Lessons from the Abdul Ballout Case

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * *

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

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

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

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

Who Really Rules Iran?

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

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

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

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

* * *

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

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

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

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

* * *

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

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

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

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

Trump’s War Without Strategy: Why Iran May Come Out Stronger

I wrote in yesterday’s text that the expansion of Charlemagne’s empire "was possible because Charles was constantly at war and gave his enemies no time to recover." This came to my mind this morning when I read in the newspaper that the negotiations between Donald Trump and Iran’s leadership had come to nothing, because representatives of the latter had left the negotiation site.

However, the Americans had already received a new negotiation proposal, in which, according to Trump, Iran had "offered a lot, but not yet enough." Nor had he yet considered continuing the war.

In my view, this is foolish, because Iran’s tactics seem as if they were designed based on the history of Charlemagne’s empire. As a result—if and when it has survived the initial attack by the United States and Israel—the aim is to prolong the ongoing peace process in order to improve and develop its own military capability.

* * *

Iran’s leadership is undoubtedly encouraged by the fact that although their army was hardly able to defend itself during last summer’s attack by the USA and Israel, it has during the current military operations been able to cause considerable destruction—especially in countries allied with the USA, but also to the U.S. Air Force. This shows that Iran’s Islamist leadership has the ability to enhance the combat capability of its own army and to survive the current attack, if given the opportunity.

It therefore remains to be seen what the final outcome of the war will be. Will it turn out to be the strengthening of Islamist Iran, rather than the rise of a more moderate government or even a democracy?

* * *

That is why it has been sad to observe that Donald Trump clearly does not know world history and its lessons, but embarked on the war recklessly, without preparing for it to become bogged down in the way now seen. If this is the case, the greatest sufferers will be Iranian women, who will be subjected even more tightly to a medieval hell and killed if necessary.

But Iranians will not be the only ones to suffer; global security will also be among the losers. Iran has, after all, been known as the most significant driving force behind Islamic terrorism.

And there is no reason to doubt that it would continue on that path—indeed even more determinedly—if the political leadership of the United States and/or its military proves incapable of carrying its attack through to completion. In other words, the outcome of the war will be exactly what it currently appears to be.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony
Iran – The End of Theocracy or the Beginning of Civil War?
Donald J. Trump 

What’s Next, Iran?

In public discussion, surprisingly little attention has been paid to what would happen if Iran’s Islamist regime were to collapse as a result of the ongoing uprising of its own citizens. Would power be taken—at least temporarily—by the son of the late shah, who ruled the country dictatorially, Reza Pahlavi? And if so, would he, as he has promised, organize free elections, allowing Iranians to establish a democratic system of government? Or would he instead follow in his father’s footsteps, becoming an undemocratic but Western-aligned leader?

Or would the country descend into civil war, with various political groups engaging in armed conflict with one another—an outcome determined partly by Iranians themselves, but also by the amount of support the different sides receive from rival great powers? That is, from Trump’s United States and Xi’s China—but hardly from Russia, bogged down in its own “special operation,” or from a Europe that is disarrayed in every respect.

* * *

Of course, it would be wonderful if Iranians were able, in free elections, to choose an enlightened father of the nation under whose leadership a modern constitution would be created and, on that basis, the rest of the legal system reformed as well. At the same time, religion would be defined as a private matter for each individual, as has been done, for example, here under the North Star.

The question, however, is whether this is what all Iranians actually want. Or do they have different aspirations? Or might the great powers—or neighboring countries, for that matter—have their own spoons in the pot, stirring it in such a way as to push Iranians from a religious dystopia into a secular tyranny?

Unless, of course, the current Islamist regime manages after all to retain its position and continues at the helm of the ship of state, using even harsher methods than before to subjugate its citizens. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Iran at a Crossroads: From Islamist Rule Toward Democracy?
Finnish Ex-Military Chief: U.S. Likely Halted Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program
Will Power Change Hands in Iran?

The original blogpost in Finnish:
Mitä seuraavaksi, Iran?

