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?

"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

From Burden to Benefit: Reforming Immigration in Finland

The Finnish government led by Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party) submitted no fewer than three legislative proposals to Parliament for approval on Thursday. For this reason, Interior Minister Mari Rantanen (Finns Party), who led their preparation and presented the matter in Parliament, remarked that “we are having a kind of immigration super Thursday.”

The purpose of the legislative proposals is to streamline Finland’s immigration policy by introducing a citizenship test, intensifying the deportation and entry bans of those residing in the country illegally, and making use of the opportunities provided by the EU’s migration and asylum pact.

The aim of the citizenship test is to ensure that Finnish citizenship is not granted without the applicant having familiarity with Finnish society. However, the level of knowledge required to pass the test is not particularly demanding, as passing the multiple-choice exam only requires correctly answering seven out of ten questions.

According to the Interior Minister, the government “expects individuals seeking Finnish citizenship to be proactive in acting in the manner required by law.” For this reason, integration funding will in the future be more precisely directed toward teaching Finland’s national languages—which can only be welcomed.

Regarding deportations, the government aims to ensure that deportation decisions can be carried out more efficiently and quickly than at present. In addition, endangering national security will be added as grounds for an entry ban—this will also apply to individuals seeking to enter Finland from within the EU.

The third change is mainly technical. It implements the EU’s migration and asylum pact, which will in the future make it possible to transfer the asylum process to a country outside the Union. This too is an excellent development—provided the future arrives before it is too late.

* * *

In my view, all of the government’s proposals yesterday are good and necessary—if not outright essential—conditions for transforming immigration from its current burden into something beneficial for Finland. Therefore, it is worth observing how Parliament responds to them.

It is, of course, to be expected that members of Parliament from the far left will react negatively to at least some of the proposals. If and when this happens, it will not change the image already formed of the Left Alliance and the Greens as a “fifth column” marching within our country.

More interesting, however, is to see what happens within the government itself—especially within the parliamentary groups of the Swedish People’s Party (RKP) and the National Coalition Party—as well as within the main opposition parties, the Social Democratic Party and the Centre Party. Will there also be, and if so how many, individuals willing to participate in the activities of a “fifth column”?

* * *

As an aside, and loosely related to the topic: Member of Parliament Joakim Vigelius (Finns Party) made a rather apt remark on social media. He stated that “it is quite a paradox that first low-income people are attracted from around the world to Finland to be low-income, and then people wonder how much low-income status has increased.”

This observation also appears to be shared by Professor Heikki Hiilamo, who stated that immigration is “a significant factor” in the increase in poverty. “There has been a change in the labor market, with more and more immigrants working in low-wage occupations.”

In addition, the professor noted that the situation is also affected by the fact that immigrants largely live in big cities, such as Helsinki, where housing costs are relatively high. What more is there to add, except that public authorities in Finland actively encourage this by offering various non-reciprocal benefits to citizens of other countries as well.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Perspectives on Immigration Restrictions in Finland and the U.S.
Finland to Cut Off Taxpayer Money for Immigration
Can Europe Learn from Finland´s and Spain’s Contrasting Immigration Policies?

Cuba’s Crisis and the Lessons of Socialism

In many European countries, relatively little has been reported about events in Cuba, the longest-lasting and strongest communist stronghold in the Western Hemisphere. Therefore, it was interesting that yesterday or today many Finnish media outlets published a news report stating that “a group of protesters vandalized the regional office of the ruling Communist Party during the night leading into Saturday.”

Video footage of the incident could also be found, confirming the statement that “a group broke into the party office, carried furniture out onto the street, and set it on fire.” The police had also fired shots at the scene.

Following the events described above, Cuba’s current dictator, Miguel Díaz-Canel, has announced his willingness to discuss the future of his country with the United States. His counterpart will likely be Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who, as a Cuban émigré, probably has very little sympathy for the difficulties of the country’s communist government.

It therefore remains to be seen whether the situation has finally been reached in which Cuba frees itself from the yoke of communism and its people regain their freedom and the opportunity to raise their miserable standard of living. This would of course be a fine thing, but as the collapse of the European socialist states in the 1990s showed, the outcome could be either success or failure, as illustrated by the figure below showing the economic development of Poland and Moldova.

