Warnings from Jussi Halla-aho and Igor Girkin About Europe's Near Future

The Speaker of the Finnish Parliament, Jussi Halla-aho, stated at the Conference of EU Parliament Speakers in Budapest that Europe's biggest and most urgent challenge is to learn from the mistakes made after the Cold War, as Russia poses an immediate threat to European security.

He noted that it is not enough for us to rebuild our own defense and help the Ukrainians—nor is it even enough that Russia’s neighboring countries do their part. Instead, the major EU countries must do more.

At the same time, he reminded that those countries which benefited from European solidarity during the financial crisis, the migration crisis, and the COVID crisis must now show similar solidarity towards the EU's and NATO’s eastern border states. Only in this way can Europe survive future crises.

Speaker Halla-aho also recalled the serious mistakes made over recent decades, stating that "many European countries built their economies on cheap Russian gas and oil, ignoring the risks and warnings. Most European countries dismantled their defense capabilities, believing that traditional military threats were a thing of the past and that the United States would endlessly pay for our security. Moreover, the whole of Europe is dependent on China—from raw materials to industrial production."

Much needs to be corrected now, just as Russia and Ukraine are—perhaps—expected to sit at the negotiating table in Turkey to make peace. More precisely, a peace that would allow the Russians to prepare for their next imperialist strike against Europe—very much in line with the precedent set by the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.

* * *

Of course, peace in Ukraine is not yet certain, but that does not change the fact that European leaders would do well to listen carefully to Jussi Halla-aho, who has time and again been right in his assessments. This also applies to immigration from developing countries into the EU.

That is why he reminded politicians and the press—also in Budapest—that "instead of panicking over President Donald Trump or similar movements in Europe, we should understand that more and more ordinary citizens are voting for them for a reason. People have genuine and legitimate concerns about the changes happening around them. Mass immigration from third countries is probably the most significant of these concerns."

He also reminded that well-off people—such as politicians—are more or less shielded from the negative effects of immigration, such as violent crime and the segregation of schools and residential areas. Less affluent people, on the other hand, experience these effects, according to Halla-aho, "in their everyday lives."

As a result, societies in EU countries are becoming polarized and fragmented, so "we must ensure that citizens feel their voices are heard and that their hopes, fears, and concerns are taken seriously."

It remains to be seen how carefully and seriously the speakers of EU member states listened to Halla-aho’s remarks—and whether they will pass on what they heard to their national governments for action. They certainly should, because—as I said at the beginning—Halla-aho’s views have repeatedly proven correct, and I do not doubt that the same will be true for the points made above.

* * *

Finally, I want to inform you, dear readers, that Russian FSB Colonel Igor Girkin has predicted that Ukraine will gain the upper hand in the war this summer. According to him, "the Ukrainian Armed Forces have gathered reserves, while the Russian Armed Forces have exhausted their capabilities... The next Ukrainian assault could begin at any moment."

Girkin also does not rule out the possibility that the upcoming Ukrainian offensive could result in major territorial losses for Russia. That is yet another reason why major EU countries must now take Ukraine’s military assistance seriously—so that Girkin’s prediction may come true, and Europe's security situation could improve, at least for a time.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Diplomacy Without Rituals: What Awaits as Finland’s Speaker Halla-aho Visits China?
Are We on the Brink of World War III?
A Finnish MP Resigned After Straining Finland-Russia Relations

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * 

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

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

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

* * *

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

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

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

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

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

Can climate models predict the distribution of warming?

According to climate models, greenhouse gases warm the Arctic region faster than the rest of the world, although there is some discrepancy between their predictions and actual measurements. Therefore, it has been more than interesting to follow the development of the northern sea ice over the years.

The National Snow & Ice Data Center (NSIDC) publishes two statistics on its development: the extent of the ice and its area. Of these, daily data is available for the extent, but only monthly averages for the area.