Iran at a Crossroads: From Islamist Rule Toward Democracy?

Iranians are protesting—according to Finnish news sources (Yle, Uutissuomalainen)—because of the deterioration of the country’s economy. According to these reports, the background lies in the sanctions imposed on Iran by Western countries, but I would believe that the unrest has also been influenced by the religious leaders’ earlier saber-rattling toward Israel, which ended in humiliation.

The Islamists who lead the country have resorted to harsh measures against the demonstrators, and the situation has therefore escalated. By contrast, President Masoud Pezeshkian has urged the interior minister to listen to the protesters’ “legitimate demands.”

* * *

An interesting additional dimension to this situation has been introduced by Reza Pahlavi, the son of the shah who ruled the country before the Islamist regime. For some time now, he has been seeking to stir the Iranian people into revolution. Yesterday he published a message on social media in which he called on “the people of Iran to join in with the nationwide strikes and protests: government employees, workers in the energy and transportation sectors, truck drivers, nurses, teachers and academics, artisans and entrepreneurs, retirees and those who have lost their savings—everyone, unite and join this national movement.”

In addition, he called on “Iranians abroad—from Australia and East Asia to Europe and North America—to redouble your activities within the framework of the ‘Rise Iran’ campaign to amplify the voice of the Iranian people to the media, international institutions, foreign governments, and parliaments.” and declared that “we will win because we are united and we are many.”

As the year changes tonight, I would like, for my part, to express the hope that Iranians will finally succeed in toppling the Islamists from power and move their ancient homeland from medieval totalitarianism toward democracy—and begin a process that, over time, would lead to a weakening of religious fanaticism throughout the Middle East and Central Asia.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Donald J. Trump
Finnish Ex-Military Chief: U.S. Likely Halted Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program
Will Power Change Hands in Iran?

Reflections on the Terrorist Attack in Australia

Today in Australia, a terrorist attack was carried out against Jews celebrating Hanukkah. At the moment it appears that 12 people have lost their lives and 29 have been injured in this senseless act.

One of the attackers is a ‘Sydney man,’ Naveed Akram, which points to an Islamist motive. Of course, this can also be inferred from the choice of target.

What makes the incident unusual is that an Australian in civilian clothes took a weapon away from one of the terrorists. After that, another person even threw something at him—apparently a stone. Well done to both, although such civilian bravery cannot be recommended to anyone, as it can turn out badly.

On a general level, this case once again demonstrated the risk posed to the native population by the Muslim population living in Western countries. At the same time, it reinforced the negative stigma often attached to all Muslims. For this reason, it would be sensible and wise, for the sake of the Islamic community living throughout the West, to ensure that such attacks no longer occur.

Therefore, the lesson of the Australian case is clear from Europe’s point of view: it is not advisable to increase our country’s Muslim population beyond its current size. This is not changed by the fact that Australian Muslim communities have condemned the attack, because the act seen here was unfortunately not an isolated case, nor was the group of perpetrators random.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Donald Trump Called a Shooter an Animal
Just Another Case of Multiculturality in Manchester, UK
Understanding of European Terrorism by Left-wing and Value-liberal Politicians

Burning a Man Alive Led to Life Imprisonment

One of the consequences of the immigration policies practiced by Western countries has been the emergence of Islamist terrorists in Europe. This naturally means a deterioration in the security situation in the West, but also an increased burden on judicial and prison systems.

This came to my mind while reading a news article stating that a "Swedish man," Osama Krayem, had participated in the murder of a Jordanian pilot in 2014 and has now been sentenced to life imprisonment for war crimes and terrorism. The same man had previously been sentenced to 30 years in prison for the 2015 Paris and 2016 Brussels terrorist attacks.

Osama Krayem grew up in Malmö, the Swedish city most affected by immigration, and became radicalized already as a teenager. When the opportunity arose, he traveled to Syria and joined the terrorist group ISIS.