It remains to be seen, then, what Cuba’s future will look like—and how it will affect the lives and prospects of ordinary Cubans.

Of course, at a time when support for the political green-left is still strong among many European citizens, it would be desirable if the difficulties of Cuban socialism and its possible collapse would also increase understanding of the harmfulness of socialism. Or will there still be a large share of European voters who believe that applying Marx’s ideas leads to something good?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Venezuela, Antonio Guterres and the Nature of Great Powers
Pedro Sánchez Sides with Europe's Fifth Column on Russia
Marx in the Classroom: How Ideological Education Shaped Careers and Values

The original blogpost in Finnish: 
Onko Kuuban kommunistihallinto kaatumassa?

Free School Education for Foreigners Ends in Finland

The Parliament of Finland approved the government’s proposal according to which students from outside the EU and EEA will in the future pay an annual fee in upper-secondary schools (lukio) and vocational institutions corresponding to the actual cost of their education. We are not talking about small sums: for example, the cost of one year of upper-secondary school can exceed 10,000 euros.

According to Statistics Finland, in 2022 there were about 35,000 foreign nationals studying in vocational education and about 3,400 in upper-secondary schools. These figures also include people from EU and EEA countries, to whom the legislative change does not apply. The largest groups in vocational schools were Estonians (around 4,500), Russians (around 4,500), Iraqis (around 3,500), Afghans (around 2,200) and Filipinos (around 2,000).

In Parliament, the proposal was opposed not only by the left-wing parties—the Greens and the Left Alliance—but also by the Centre Party. It would be interesting to know what the party’s voters think about the matter at a time when public services have been cut and will continue to be cut drastically—if not from foreigners’ services, then from Finns’.

This was also noted by MP Joakim Vigelius, who additionally stated—quite correctly—that "Finland cannot be the world’s educational hub, nor a global social service office, health centre, care home or prison. The money will not be sufficient if the number of those to be served expands to everyone crossing the border without conditions, fees or responsibilities."

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Attitudes Toward Immigrants Are a Problem in Schools
Has Modern Education Strayed Too Far — and Is It Time to Change Course?
Marx in the Classroom: How Ideological Education Shaped Careers and Values

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Laitavasemmisto ja Keskusta haluaisivat Suomesta koko maailman ilmaisen koulutuskeskuksen

Perspectives on Immigration Restrictions in Finland and the U.S.

You don’t have to—nor is there any reason to—like Donald Trump or everything he has done. There is, however, one thing for which he must be given credit.

His administration has suspended the processing of immigration applications from citizens of Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela, Sierra Leone, Togo, Equatorial Guinea, the Republic of the Congo, Burundi, Chad, Sudan, Libya, Eritrea, Somalia, Yemen, Iran, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Myanmar, and Laos. The reason for this is that an Afghan who had gained entry to the country recently committed an act of terrorism by shooting members of the National Guard.

* * *

Over the years, Finland has also learned that people with developing-country backgrounds commit more violent and sexual offenses than others. That is why it is good that Prime Minister Petteri Orpo’s (National Coalition Party) government has tightened immigration policy.

As a result, the number of immigration applications on the basis of international protection from citizens of countries with the highest crime risk has been clearly lower last year and this year than at any point since the major migration year of 2015.

* * *

One can only hope that this development continues in the coming years and that the next government of our country does not start dismantling the progress achieved. Instead, one may hope that future policymakers will find a philosopher’s stone for how to get the developing-country immigrants who have already arrived here to adopt Finnish culture and way of life, and thereby take responsibility for their own lives here under the North Star.

One way to advance this goal is to develop criminal law in a direction that reduces the interest of crime-prone newcomers in coming to Finland, while at the same time encouraging those who are already here to live in Rome as the Romans do. In these matters, it is worthwhile to follow practices that have proven effective in other countries—including the immigration policy measures of Donald Trump’s administration—and make use of their experiences in the development of Finnish legislation.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Donald Trump Called a Shooter an Animal
Finally, Honest Reporting on Immigration and Crime
Sensible Immigration or Moral Posturing?