Now that India has suffered from an unprecedented heatwave and southern Europe has also been reported as one of the areas experiencing the most exceptional temperatures, it has been interesting to note that the latest data on the extent of the northern ice shows it is the 37th largest, or 10th smallest, for this time of year in the measurement history starting from 1979.

The monthly area statistic of the northern polar ice surprises even more, as in May, the ice area was the 23rd largest, or 24th smallest, in the statistics, thus roughly at the median value of the statistics. Therefore, the area of Arctic sea ice does not support the idea that the climate is warming fastest in the Arctic region. And even the estimate based on ice extent supports that only weakly.

All this raises questions about the ability of climate models to predict the distribution of warming caused by greenhouse gases across different parts of the globe. Or alternatively, about the reliability of climate statistics: in this regard, the measurements of the Arctic ice cover, carried out with easily interpretable methods, are surely among the most reliable, even though the two different measurement methods of the NSIDC produce surprisingly divergent views of the size of the northern polar ice cover.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The area of Arctic sea ice was exceptionally large in January
Does Arctic sea ice melt as atmospheric greenhouse gases increase?
The increase in carbon dioxide concentration warms more than anticipated

The increase in carbon dioxide concentration warms more than anticipated

I have previously followed with great interest the progress of climate change. In doing so, I have personally observed how ground-level measurement data has been retrospectively altered in such a way that there may not be reality-based justifications, such as changes in the location of thermometer or adjustments for temperature changes due to urbanization.

Therefore, my interest has shifted mainly to monitoring the surface area of the Arctic sea ice because I find its distortion quite challenging or downright impossible. To my satisfaction, I have also noted that there have been no significant changes to these statistics.

Today I read a recent study that measured the impact of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration on the lower atmosphere's temperature. Increasing it (CO₂) has so far been thought to have a direct effect on the global average surface air temperature.

However, this is not the case, as Haozhe He et al. found that doubling the atmospheric CO₂ concentration increases the impact of CO₂-induced growth by about a quarter. In other words, the more anthropogenic CO₂ emissions accumulate in the atmosphere, the more serious the consequences.

In essence, He et al. presented a prediction - or hypothesis - that the lower atmosphere's temperature should rise more rapidly as the climate warms. Therefore, I plan to monitor how this is reflected in the fluctuations of the Arctic sea ice area - above all, whether it begins to melt again after statistically remaining the same size for over a decade despite the increase in CO₂ concentration.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The record-breaking warming of the oceans is not visible in the Arctic
Record low temperature in northern Finland
Arctic sea ice contradicts with the climatic model predictions, but is that changing now?

The record-breaking warming of the oceans is not visible in the Arctic

The most important newspaper of Finland, Helsingin Sanomat, took a stance in its editorial on Minister Kaj Mykkänen's (National Coalition Party) comment, according to which the key climate action in Finland is to plug factory chimneys. A couple of days ago, I also commented on this matter in Finnish, pointing out that human progress is based on science and technology – and reminding that insect infestations threaten forest carbon sinks in a warming climate.

Climate change has also been commented on by Petteri Taalas, Secretory General of the World Meteorological Organization, who says that the problems predicted by climate researchers in the Greek archipelago back in the 1980s are now becoming a reality. This led me to once again look at the development of northern sea ice extent. One might imagine it melting rapidly right now, given that the surface water of the North Atlantic is warmer than ever in recorded history.

My surprise was significant when I observed that the extent of northern sea ice on July 24th, relative to this time of year, was the tenth smallest in the statistics. The years 2007, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2017, 2019, 2020, and 2021 were surpassed.

However, it is true that the last time I wrote about the subject in English, sea ice was 12th smallest, so its relative extent compared to recent years has decreased. On the other hand, compared to the record year 2012, the extent of northern sea ice is over five percent larger – when I wrote about it in Finnish, the difference was just under five percent – so in that respect, it has expanded rather than contracted. This could, of course, be due to the exceptional anomaly of the year 2012.

