Ukraine’s Situation Mirrors Finland in 1944

According to Pasi Paroinen, an analyst from the Finnish Black Bird Group, Ukraine's attack on Kursk has resulted in Russian forces advancing approximately ten kilometers in the Donetsk region. Therefore, Ukrainians should consider repositioning their troops from the Russian side to the Donetsk area.

This reminded me of Finland’s situation in 1944. At that time, the Finnish Army controlled vast areas north of Lake Ladoga in Russian East Karelia, and there was reluctance to relinquish these territories, as they were thought to have potential as bargaining chips in peace negotiations to end World War II.

As a result, Finland's military strength on the front south of Lake Ladoga—in the Karelian Isthmus—was left insufficient. This became evident when the Soviet Union launched a massive offensive from the direction of Leningrad (St. Petersburg) on June 9.

Consequently, Finland’s defensive lines quickly collapsed, and the Russians advanced about a hundred kilometers within ten days. Simultaneously, the Finns hastily shifted their forces from East Karelia to the area between Lake Ladoga and the Baltic sea.

With this repositioning—and support from the German air force—the Finns ultimately managed to halt the Soviet strategic offensive in the battles of Tali-Ihantala, Äyräpää-Vuosalmi, and the Bay of Viipuri. They even stopped the Red Army’s attack north of Lake Ladoga in the Battle of Ilomantsi, where the Soviets were eventually forced to retreat in panic.

As a result of these battles, Finland retained its independence and a Western societal structure after World War II, unlike other Soviet border states. By the 1970s, Finland had developed into a so-called welfare state, following the model of its western neighbor, Sweden.

So, it remains to be seen how the war in Ukraine will unfold. Hopefully, history will not repeat itself in such a way that the Russians advance in Donetsk as they did on the Karelian Isthmus in 1944. However, if history does repeat itself, Ukrainians must do as the Finns did in 1944: reposition their forces into new positions and decisively defeat the Russians.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Ukraine Plans to Recruit 160,000 Soldiers, but Will It Turn the Tide of the War?
Estonia is Arming its Military, but Does the Nation Have the Will to Defend Itself?
Turning Points in the War in Ukraine and the West's Responsibility

The first casualty of war is the truth - but whose truth?

The High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, has called on Israel to immediately cease strikes in the Rafah area. The reason is that they have hit a tent camp in the southern part of Gaza, killing dozens of people according to local (Palestinian?) authorities.

At first glance, the demand seems justified. But after Israel announced that it had carried out strikes on a target used by the terrorist organization Hamas in the area, and its armed forces stated that they were based on precise intelligence knowledge and used precision weapons, Borrell's demand requires further consideration.

If Israel's and its armed forces' claim holds true, the situation changes completely. In this case, the Palestinian fighters would have - once again - used civilians as human shields to succeed in their war. And if this is the case, we must ask what their responsibility is for the civilian casualties caused by the Israeli attack.

And consider what it would mean if we accepted such warfare, where one side is allowed to break all the rules of war, but we condemn the other, which is thus forced to act in a way that results in civilian casualties. Or giving an advantage to the one who wages war without caring about even its own civilian casualties.

Therefore, I believe that Borrell should have kept his mouth shut thus far. Or alternatively, he should have also called on Hamas to stop fighting from behind civilians and demanded the international court to condemn its actions.

In reality, no outsider knows what the truth is in this case. Nevertheless, we can certainly consider which side's information has proven to be more often correct. And which one has has been feeding lies.

However, in this matter too, the old saying applies, that the first casualty of war is the truth. Perhaps also in this case. But whose truth?

PS 21.39 Finnish time: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has admitted that the attack mentioned in my writing was a 'tragic mistake'. Thus, it seems that this time the truth did not get trampled by the war after all.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Norway and Ireland are awarding the terrorists a prize
Putin's understanding and the battle between the gods
During the Eurovision song spectacle, the incompetence of EU officials was revealed

The procrastination of Western countries is paid for with the blood of soldiers

Russia has recently achieved success in the ammunition-starved Ukraine. News reports indicating the increasing success of Putin's army day by day suggest that even the rapid collapse of Ukrainian defense is possible.

Three factors have enabled this development. One is the procrastination of the Trumpian House of Representatives in sending new aid packages. Second is the irresponsible defense policy of most EU countries in recent years, resulting in depleted weapon and ammunition stocks. And - as we know - it's hard to make something out of nothing. Additionally, behind it all is the Ukrainian government's inability to mobilize enough men to the front lines.

* * *

Apparently, French President Emmanuel Macron has understood that the situation in Ukraine is currently completely untenable, as he even raised the issue of sending Western troops to assist Zelensky's army. This would undoubtedly mean facing Western casualties and Russian counter-reactions in one way or another.

Western populations are by no means prepared for returning filled coffins. And their home fronts will not withstand large-scale losses. Therefore, Macron's proposal did not receive immediate support from Finland or other Western countries either.

The future commander of the Estonian Defense Forces, on the other hand, suggested granting Ukraine permission to use Western weapons also on Russian soil. This is because Estonians have learned from their history that "when Russia attacks, the war must be taken to its territory. Otherwise, we will lose it. This rule still applies."