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Väkivalta- ja seksuaalirikollisuuden seuraukset

A Professor’s Ten-Point Plan to Fix Europe’s Immigration Policy

Finnish emeritus Professor Vesa Kanniainen has made a list related to immigration policy.

1. The EU member states must abandon the universal social security model throughout Europe.

2. The processing of asylum applications must be moved outside Europe.

3. Financial aid must be stopped for those countries of origin of refugees that refuse to take back their citizens who have not been granted asylum and whose return would therefore not violate the Geneva Convention.

4. Those who have received a negative asylum decision must be required to cooperate and be housed in return centers while waiting for their journey home.

5. Crossing European borders by land, sea, or air must be criminalized when a person does not have a positive asylum decision or valid travel documents.

6. Transport vehicles (such as boats in the Mediterranean) financed by criminal organizations must be confiscated.

7. International cooperation with various countries must be strengthened in order to relocate refugees outside Europe.

8. Visits by those who have been granted asylum to their home country must be prohibited.

9. Family reunifications of asylum seekers must be prohibited or frozen.

10. All foreigners who have received an unconditional or conditional prison sentence must be deported, regardless of how long they have lived in an EU country.

I think the professor’s list is quite good. So good, in fact, that it should be implemented as it is. For that reason, all its points should serve as guiding principles both in the humanitarian decisions of the current European Commission and in Finland’s immigration policy program after 2027.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Two Men Sentenced for Raping Underage Girls
Is Immigration Driving the Nordic Countries Apart?
Why is Somalia unwilling to meet Finland’s conditions for continuing development cooperation?

The original blogpost in Finnish:
https://professorinajatuksia.blogspot.com/2025/11/vesa-kanniaisen-lista-kannattaisi.html

Finns Give Their Government a Green Light to Ban Face Coverings

According to a new public opinion survey, 54 percent of Finns support and 26 percent oppose banning face coverings in public places and public services. This view is especially common among supporters of the Finns Party (92%), the National Coalition Party (70%), the Centre Party (62%), and the Social Democrats (54%). Thus, only the supporters of the left-wing parties (the Greens and the Left Alliance) are, on the whole, opposed to such a ban.

In fact, support for banning face coverings among different parties is even higher than the figures above suggest. For example, 14% of National Coalition supporters did not express an opinion, meaning that only 15% of them opposed the idea. Moreover, among those Green Party supporters who did state a view, around one-third supported a ban on face coverings.

There are at least two main justifications for prohibiting face coverings. First, they complicate criminal investigations.

Second, wearing a face covering is not always voluntary, since in certain cultures women are forced to cover their faces against their own will. Therefore, a ban could promote gender equality and the rights of girls and women.

That is why I now ask whether Prime Minister Petteri Orpo’s (NCP) government, together with the Social Democrats, could ensure that the will of the people on this matter is implemented as soon as possible. Drafting such a law should be fairly straightforward, as Finland could follow the example of countries such as Norway, the Netherlands, or France, where such bans are already in effect.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Managing Societal Change with a Growing Muslim Population
A young woman skiing in a swimsuit caused a controversy among women
Did police have the right to strip women

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Hallitus sai kansalta valtakirjan kasvojen peittämisen kieltämiselle

Will Orpo’s Government Repeat Milei’s Miracle and Restore Finland’s Values?

In Argentina, President Javier Milei has been fixing the country’s economy with a firm hand. As a result, his party suffered a defeat in the provincial elections of the Buenos Aires region in September.

This morning, however, we learned that the president’s party is nevertheless set to win the parliamentary midterm elections—and by a considerable margin over the opposition. It therefore appears that, in Argentina as well, the political “climate” of the capital region differs from that of the rest of the country—just as in Finland.

For Argentinians, the outcome of the midterm election is undoubtedly a good thing, since abandoning the economic reform halfway would most likely have led their homeland into another downward spiral, from which Milei has only just managed to lift it. Now, he has the people’s mandate to complete his economic recovery program.