According to the court proceedings, Osama Krayem led the pilot of the plane shot down by ISIS into a metal cage and guarded it until it was set on fire with the man still alive inside. Thus, the sentence handed down now is undoubtedly well deserved, though it naturally cannot undo what was done.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Activism Without Truth
Western Countries Have Neither a Reason Nor a Need to Accept Asylum Seekers from Syria or Gaza
Three Islamists Arrested in Finland on Suspicion of Belonging to a Terrorist Group

 

Will Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s Demand Block Peace in Gaza?

The terrorist organization Hamas is ready to begin negotiations on implementing a proposed 60-day ceasefire. It accepts the main points of the agreement but seeks some minor additions to the deal.

The Palestinian Islamic Jihad organization has also announced its support for the ceasefire plan in Gaza but demands guarantees that the negotiation process will indeed lead to a permanent ceasefire. At the same time, it wants to ensure that Israel will not resume military operations in Gaza after the hostages held by Hamas have been released.

The Israeli leadership, which has accepted the original text of the ceasefire proposal drafted by Qatar and the United States, is currently considering how to respond to the terrorists’ suggestions. U.S. President Donald Trump, for his part, has previously told the Palestinian organizations that they will not be getting a better deal.

It thus remains to be seen whether Gaza's exceptionally bloody war is finally coming to an end, or whether it will continue after the currently debated two-month truce concludes. However, the Islamic Jihad’s precondition for a permanent ceasefire may in itself prevent the ceasefire from materializing at all, as Israel is unlikely to commit to permanently halting its military actions in Gaza before terms for lasting peace have been agreed upon.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Some University of Helsinki Employees Demand End to Collaboration With Israeli Universities
UN Security Council Resolution Draft Risks Encouraging Terrorism
Gambling Addiction and the Shadowy Instigator

Iran Exposes the Finnish Green-Left as Intellectually Dishonest or Lacking Values

A young Finnish conservative politician, Binga Tupamäki (National Coalition Party), recently expressed her astonishment on social media, asking: “Why is the Finnish left defending an Islamist state that, in the name of jihad, is seeking to develop nuclear weapons?” It’s a valid question—so let us take a look at the values of the Finnish left.

According to the Left Alliance's party platform, the party's "core values are freedom, solidarity, and equality." The Social Democratic Party of Finland lists the same values, albeit in a slightly different order: "Our core values are freedom, equality, and solidarity."

Each reader can decide for themselves how well those words describe the actions of Iran’s Islamist government—or how those principles could possibly lead to the conclusion that such a regime is in any way worth defending by members or supporters of these parties.

And what about Finland’s value-liberal Greens? They don’t have a concise list quite like the Left Alliance, but their platform includes the following description: “We work to stop climate change and the sixth wave of extinction... we fight for an equal, safe, and just future. We defend nature and people.”

Nothing in that list seems even remotely compatible with the defense of Iran’s Islamist regime. On the contrary, based on these statements, one would expect the Greens to be pleased that someone—anyone—is actively trying to stop Iran’s mullahs from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Altogether, it appears that when comparing their stated values with their actual behavior, many Finnish green-leftists are not living up to their principles. In other words, they are either intellectually dishonest or, in practice, lack values. Perhaps even both.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Does the Political Green-Left Lie, and Why Does It Resonate with the People?

Hezbollah Uses Human Shields While the Green-Left Looks Away
The European Parliament elections were a celebration for the far-left in Finland

Will Power Change Hands in Iran?

After Israel attacked Iran few days ago, it didn't take long before Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced his willingness to discuss the nuclear deal aimed at preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The reason for this is most likely the Jewish state's military superiority compared to Khamenei’s forces.

So far, Western countries have not, at least publicly, responded to the Iranians' announcement, instead choosing to watch from the sidelines as an uneven struggle unfolds, in which Israel demonstrates that it is militarily and technologically vastly more capable than Iran. This is the case even though Iran has managed to launch some missiles into Israel.