Behind both proposals likely lies the idea of not only direct military impact but also of undermining the Russian home front. In other words, the clearer the war is visible to Russians, the more resistance is likely to arise against Putin's administration's war policies. And the more difficult position the country's dictator finds himself in domestically.

* * *

It's quite clear in this situation that Ukraine's army will collapse for sure unless it receives swift material aid from the West. Loss is also certain in the longer term if a vast number of capable Ukrainian men or women are not urgently called up and trained into Zelensky's army.

In this context, it's also worth noting that every recapture of a village surrendered to the aggressor seems to demand a massive human sacrifice in Ukraine, with fallen soldiers. Therefore, the Western countries' incapacity for effective aid to Ukraine will, in the best-case scenario, demand the lives of tens of thousands, or - if the situation persists - even hundreds of thousands of soldiers.

It's justified to say, therefore, that the delay of Western countries will be paid for with the blood of soldiers. First in Ukraine and - if Putin ultimately wins the war - later most likely also in the militarily weaker Russian border states. And eventually, possibly even in Finland.

The original thought in Finnish:
Länsimaiden viivyttely maksetaan sotilaiden verellä

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Polish Minister for Foreign Affairs reminded Russians about their nightmare
Desperate cry of Russians
Finnish general praised the Ukrainian air strike

Will China ally with Russia against Ukraine?

After the visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping in Russia, people around the world have been pondering what the consequences will be. One manifestation of this is when US President Joe Biden stated during his visit to Canada that China has not yet delivered weapons to Russia. 

It remains to be seen whether this will happen at a later stage. However, it is most likely that Xi's administration will not take such a risk. Instead, it seeks to benefit from Russia by exporting Chinese products there to replace Western counterparts and importing underpriced Russian raw materials to China as their export to Western countries has collapsed.

I base my view on the fact that China would not gain much advantage by supporting the soon-to-be ousted dictator Vladimir Putin and exacerbating its strained relations with the West over the Taiwan issue. On the contrary, such an action could prove to be very costly for China. Moreover, the current Chinese leadership is not accustomed to taking significant risks in any matter, as demonstrated by its excessive caution in lifting coronavirus restrictions.

However, this does not mean that China could not act differently from what I imagine, as the failed coronavirus policy has shown that Xi's administration has made mistakes before. Therefore, Western countries should be prepared also for that possibility.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
China is betting on scientific excellence
The main consequence of Putin´s attack to Ukraine
Could China take advantage on the weakness of Putin´s Russia?

Tradition of low professional ability among Russian security agency and dictators

According to the Washington Post, the Russian Federal Security Service misinformed Vladimir Putin prior to his decision to attack Ukraine. According to its poor evaluation, the war would be over in a very short time. 

To us in Finland, there was nothing new. It was the security service of Soviet Union that informed dictator Josif Stalin in 1939, that Russian army would be able to march to Helsinki - the capitol of Finland - in just few weeks. Based on that Stalin ordered his army to conquer Finland. As a result, they lost 126 875–167 976 soldiers as dead or missing as well as 188 671–207 538 as wounded or sick and 5 572 as captured. And as a result, the Russian attack in 1939 pushed Finland to join the German invasion to Russia in 1941.

So its seems that Russian security agencies have a tradition of exceptionally poor professional skills and their dictators poor understanding on the willingness of their neighboring nations to defend themselves. Surprisingly, dictator Putin had not even learned his lesson from 1939. I would call this utter stupidity.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
How can Vladimir Putin survive from his propaganda after the Russian loss in Ukraine?
Is President Putin on his way to repeat the destiny of Czar Nicholas II?
Military specialist: Russian plan in Ukraine was incredibly poor

Historical failure on an issue related to a Finnish beer

The former liberal (in the classic sense) politician and Doctor of Political Sciences Jukka Tarkka reminded us - the older generation - and educated younger ones about an interesting beer-related case between Finland and Soviet Union back in 1968. 

Then the ambassador of the super power - Andrei E. Kovalev - pointed out in his speech that the Karjala beer bottle label included a Carelian (a Finnish county, Karjala, partially located in the Soviet Union) coat of arms. It illustrates two hands against each other, one holding a sabre (eastern sword) and another one a direct (western) sword. The ambassador considered that as provocative and demanded its removal from the bottle.

That launched a nationwide interest to the Karjala beer, and it became for a long time the most popular beer in the country, although before ambassador´s intervention its popularity was quickly vanishing. 

Obviously Finnish people had not completely accepted the official policy considering Soviet Union as our best friend. And wanted to show it.

Interestingly, the same swords can also be found in the Finland´s coat of arms, but in considerably more provocative setting. There the lion of Finland is standing on the eastern sabre (symbolizing a defeated eastern enemy) and holds bravely the direct sword on its head. 

I have never heard Russians to complain about that. Not even when Finland was an autonomous part of Russia (1809-1917), although its coat of arms included the same symbolism as it has had since 16th century - this you can confirm by your own eyes by visiting the tomb of the king Gustaf Wasa of Sweden in the Uppsala Cathedral.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Finland will apply for a membership in NATO
It hurts Russians to learn about the truth
Obligatory military service gains support