Although Argentina is far from Finland, its economic situation is by no means irrelevant to us. After all, we too have a government that has sought—albeit with extreme caution—to reduce state spending.

And that’s not all, because the task will also fall to the next government, if its members have even a shred of responsibility. Finland’s public finances have been chronically in debt since 2008, and nowadays the payment of interest alone consumes roughly three and a half billion euros of the state budget every year.

It remains to be seen whether the Finnish people will act like the Argentinians in the parliamentary elections to be held in 2027. In this regard, the development of Finland’s economy over the next year and a half will be a crucial question.

What matters most is that if the country’s economy and employment rate begin to grow as a result of the government’s actions, and the accumulation of debt can thereby be halted, then the current Orpo cabinet coalition will have a good chance—like Milei—to renew its mandate to lead the country. That, in turn, could put Finland’s economy back on a healthy footing.

At the same time, we could continue to repair the value base of our society toward realism. In this respect, immigration policy is a significant part of the whole.

* * *

In that light, it was interesting to read in this morning’s Helsingin Sanomat article that among the humanitarian immigrants who arrived in Finland in 2015, those who came as unaccompanied minors have fared the best. By contrast, those who arrived here as adults have unambiguously become a heavy burden on society.

The HS article suggested that the young people who came alone might have been unusually resourceful individuals, which could explain why they have succeeded in Finland better than other humanitarian refugees. That may partly explain their success, but I strongly suspect that culture also plays a role here.

More specifically, the transmission of culture from parents to children. It is clear that young people who live with their families and share the values of developing countries preserve their own cultural background more strongly than those who live alone. Therefore, they adopt Western attitudes and habits that lead to social success much less readily than those who arrived unaccompanied.

Against this background, it might make sense to make a complete U-turn in our current refugee policy and redefine Finnish humanitarian immigration—at least with regard to quota refugees—so that priority would be given to unaccompanied young people. At the same time, we could abolish family reunifications altogether, since they undoubtedly have harmful cultural consequences as well.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Sensible Immigration or Moral Posturing?
Javier Milei and the Great Western Opportunity
Will Orpo's Government Restore Finland to Sustainable Economic Growth?

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Toistaako Orpon hallitus Milein ihmeen ja korjaa suomalaisen arvopohjan?

When Should the Independence of Palestine Be Recognized?

Many states have recognized the State of Palestine. In other words, they have recognized something that does not even exist.

Finland is not, at least for the time being, part of this group. But now the entire Finnish green-left – the Social Democratic Party, the Greens, and the Left Alliance – have demanded that Finland’s government recognize the State of Palestine. In other words – I repeat – recognize something that does not even exist.

President of Finland Alexander Stubb has left this matter to the government and parliament, meaning he has promised to sign the recognition if such a proposal is placed on his desk. It has not yet been presented, but according to Prime Minister Petteri Orpo, “the government is still processing the matter, but our main policy, as decided in the foreign and security policy report, is that we promote the two-state solution.”

In practice, the government is unlikely to make such a proposal to the President, since its other main party, the Finns Party, as well as its smallest party, the Christian Democrats, oppose recognition. The President has also acknowledged this, saying: “Somehow I don’t believe I will receive this proposal before the UN meeting next week.

* * *

For my part, I state that if a new independent state is created in Palestine, I am ready to support its recognition immediately. On the other hand, I do not wish under any circumstances to recognize something that does not even exist.

In this, I follow the model set by Western countries over a hundred years ago – including Germany, which was at war with them – who decided after Finland declared independence in 1917 that recognition would not come until Soviet Russia itself recognized the new state. This led the ruling Senate of Finland to turn to Lenin’s Council of People’s Commissars.

After various stages, Lenin then acknowledged the facts as they were and recognized Finland’s independence. After that, Western nations followed suit one by one, and there has been no ambiguity about Finland’s independence since, even though the Soviet Union tried to occupy the country during World War II – on two separate occasions.