So, we'll see if the warm water from the North Atlantic finally flows to the Arctic region and begins to melt the northern sea ice. And thus, would bring closer the day – which climate researchers say is inevitably ahead – when the Arctic ice completely disappears.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
HS katkeroituneen naisen työkaluna

Helsingin sanomat jatkoi valheellista uutisointiaan
Nostaako El Niño maapallon keskilämpötilan uuteen ennätykseen?

A Finnish military professor predicted the possibilities of Ukraine's counterattack

The ongoing counterattack by Ukrainian forces is captivating to observe, especially when a military professor from the National Defence University of Finland provided insight into its potential outcomes.

According to the professor, if Ukraine manages to disrupt Russia's logistics along the shores of the Sea of Azov, it could mark a significant turning point for the future of the war. However, before achieving this, Ukraine must break through Russia's initial defensive line and obstruct their supply routes.

The coastal road of the Sea of Azov holds immense importance as a crucial supply route for Russia. If Ukraine can successfully push Russian forces out of their defensive positions, secure the area, and advance towards Tokmak, Melitopol, and Mariupol, they will create a strategic region that puts pressure on Russia's logistics and supply.

Once the initial defense lines are breached, it is expected that the Ukrainians will reinforce with a significantly stronger force. If the plan succeeds, it can have far-reaching effects and present entirely new possibilities for the future progression of the war. This success would enable Ukraine to prepare for addressing the western front and the situation in Crimea.

The professor has previously predicted that the gradual breach of defense lines, coupled with the ensuing battle and advancement, will likely lead to substantial casualties and equipment losses for both sides. The battle will be intense and highly destructive. Nonetheless, Ukraine has made its decision and is prepared for the challenges ahead.

Inspired by the professor's comments, I have decided to closely monitor the developments between the current front and Mariupol. I extend my heartfelt wishes for success to the courageous Ukrainian soldiers in their endeavors to reclaim their land and push the enemy forces out.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto aligned Indonesia on the wrong side of world history
Does the attack by Russian rebels pose a problem for Ukraine?
Will China ally with Russia against Ukraine?

G-index challenges the theory of the global climatic change

There are many kinds of estimates describing the development of the global temperature. You may follow statistics based on adjusted temperature measurements from worldwide network of stations, satellite data or - my favorite thus far - melting of arctic sea ice. 

Here I will introduce you - my respected reader - to a G-index developed by a Finnish teacher Simo Ruoho. I know, it sounds ridiculous to compare a school teacher´s achievement to those of huge scientific organisations like NASA - and that is what I thought myself, when I heard about him for the first time some half a year ago.

Now, after following his G-index thereafter, I have become highly interested due to its accuracy. During this time its prediction of the becoming global temperature has failed only once. And no, the prediction has not been changed afterwards. 

In addition, the G-index of Mr. Ruoho has also predicted amazingly well the annual mean temperature of Finland. That is, more accurately than the prediction of the governmental Finnish Meteorologial Institute. 

These evidence are impressive enough for me to share this information in this blog. However, only the accuracy of the future predictions will show, whether he has only had good luck with his index - or whether he has made a major finding on the mechanisms of the global climatic development. 

If the latter, the global atmospheric development does not follow from the carbon dioxide and other emissions due to human actions, but is driven by the exchange of energy between the oceans and atmosphere. In other words, if G-index-based predictions will hold also in the future, the current climate theory developed to explain the warming of the global climate will become falsified. That is, shown to be wrong.

As the global climatic change has a major effect on politics in the EU and elsewhere, that would probably be the greatest scoop ever. But also a sad example of scientists losing their objectivity after the big money became available for the climatic research. 

Therefore - as a professional scientist - I am not sure, should I cross my fingers for the success or failure of Simo Ruoho´s G-index. The fact, however, is that the position of my fingers does not affect the outcome. And therefore the only thing I can do now, is to continue my follow-up of his predictions and their accuracy.  

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Measurements of arctic temperatures and sea ice area agree with each other
Arctic ice sheet does not support greenhouse gases as the cause of accelerating global warming
A scoop to be kept out of daylight