For the world at large—and especially for the Iranian people—it would likely be best if Iran’s Islamist regime were to collapse as a result of the war and be replaced by a religiously neutral government that would free its citizens from the religious terrorism imposed by the current regime. However, this would require a sufficiently strong force to emerge from within Iran, one capable of channeling public dissatisfaction into a revolution.

Another possibility for regime change could be the use of force by Israel or Western nations. However, I strongly doubt that anyone has the will to undertake such an operation, even though, for example, many Iranian refugees in Finland (an example and another) would undoubtedly wish for it.

It remains to be seen what consequences this ongoing and likely very short-lived war will have for the Iranian regime. Will it manage to maintain its position even in defeat, or will the Iranian people finally gain their freedom?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
A Quick Israeli Success in Iran Would Be Crucial for Ukraine
Iran Rejects Direct Nuclear Talks with U.S., Calls Them Pointless
Israel’s Strike on Iran: Ripple Effects for the Middle East, Russia, and Global Stability

A Quick Israeli Success in Iran Would Be Crucial for Ukraine

Israel's attacks today demonstrated that Iran has no means to defend itself against the Jewish state's assaults. Nor does it have the capability to inflict significant damage on Israel, as the mullahs’ failed counterattack attempt showed.

As a consequence, the conflict between Israel and Iran will be militarily uninteresting. However, it is clear that if Iran even partially closes the Strait of Hormuz, the global market price of crude oil will rise — and this, in turn, will have an indirect impact, particularly on the war in Ukraine.

This is because the price increase would result in money flowing into Russia’s war chest from oil sales more rapidly than it currently does. And this would lead to two consequences, both of which would be detrimental to Ukraine.

The first would naturally be that the increased oil revenues would provide more funding for arming Putin’s military, thus strengthening Russia’s invading army. The second is that the burden of war on Russian civilians would ease, thereby reducing the risk of a collapse in support for Putin’s regime — and thus the risk of a potential popular uprising.

For this reason, it is to be hoped that Israel achieves its objectives in Iran as quickly as possible. And if the mullahs attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz, its openness must be ensured by the actions of other countries — especially the United States.

For this reason, it is especially interesting to closely follow the war between Israel and Iran over the weekend and the early part of next week. And perhaps even to hope that the Iranian people will grow tired of their Islamist regime and overthrow it through a popular uprising — just as the Shah's regime collapsed 46 years ago. And as a result, shut down Iran’s entire nuclear weapons program.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Iran Rejects Direct Nuclear Talks with U.S., Calls Them Pointless
Can Peace Emerge from Horrific War Crimes?
Israel’s Strike on Iran: Ripple Effects for the Middle East, Russia, and Global Stability

Millions Defy Erdoğan – The Battle for Atatürk's Legacy Continues

According to the Turkish opposition, up to 2.2 million people gathered in Istanbul on Saturday to protest against President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his dictatorial actions. Meanwhile, the government has banned demonstrations and arrested thousands of protesters.

What is essential here is that Turkey still has millions of people who are willing to put their own future at risk to defend the legacy of the country’s first president, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk—namely, the modernization and democratization of the nation.

Erdoğan, on the other hand, has undermined this legacy by leaning on Islamist forces, which have helped him secure an almost dictatorial position. At the same time, Turkey has gradually drifted toward its ideological past, falling into instability after a long period of economic growth. 

It remains to be seen whether Erdoğan’s administration will collapse and, if it does, whether its successor will restore Turkey to the path laid out by Atatürk. If that happens, Turkey may regain a leading position among Islamic countries and set an example for a better future.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Need for Asylum Among Syrians Disappeared with the Regime Change
The Finnish Minister of Foreign Affairs apologized to the Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs for the words of the woman who criticized the man who exposed his penis
What seemed to be impossible just two years ago is going to happen in very near future

Understanding of Facts is Increasing in the Middle East

A couple of days ago, I wrote about how some Palestinians in Gaza have begun to realize that their problem is not Israel but Hamas. This lesson comes from the fact that Israel has started responding with a heavy hand to every rocket attack directed at it.