This is the same model I am prepared to recommend for the recognition of Palestine. That is, let the Palestinians lay down their arms, make peace with Israel, and agree on the conditions under which an entity made up of the West Bank and Gaza could achieve independence. And let Finland, in that context, acknowledge the reality – and grant recognition to the new state only then.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Did Finland Remain an Independent Democracy After World War II?
When Should We Recognize the Independence of Palestine?
Palestinian Youth Require More Understanding, Less Aggression

Is Immigration Driving the Nordic Countries Apart?

The bigger Nordic countries – Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland – are generally seen as a highly unified group of states, where democratic decision-making works exceptionally well. At the same time, however, they have undergone major demographic changes as a result of humanitarian immigration, which will likely have a significant impact on their future.

Sweden, as a former great power, is the largest Nordic country, governed by the local EPP together with a smaller EPP party and a liberal RE party. The government is also supported in parliament by an ECR party outside the coalition, whose immigration policy goals have been included in the government program.

This unusual arrangement stems from the fact that Sweden’s immigration policy has been extremely liberal, which has made the country’s population more multicultural than in the other Nordic countries. At the same time, the related challenges have also been greater.

This is reflected in the support for Swedish parties. The largest party in the country is still the Social Democrats (S&D group in the European Parliament), with around 34% support, but a party belonging to the ECR group that is critical of multiculturalism has risen to compete with the EPP for second place, with about 20% support. The country’s other parties are small.

Denmark is currently governed by a three-party coalition consisting of the Social Democrats (S&D) and two RE parties.

Unlike in the other Nordic countries, Denmark’s S&D has long pursued a strict immigration policy, which has reduced immigration-related problems. This helped their support rise a few years ago to very high levels – even around 35% – but in recent years it has dropped to about 20%. Despite this, the party remains clearly the most popular in the country.

Denmark’s second most popular party has been the Greens (G/EFA), with support around 15%. They are followed slightly behind by the RE-affiliated Venstre party, and behind them an ECR party at about 10%, which is slightly higher than the Danish PfE group, whose support has risen significantly this year. In addition, a large number of smaller parties influence Danish politics, including the smallest RE party in government.

In Norway, the country is currently governed by a minority government of the local S&D party, but parliamentary elections are being held today and tomorrow, after which a new government will likely be formed.

Humanitarian immigration in Norway has been more limited, and thus the related problems have been smaller than in Sweden. Nevertheless, the local ECR group has in recent years competed for the position of the country’s largest party alongside the S&D and the EPP. Meanwhile, the far left (SV) has lost support.

In my home country of Finland, the government is formed by two EPP parties, an ECR party, and an RE party representing the interests of the Swedish-speaking population. The government has pursued a strict economic policy driven by the larger EPP party, while also following the relatively strict immigration policy demanded by the ECR party in its government program.

During the current parliamentary term, the support for Finland’s EPP parties and the language-based party has remained relatively stable (around 20%, 3%, and 4%, respectively). By contrast, the Finns Party’s support collapsed under government responsibility, falling from around 20% in the 2023 elections to about half of that, though in recent months it has started to rise again.

Among the opposition parties, support has grown for the S&D party, which has risen to 26%, making it clearly Finland’s most popular party at the moment. Another recent gainer has been the former agrarian party (around 15%), which for some reason belongs to the RE group in the European Parliament. Meanwhile, the Greens’ support has long been in decline (8%), while the far-left party belonging to the LEFT group has remained fairly stable in 10%.

As this brief overview of Nordic politics shows, there are significant political differences among these countries regarding immigration. It remains to be seen how these differences develop in the future – and especially whether Sweden’s long-standing open immigration policy will lead it to diverge from the other Nordic countries.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
No Low-Hanging Fruits Among Russian Neighbors
Nordic Police Announce: Spread of Gang Violence Cannot Be Stopped
Nordic Nations Unite Against the Growing Threat of Cross-Border Organized Crime

Houthi Leaders Risk Their Lives to Cling to Power

Last Thursday, the Israeli armed forces killed Yemen’s Houthi administration Prime Minister Ahmed Ghalib al-Rahawi, Foreign Minister Jamal Amer, and ten other ministers — more than half of Yemen’s government members — in a precise airstrike. Such an outcome is undeniably impressive, and it could not have arisen by chance as if in a fairytale.

