Why It’s Crucial for Germans to Vote Wisely

Japan has been one of the countries that shut down its nuclear power plants. The reason for this was the Fukushima plant accident that occurred in 2011.

However, the Japanese relatively quickly came to their senses and restarted their first nuclear power plant already in 2011. Now, 14 nuclear power plants have been restarted in the country.

In Europe, Germany has shut down its nuclear power plants—the last ones in 2023—as it transitioned to using Russian fossil energy. As a result of the war in Ukraine, however, Europe’s economic powerhouse has found itself in a difficult position, as its natural gas purchases are financing Putin's war campaign.

Therefore, it is time for Germany to follow Japan’s example and restart its own nuclear power plants. By doing so, it could join the international group of countries that are genuinely trying to help Ukraine emerge victorious from Russian aggression.

In this matter, the decision-making power lies with German voters, who have the ability to shape the outcome. It is therefore to be hoped that they will recognize the importance of voting wisely. Failing to do so could make all of Germany a laughingstock.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Germany Then and Now Resemble Each Other
The Fall of Germany’s Government Could Open the EU’s Path to a Better Future
Elections in Georgia and Japan: The Future of Democracy on Different Paths

Western Countries Must Stay United Against the Russian Threat

According to Finland's former ambassador to Washington, Mikko Hautala, Russia poses both an acute and a long-term threat to Finland. He also does not believe in a democratic future for Russia.

Instead, Putinism will continue in Russia even after the current leader, Vladimir Putin, leaves his position, which will likely happen within the next ten years. As a result, Finland’s eastern border will remain closed for years—if not decades—according to the ambassador.

For this reason, Finland should be prepared for a full-scale and prolonged war. At the same time, to deter Russia’s potential aggression, Finland must strengthen its military deterrence and create sufficient force to stop a possible Russian attack.

This would mean enhancing the current—already strong—army’s responsiveness and combat capability. For example, by creating a "semi-professional" reserve of approximately 50,000 soldiers who train annually and are well-armed, expanding the military fortifications along the eastern border, and significantly increasing defense spending. Additionally, Finland’s economy must remain stable, and the country's domestic defense industry should be developed into as significant an exporter as possible to ensure it can produce sufficient arms for the military in a crisis.

Ambassador Hautala also estimates that Russia’s military industry and economy will be able to continue producing enough military material to compensate for the losses in Ukraine. Nor does he believe that the Russian people will rise against the war, despite the heavy casualties.

This also applies to those who do not necessarily support the war, as even they do not accept defeat or the reparations for the war’s destruction. According to Hautala, "for the majority of Russians, taking responsibility for the war is almost impossible... In reality, public opinion supports the war of aggression."

The ambassador also reminds us that completely defeating a nuclear power is not possible. On the other hand, using nuclear weapons in Ukraine would be highly risky, even if Zelensky's army—with Western support—were to gain the upper hand in the war against Russia.

The views expressed above are serious and should be considered by decision-makers in Finland and other countries. Especially, it should be clear in all situations that neither Vladimir Putin nor the Russians, in general, should be given the impression that Russia could win a war against the Western world. Therefore, Western countries must remain united against the threat it poses—especially now, in Ukraine.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Bad News for Vladimir Putin and His Imperialistic Dreams
General Pekka Toveri, the Chair of the European Parliament's Delegation for Ukraine
Finland Must Avoid Ukraine’s Fate

The Rise, Fall, and Future of the European Green Parties

During the 1980s, European media headlines were dominated not only by the fear of nuclear war but also by the nuclear power plant accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, biodiversity loss, and pollution, which was blamed for causing widespread forest dieback in Poland, Germany, and Finland. In other words, the atmosphere of doomsday was similar to what we experience today with the fear of global warming.

Especially young people were anxious – just as they are today – which provided an opportunity for a new kind of political movement. This gave rise to the political emergence of green movements in Germany, Finland and various other countries, leading to significant support in many nations, where environmental advocates even entered national governments.

However, over time, the consequences of nuclear accidents were found to be far less severe than feared four decades ago, and forests continued to grow. At the same time, European industries reduced their emissions to a fraction of what they had been, and agriculture and forestry became more environmentally friendly.

As a result, the driving force behind the popularity of green movements began to fade, leading them to seek new agendas. These were primarily found in value-liberal thinking, whose conclusions were incorporated into green party programs across Europe. This appeared to make the movements a permanent part of the European political power structure.

Eventually, the year 2015 arrived, along with the large migration wave from developing countries. Green movements supported this, which led to a collapse in less than a decade, as the newcomers proved poorly adaptable to European societies.

Thus, the previously extremely powerful German Green Party practically collapsed this fall in the state elections in eastern Germany. Its support in Thuringia was only 1.1% of the votes. In Saxony, the party's share was even smaller, at 1.0%, and in Brandenburg, it was a dismal 0.8%.

In Finland, the Green Party, which at its peak attracted about one-sixth of Finns, fell out of government after the poorly performing 2023 parliamentary elections, and its support has not recovered from rock-bottom levels. It is reasonable to assume that its support would be even lower without the prominent media coverage of the supposed consequences of climate change.

It remains to be seen whether Europe's green movements will have a return to prominence in the future. In my view, this is not possible without a significant reform, in which the parties would abandon at least the most irrational of their value-liberal theses, such as boundless empathy for poorly integrating immigrants or their support for eco-fascist organizations like Extinction Rebellion.

In this regard, I noted as a positive development that at least one Finnish Green politician has condemned the recent attack by the aforementioned eco-fascist organization against Finnish democracy. However, this doesn't allow them to stand out, as also all other Finnish political movements – even the far left – acted similarly. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Green Movement of Finland is Lost
The Role of Ukraine Aid in the Elections of Thuringia and Saxony, Germany
Competence of the political left