Today's news, in turn, reported that two rockets were fired from Lebanon into Israel. One was shot down, and the other fell on the Lebanese side.

Despite the minimal damage, Israel retaliated by striking the Dahieh suburb of Beirut. After that, Israel's Defense Minister Israel Katz stated that "if there is no quiet in Kiryat Shmona and the Galilean communities, there will be no quiet in Beirut either."

According to him, "the Lebanese government is directly responsible for all fire directed at Galilee." Lebanon’s Prime Minister, Nawaf Salam, seemed to understand this and immediately announced that the Lebanese armed forces would identify and promptly arrest those who had fired the rockets.

Hopefully, this means that the Lebanese are also beginning to realize that their problem is not Israel but the Islamists residing in their country, who seek to terrorize the Jewish state time and time again.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
In Finland, the Enemy Is Clear – and Now the Truth Is Emerging for the Palestinians Too
Western Countries Have Neither a Reason Nor a Need to Accept Asylum Seekers from Syria or Gaza
Iranian Missile Attack was Followed by Humorous Flowers

Western Countries Have Neither a Reason Nor a Need to Accept Asylum Seekers from Syria or Gaza

After the Syrian revolution, many believed that a new and better era was dawning for the country. This was despite the fact that the HTS alliance, which came to power in December, has an Islamist background.

However, the persecution of Syria’s minorities recently made headlines, after which President Ahmed al-Sharaa promised to end the violence and arbitrary executions. Now, however, it has emerged that Alawites who fled to Lebanon have a different view.

According to one of them, “Bashar al-Assad is a murderer, but al-Sharaa is even worse. Words cannot describe the horrors.” 

A Christian, on the other hand, claimed that government forces had shot his father. According to him, “The troops entered our house, and my father was the only one home. Otherwise, we would all be dead.”

At this stage, it is difficult to assess the accuracy of these accounts, as there is no precise information available on the violence that has occurred. Allegations suggest that, in response to uprisings against the new government’s fighters, Islamists have retaliated ISIS-style with arbitrary executions and by kidnapping women as sex slaves.

If this has indeed happened, it is, of course, an extremely serious matter. On the other hand, it is clear that people who have fled Syria are not necessarily reliable sources.

Therefore, it would be important for the intelligence agencies of other countries to obtain more reliable information about what is currently happening in Syria. And if the allegations of crimes described above are confirmed—or especially if they appear to be becoming the new norm—the rest of the world must take action.

Or alternatively, acknowledge the situation and let people live in the reality of their own society without even trying to change it. While at the same time declaring that all cultures are equally good. And to understand that for this very reason, Western countries have neither a reason nor a need to accept asylum seekers from Syria.

* * *

Israel attacked Gaza again some time ago, stating that the reason was that Hamas had been preparing attacks on Israeli territory. This justification became very clear today, when Hamas' military wing announced that it had fired rockets into Israel.

One of the rockets was intercepted, and two fell in uninhabited areas within Israel. The almost certain consequence of this will be an Israeli counterstrike, which will cause even greater suffering for the people of Gaza, who are already experiencing hard times.

Also in this case, Western people should acknowledge that all cultures are equally good. And understand that therefore they have no reason to accept even a single Palestinian asylum seeker.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Uncertain Horizons: Syria's Post-Assad Era
The Need for Asylum Among Syrians Disappeared with the Regime Change
On the Consequences of Russian Inability in Syria

Uncertain Horizons: Syria's Post-Assad Era

Israel destroyed the Syrian army’s equipment in swift strikes following the collapse of Bashar al-Assad's regime, as the previously Islamist-designated Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) assumed power.

In practical terms, this means that the armaments of the Syrian dictatorship, including chemical weapons of mass destruction, will not fall into the hands of a new government, which may turn out to be an Islamist rogue state.

In this light, one might imagine that the entire world would be pleased with Israel’s actions. On the other hand, Israel’s operations contradict general principles of justice, which dictate that the law should apply equally to all. The same should hold true at the state level, meaning that Israel’s actions appear as nothing more than the unlawful use of force by the stronger party.