In this case too, the strike was preceded by weeks of intelligence gathering involving around 200 military intelligence professionals. The group worked in a secret bunker located in Israel and also included representatives of the United States military.

The actual attack was carried out by Israeli fighter jets just a few hours after the intelligence team had confirmed the meeting place of the Yemeni government. At that moment, the Yemeni ministers had just gathered to listen to the speech of spiritual and military leader Abdul Malik al-Houthi, who, fortunately for him, was speaking via remote connection and thus preserved his life.

For the time being, the broader impact of the successful strike remains uncertain, but it seems that the Houthi administration is trying to hold on to its position. In doing so, its members are taking an enormous risk of another Israeli and U.S. strike, which, if successful, could cost them their lives. In any case, it is clear that the intelligence services of these states will do their utmost to succeed again.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Will Power Change Hands in Iran?
The End of the Holy Soldier of the Arabs
Religious authority and the Iran strike on Israel

Finland to Cut Off Taxpayer Money for Immigration

Under the leadership of Finland’s Minister of Finance, Riikka Purra (Finns Party), a budget proposal has been drawn up which would allocate no state-collected tax money next year to the integration of immigrants or the reception of quota refugees. This would be a major change from the current situation, in which a significant share of tax revenue is used precisely for these purposes.

According to Minister Purra, “The integration structures within the public sector, and the ‘private’ integration industry that has grown around them, form one branch of the welfare state that has become enormous. The taxpayer foots the bill. If immigration broadly worked, such structures wouldn’t be needed at all. The government has previously cut integration spending, and in my opinion, it could easily cut more.”

Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party) commented on the proposed change, stating that “Integration should not be measured by the amount of money spent, and society should have an incentive to push those granted permission straight into work. That would also put an end to all sorts of busywork back home, such as collecting droppings in matchboxes.”

It remains to be seen, however, how the other government parties and Parliament will respond to the Finance Minister’s proposal. It is expected that the ending of support for companies making their living from immigration would face opposition within the government, at least from the Swedish People’s Party, and in Parliament from the entire green-left bloc.

The taxpayer, on the other hand, would welcome it—since once Finland’s chronically deficit-ridden state budget is brought into balance, they might one day have a say over the use of a larger share of their own paycheck.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A New Beginning: Economic Independence in the Hands of Developing Nations
Finnish Branch of Extinction Rebellion Faces Possible Ban
Finland's Stance on NATO Defense Spending Is Linked to the Geopolitical Threat from Russia

New Framework for Post-Hamas Gaza

Israel’s Security Cabinet has announced that it will take control of Gaza and destroy the terrorist organization Hamas, which previously ruled the area. Additionally, it has outlined five principles to be applied in the region.

These principles include the disarmament of Hamas, the release of hostages, the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip, Israeli security oversight in Gaza, and the establishment of an entirely new Arab civil administration. The final decision on implementing these principles will be made by Prime Minister Netanyahu’s full cabinet, which is set to convene no earlier than Sunday.

To carry out this plan, Israel has repositioned its troops near the Gaza border in formations suggesting the beginning of a new large-scale ground offensive. It remains to be seen whether the war, sparked by Hamas’s terrorist attack on October 7, 2023, is now moving into a phase that could lead to a peaceful resolution.

* * *

At first glance, the plan raises many questions. It is certain that Hamas fighters will do everything they can to avoid capture—potentially even by using human shields. At the same time, they will undoubtedly seek to prevent the release of hostages.

I also approach with great skepticism the idea that an entirely new Arab administration could be established in Gaza without any involvement from previous powerholders. And even if such an administration were created, could it build enough military strength to prevent Hamas from resurging? One problem could be that such a government would likely be seen as an Israeli puppet regime, making it difficult to gain the trust of the local population—many of whom have traditionally supported Hamas.

On the other hand, any attempt to end the war in Gaza—and to achieve long-term, sustainable peace—is undoubtedly welcome from both the Palestinian Arab and Jewish perspectives. That is why I hope the proposed plan can materialize into an authority that wields real power in the region and succeeds in suppressing the terrorism that has taken root there for decades.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Hamas Continues the Suffering of Gaza's Civilians
A Night at the Opera
When Demands Become Damage

Can Europe Learn from Finland´s and Spain’s Contrasting Immigration Policies?

