirable. However, it remains to be seen whether the government can fulfill Packalén's wish, or whether the concern for the safety of Finns will continue to be compromised due to what are perceived as superficial humanitarian justifications.

In this regard, it was particularly significant that the Chief Inspector's comment indicated, "crime related to immigration... I am a civil servant now. I have to say it correctly so that I won't be reprimanded." This is concerning because this comment starkly illustrates how the atmosphere in Finland has become so strange that even a police officer does not dare to speak about facts as they are.

Therefore, I offer advice to Petteri Orpo and his government, especially to Minister Anna-Maja Henriksson (Swedish People's Party): please ensure that people of Finland don´t have to fear presenting facts and that discussing real problems or seeking effective solutions to them is not only possible but encouraged.

In this light it was interesting to note this morning, that a popular presidential candidate Mika Aaltola - who comes from outside of the mainstream politics - stated in an interview with the Finnish Broadcasting Company (Yle) that immigration should not be approached through identity politics or as a moral issue but rather as a practical matter. He also suggested that Finland should study the problems in Sweden and draw conclusions from them.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland offers a discount for serial criminals
Sweden already in trouble - Finland following
Did police have the right to strip women

History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women

This is the eleventh part of a blog post series where I go through the significant phases of Finnish history. In the tenth entry, I described how the Finnish nationalism led to the formation of a unified, yet bilingual Finnish identity.

However, the next change occurred when the development of the Russian society progressed to a level where the country could dream of standardizing the administration of the empire. As a result, Tsar Nicholas II decided to end Finland's autonomous status as a part of the empire - in other words, the first period of oppression began in our country, which lasted from 1899 to 1905.

The beginning of the period of oppression heavily politicized our country, causing the political struggle, which had previously been focused on language issues, to shift to new fronts. The Old Finns party, primarily relying on the peasantry, adopted a conciliatory policy with the aim of combining the interests of the Finns and the Tsar, while the Young Finns party of the educated and industrial circles, the Old Estates, and the Swedish-speaking industrialists formed a constitutional front that held onto autonomy as it had been known.

The first period of oppression ended when Russia stumbled in the war with Japan in 1904-05, resulting in Tsar losing his autocracy, and a parliament, called the Duma, was established in the empire. At the same time, the Tsar's grip on Finland loosened, and the people went on a general strike demanding the restoration of autonomy and their own parliament.

After a lengthy struggle, the country finally obtained a unicameral parliament that maximized democracy, and women, along with the working-class, were granted the right to vote and, gradually, an equal position with men.

It may interest my esteemed reader that the Swedish-speaking minority in our country, supported by some Young Finns, vehemently opposed women's access to positions of power. This opposition was sometimes expressed in quite interesting turns of phrase.

One of my ancient colleagues opposed women's eligibility for elections on the grounds that "women, as emotional beings, might easily sway towards too extreme positions" - expressing incontrovertibly that the opposition to gender equality was not so much ethical or political, but rather stemmed primarily from a fear of democracy. In other words, women's ability to make sound political decisions was not trusted.

The original blog post in Finnish:

Suomalainen demokratia ja naisten tasa-arvo

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future

History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people

This is the third part of a blog series in which I go through the significant phases of Finnish history. In the second post, I described how Finland became a part of an early modern state, where the power was concentrated in the hands of the king, who also had the means to use it.

After Gustav Vasa, there was a long power struggle in Sweden. First, the throne was inherited by Eric XIV, then John III, and his son Sigismund. Finally, after various twists and turns, Dude Charles, i.e., Charles IX, came to power. During this power struggle, the Swedish nobility tactfully maneuvered between the different parties and thus managed to improve its position, which was also strengthened by the wars that Sweden was fighting at the same time - after all, the nobility was ultimately a military class.

The longest of the Swedish wars was the war between Sweden and Russia at the end of the 16th century, which was preceded by a heated exchange of words. This 25-year-long conflict, known as the "Long Wrath," ended with the Treaty of Tyavzino in 1595, in which victorious Sweden's power expanded to include areas from the depths of the Gulf of Finland to the desolate borders of Lapland.

Sweden fought the war using a mercenary army, as was customary at the time, and the maintenance of this so-called castle camp was a burden on the peasants. There were widespread abuses associated with this, resulting in people having to sell their valuables and even their land due to financial difficulties. Thus, the wealth gap between the estates grew rapidly.

After the Treaty of Tyavzino, the peasants assumed that their burdens would end, but this did not happen. Instead, Klaus Fleming, the governor appointed by King Sigismund Vasa - who was staying in Poland - and effectively the dictator of Finland, kept his army ready. This provided the nobility and the wealthiest segment of the peasant population, the cavalry farmers, the opportunity to continue to increase their profits during peacetime as they had done during wartime by equipping the cavalry.

Since the maintenance of garrisons had severely impoverished ordinary peasants during the long war, the future seemed extremely bleak for them. This created a tremendous fear among the people of becoming tied to their estates as serfs, as had happened earlier in Central Europe.

As a result, Finland's first civil war, known as the "Cudgel War" erupted, and Fleming's cavalry brutally defeated the peasant armies: nearly 3,000 peasants were killed, a remarkably high number considering that there were less than 30,000 farms in Finland at the end of the 16th century. The outcome of the lost war was the formation of a class society, in which the legal and economic status of the common people was weak, and the position of the nobility was even stronger than before.

The original blog post in Finnish:
Kansan aseman oikeudellinen ja taloudellinen heikentyminen

All the blog posts in this series:
History of Finland I: How did Finland become culturally part of the West?
History of Finland II: From a hinterland of the Union into a modern state
History of Finland III: The legal and economic weakening of the position of the people
History of Finland IV: The bleakest time in Finnish history
History of Finland V: The pursuit of economic profit saved the country
History of Finland VI: Age of freedom and utility
History of Finland VII: The dictator of the era of Enlightenment promoted capitalist economy
History of Finland VIII: Joining of Finland to Russia led to an increase in crime
History of Finland IX: Enlightended dictator initiated economic growth
History of Finland X: The birth of Finnish identity
History of Finland XI: Finnish democracy and gender equality for women
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
History of Finland XIII: The far-right's rebellion
History of Finland XIV: The end of the first Finnish Republic
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
History of Finland XVI: Through rise and fall to a new kind of future

Ukrainian army should be equipped with the best possible weapons against missiles

This morning started with Russian missile attacks against Ukrainian towns including the capitol, Kyiv. According to a Finnish General and Ministerial Adviser for Intelligence "today we got to witness the work of the new commander of Russia's war of aggression, army general Sergei Surovikin, at what he does best: brutal missile terror against civilians.

After this day, it should have become crystal clear to everyone, that Vladimir Putin in not a brave President and leader of the Russian army, but a pitiful mass murderer and slimy coward. And as such, it has become imperative to turn his regime down. 

Unfortunately, Putin has a huge arsenal of nuclear weapons that prevent direct attack against Russia and its regime. However, military forces of the brave Ukrainian army should be equipped with the best possible weapons to protect themselves against the terrorist´s missiles. 

I certainly hope that the President of the United States, Joe Biden, understands this and acts as soon as possible to make that happen. Rather today than tomorrow.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
War in Ukraine affects other countries
Putin is in a political and military impasse
The main consequence of Putin´s attack to Ukraine