It is therefore clear that opponents of the Jewish state have gained yet another justification for their hatred toward it—and even a seemingly legitimate basis for actions against it in international forums such as the UN.

It is thus to be expected that the value-liberal left in Western countries will exploit this development to support Hamas terrorists in their fight in Gaza. At the same time, they will conveniently forget that the entire Gaza war began with Hamas’s terrorist attack and has only continued because the group has refused to disarm or release the hostages it took in October of last year.

* * *

When power shifted in Syria, Israel also occupied the demilitarized zone between it and Syria. Furthermore, it has advanced somewhat into the part of Syria inhabited by Druze communities.

The world was simultaneously surprised by the fact that, following these events, the Syrian Druze neither fled nor mounted resistance but instead declared their desire to become part of Israel. This indicates that this religious minority does not trust its future under the rule of Syria's new leaders.

This development is unlikely to sit well with Syria's new government. Should Israel fulfill the Druze community's wish, it could lay the groundwork for HTS to become a more fundamentalist organization—ultimately transforming into a rogue state similar to Iran or Afghanistan.

At this stage, however, it is virtually impossible to predict what will ultimately happen in Syria. Some have even suggested dividing the country into three parts, with HTS governing the central region, the Kurds holding power in the northeast, and either Israel or the Druze themselves controlling the southwestern corner.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Need for Asylum Among Syrians Disappeared with the Regime Change
On the Consequences of Russian Inability in Syria
Revolution in Syria: What Comes Next?

The Futile Civil War in Syria

The brutal dictator of Syria, Bashar Al-Assad, managed to retain his power during the 2011 uprising in Syria and the ensuing hot phase of the civil war. This was achieved primarily through military support from Russia and the passivity of Western nations.

However, the civil war has not ended, and recent reports suggest it has once again entered an active phase. During this phase, a coalition led by the jihadist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has succeeded in capturing half of the city of Aleppo. Additionally, the rebels have taken control of over 50 villages and towns, despite government forces being supported by Russian fighter jets.

The resumption of hostilities appears to be linked to Hezbollah, a Lebanese group supporting Assad, coming under attack by Israel. Furthermore, Iran, another key supporter of the dictator, has recently been humiliated, which has likely diminished its ability to assist Assad effectively. And the Russian army is stuck in Ukraine

Reading these reports, I found myself pondering which I would prefer to govern Syria: fundamentalist Muslims or a Russian-aligned dictator. And to conclude that both options are equally insane.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Hassan Nasrallah Has Been Killed, but Lebanon Is Unlikely to Become the Switzerland of the Middle East Again
History of Finland XII: Bloody civil war
Are we going to allow ISIS women to ride on their children?

Israel’s Strike on Iran: Ripple Effects for the Middle East, Russia, and Global Stability

Israel apparently destroyed virtually the entire Iranian air defense system in an attack about a month ago. At the same time, Iran's military capability proved to be a paper tiger, unable to compete in the same arena as technologically superior Western countries. This fact might have intriguing consequences.

The first of these relates to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has unsettled Tehran after the attack by releasing two video messages urging the Iranian people to rise up against the country’s Islamist regime. This raises the question of whether the regime’s time has come to an end.

This view is supported by the fact that the fall of the government would be an excellent outcome for almost all Iranians, and especially for women. However, the Islamists hold power and with it the means to continue terrorizing their citizens far into the future.

Thus, a revolution would require both unity and courage from Iranians, but it would not be impossible. The West could, of course, assist if necessary, but I fear that the memory of the failed 1980 Operation Eagle Claw strongly discourages interference in Iran’s affairs.

Therefore, I sadly suspect that Iran’s regime will not fall for a long time. And women will continue to long in vain for their human rights.

The second consequence of Israel's attack concerns Russia. Iran's air defense has been based on Russian systems, which proved ineffective against Western equipment. This might influence Putin’s policy toward the West or the war in Ukraine.