The immigration issue in Finland became a normal political process when the government programme of Petteri Orpo's (NCP) cabinet was agreed upon — or at the latest, when those decisions started being implemented into legislation.

In Spain, by contrast, power is held by a socialist government that pays no attention to the problems of immigration. Instead, it is planning to grant residence and work permits to a large number of migrants who have entered the country illegally. In other words, the government led by Pedro Sánchez has decided to ignore the elephant in the room.

Naturally, this failure to address the problems has led to a backlash. A serious sign of this was seen in the municipality of Torre-Pacheco, where a 68-year-old man was attacked by three North African men.

This prompted frustrated Spaniards to take matters into their own hands and engage in outright illegal actions — namely, physically attacking immigrants. Reportedly, no one has died in these incidents, but five people have been injured.

It remains to be seen what the consequences of this unrest will be, as those who have taken justice into their own hands — described as far-right individuals — are to be arrested and prosecuted. All this is taking place in a municipality where as much as one third of the population has an immigrant background.

* * *

The developments I described above should prompt reflection all across Europe. In particular, it would be worthwhile to compare the immigration policies of Spain and Finland. And to examine what they have led to — and what they are likely to lead to in the coming years.

For my part, I believe — in the spirit of former president Paasikivi — that the recognition of facts is the beginning of wisdom. But how on earth can this simple truth be understood by Sánchez's government? Or by the Finnish green-left?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Left Wants to Grill a Swedish Minister Over His Son’s Past – What’s Really Behind It? 
EU Citizens Don’t Want More Migrants – But How Can the Flow of Asylum Seekers Be Slowed?
EU Commission Should Take Migration and Related Crime Seriously

Shock in Berlin: AfD Surges, Merz Stumbles

It may come as no surprise that the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party is taking the country's intelligence service to court over its classification of the party as a far-right group. What is a far bigger surprise, however, is that Friedrich Merz was not elected Chancellor in the first vote of the Bundestag, Germany's federal parliament, to lead a coalition government between the Christian Democrats and the Social Democrats.

This is likely to be corrected in the second vote. More interestingly, the AfD has already called for new elections.

The reason for this is likely the party’s rising popularity, now surpassing that of all other parties. This is certainly not only due to the perception that the intelligence service’s classification is undemocratic. The protest mood has likely also been fueled by the fact that no attempt was made—even symbolically—to negotiate a coalition with the AfD, which came second in the election. That, too, can be seen as a sign of broken democracy.

That’s why it will be fascinating to see how support for German political parties evolves in the coming months and years. Will the AfD continue to grow in popularity, or will Merz’s government restore public trust in the traditional parties?

At least Merz has a good starting point: the debt brake has been loosened, and he has pledged to fix Germany’s infrastructure and armed forces with hundreds of billions in additional funding. On the other hand, if Germany's sluggish economy begins to noticeably affect people's standard of living, support could also rise for protest parties other than the AfD.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
AfD Under Fire – But Is Democracy the Price?
Good luck to Chancellor Friedrich Merz!
What will post-migration Europe look like in the future?

In Finland, the Enemy Is Clear – and Now the Truth Is Emerging for the Palestinians Too

The Finnish government is proposing an extension to the so-called "pushback law." This law, which closes the border between Finland and Russia, came into effect last July with an almost unanimous decision in Parliament. Extending it once again requires a clear majority in Parliament.

That appears to be happening, as the parties still hold the same positions they did during the original vote that enacted the law. Only the Greens and the Left Alliance oppose the proposal, while the rest understand that Putin must not be given the opportunity to continue his hybrid warfare, which instrumentalizes migrants.

Meanwhile, the Social Democrats—also in opposition—have stated that "ensuring border security is just as relevant as it was a year ago," and they intend to support the government. The Centre Party, also in opposition, will do the same.

It seems that Finland’s eastern border will remain closed until Russia provides credible proof that it will no longer use asylum seekers against Finland. For everyone's sake, it would be best if this happened as soon as possible—the ball is now in Vladimir Putin’s court.

* * *

News has also emerged from the Holy Land. Frustration among Gaza’s residents appears to have reached new heights after Israel resumed bombings a week ago, following a two-month ceasefire.

As a result, Palestinians in Gaza staged a protest on Tuesday against Hamas, which governs the territory. The demonstrators called Hamas members terrorists and demanded an end to the war against Israel.

It appears that many Palestinians have come to realize that their biggest problem is not Israel but Hamas, which continues to wage endless terrorism. However, it remains to be seen whether the protests will grow large enough to force Hamas to surrender, release the hostages, and agree to lay down its arms permanently.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Complete Demilitarization of Gaza: What Would It Mean for the Palestinians?
Time for Hamas to Accept the Facts
Defending National Security: Finland's Response to Hybrid Warfare

The Increasing Criminality Among Swedish Students Stems from Their Values

Sweden has for decades been a "superpower in humanitarian immigration", which has significantly altered its demographic structure. At the same time, the country's security situation has deteriorated year by year, and there are fears that criminal immigrant gangs will spread to Finland – a concern that the Swedish police have also warned their neighbors, including us Finns, about.

Against this background, it was interesting to note that the Swedish government is planning a law that would allow schools to search students' bags if they are suspected of carrying a weapon. Additionally, Swedes are prepared to invest approximately 27 million euros in school security and locking systems, as well as other similar safety measures.

Furthermore, the government is planning to impose an obligation on schools to report suspicious incidents and threats to the police. This would prevent the tendency to overlook or downplay unpleasant issues that have taken root in society.

Even more striking was the finding in a report published by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå) at the end of 2024. According to the report, 38.7% of ninth-grade boys and 23.3% of girls consider it completely or fairly acceptable to hit someone who has said something offensive. Moreover, as many as half of ninth-grade students—approximately fifteen-year-olds—have, according to their own reports, committed a crime within the past 12 months. The proportion is the same for both boys and girls.

As a consequence of these attitudes, violence has increased by more than 150% over the most recent measured ten-year period (2013–2023). According to criminology professor Olof Wikström, these crimes are not committed "despite knowing that they are wrong, but rather because they perceive them as right from the perspective of their own values and morals."

These facts should be acknowledged across the entire European Union. At the same time, it is essential to understand that Sweden serves as a cautionary example of failed policies, and its experiences should be heeded throughout the Union.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Sweden is Soon Set to Surpass the One Million Mark for Illiterate People
Sweden's Rapid Demographic Shift Causes Challenges
100 percent of the violence is related to migration

Too Many Finns Share Trump’s Inability to Comprehend

Today, in Germany, some idiot has once again decided to drive a car into a crowd. As a result, at least two people have died, and at least 25 others have been injured.

This case once again demonstrates that Germany – and Europe in general – is facing massive problems due to its immigration policies. That is why a complete reversal of course is necessary.

The U.S. President, Donald Trump, is an obvious fool in his approach to Russia and Vladimir Putin. Nevertheless, the latter part of his statement published by Visegrád, "We should spend less time worrying about Putin, and more time worrying about migrant rape gangs, drug lords, murderers, and people from mental institutions entering our Country – So that we don’t end up like Europe," makes a great deal of sense.

However, if he truly wanted to act in the best interest of ordinary people—both Americans and Europeans—he should address both of the issues he mentioned. In this regard, he could take inspiration from the Finnish government, which aims to tackle both the immigration problem and Russia’s imperialist ambitions simultaneously.

Unfortunately, it seems that too many Finns share Trump's inability to comprehend more than one problem at a time. This is evident from the fact that support for the left, which promotes the cause of criminal immigrants, is surging—even though nearly all Finns understand that Putin cannot be allowed to emerge victorious from his adventure in Ukraine.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Europe Needs Leadership and Urgent Defense Actions
Political Rhetoric Like Trump-Zelenskyi’s Has Deep Historical Roots
What will post-migration Europe look like in the future?