In other words, the attack will undoubtedly increase the caution of Putin's regime in relation to the West. This, in turn, reduces the risk that - as a result of Western arms systems being supplied to Ukraine - Russia would escalate by deploying weapons of mass destruction.

Unfortunately, this dynamic is unlikely to work in both directions. Despite recognizing the inadequacy of Russian weaponry, the West is unlikely to decide to end the war by providing Ukraine with the kind of military power that would neutralize Russian missile and air strikes. For this reason, the bloodshed in Ukraine will continue, at least until the new U.S. President Donald Trump begins advancing his promised peace deal.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
It Is Time for Vladimir Putin to Acknowledge the Facts and Do Dmitry Medvedev a Favor
Will Trump Push Ukraine Toward Peace by Breaking U.S. Promise?
A Muslim Woman's Lack of Solidarity with Iranian Women

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?

Will Finland have the first openly homosexual president?

In Finland, a new president will be elected in the beginning of next year. One of the main candidates is Pekka Haavisto (Greens), who, while serving as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, even broke Finnish laws to bring terrorists from the Al-Hol camps to Finland.

It remains to be seen whether this fact will affect his success in the election. And if it does, then in which direction.

Haavisto has a strong support base among the political left and the sexual minorities. Thanks to this, he gained over 37 percent of the support in the 2012 presidential elections, in which the outgoing president Sauli Niinistö was elected as the head of state of Finland.

In the upcoming elections, Haavisto is currently the frontrunner, but it remains to be seen whether the situation changes once the election campaigns pick up pace. If he gets elected, he would become Finland's first openly homosexual head of state. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Veronmaksajan lasku on 20 000 euroa per islamisti + muut kulut (In Finnish, but readable by e.g. Google translator: The taxpayer's bill is 20,000 euros per Islamist + additional expenses)
Haaviston lain vastaisesti vaihtama virkamies otti vastuun terrorismista - mutta se kuuluu silti Marinin kabinetille (In Finnish, but readable by e.g. Google translator: The official changed by Haavisto against the law took responsibility for terrorism - yet it still falls under Marin's cabinet)

Are we going to allow ISIS women to ride on their children? 

Hussein Al-Taee, an Islamic militant and a member of the Social Democratic Party of Finland

Next Sunday, Finland will hold parliamentary elections, and one of the candidates for the Social Democratic Party is Hussein Al-Taee. He has an immigration background and is known for his work in Nobel laureate Martti Ahtisaari's peace mediation company. 

However, it has been revealed that Al-Taee sympathizes with militant Islam and dictatorships, and has been suspected of having connections to the intelligence service of Iraq. He may also have had a task to interfere with Finnish policy and help members of Shia militia immigrate into Finland through the international asylum system. Additionally, Al-Taee has written antisemitic texts, but he apologized for his mistakes after they became public.

Despite these concerning revelations, Al-Taee was still accepted as a candidate for the Social Democratic Party in the elections. Furthermore, he published a video in Arabic where he suggests that immigrants are taken from their parents by force.

In other words, Al-Taee is spreading the same kind of disinformation in Finland that is used in Sweden to hinder the integration of immigrants from the Islamic world into their new home. Furthermore, he has made it clear that his positive views on militant Islam have not changed.

Therefore, as the people of Finland, we must question whether the Social Democrats should continue to support Mr. Al-Taee. They should admit that they made a mistake by nominating him as a candidate for Parliament and discourage voters from supporting him. If they do not take action before the elections, they should cancel his party membership immediately after the election, regardless of the outcome.

We must also consider whether allowing Al-Taee to remain a member of the Social Democratic Party obstructs Finnish immigration policy and endangers the country's security. If so, the party leaders and the entire organization may be unworthy of the trust of the Finnish people.

The original blog post in Finnish:
SDP:n on erotettava Hussein Al-Taee

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Ayatollahs in Iran demonstrated their ridiculousness
Sweden already in trouble - Finland following
Riots in Sweden: what next?