Finland’s Response to Unauthorized Aircraft Entering Its Airspace

On Monday evening, the airports of the capitals of Norway and Denmark – Oslo and Kopenhagen, respectively – were temporarily closed due to drones being flown nearby. It is clear that the drones were not flown by accident, but deliberately. Therefore, it was not hobbyists, but some actor or actors who wanted to cause disturbances.

Personally, I suspect it was the same party that shortly before had flown its fighter jets into Estonian airspace and its drones into Polish airspace. That is why this incident must be taken very seriously.

* * *

Norway also announced today that Russia has violated its airspace three times during the spring and summer. Two of the aircraft that entered the airspace without authorization were fighter jets, while the third was a small transport or passenger plane, mainly operated by Aeroflot.

According to Norway’s foreign minister, “if Russia deliberately challenges the airspace of multiple countries, this is extremely serious.” This is a view worth sharing, but at the same time it should be noted that even the most temperate cat may scratch if provoked enough – and it would be highly irresponsible if the aforementioned party were to cross NATO countries’ threshold of irritation.  

* * *

Today, information was published in Finland about how the country has prepared for the appearance of unauthorized aircraft crossing the border. Such an event cannot go unnoticed, as Finnish airspace is monitored by radar around the clock, and practically all incoming flying objects near Finland’s borders are detected well in advance.

If there is a risk that a device approaching the border might enter Finnish airspace without permission, Finnish fighter jets are dispatched. As the violations of Estonian airspace have shown, this does not take long. For example, Finnish jets arrived faster than the Italian ones, which took off from Estonia itself.

If Finnish airspace is actually violated, radio contact is first attempted with the intruding aircraft, if possible. If that fails, a fighter jet flies alongside the foreign aircraft to get the pilot’s attention, for example by rocking its wings. In addition, the intruder can be warned by firing flares, which demonstrates readiness to use weapons and makes clear that the fighter is armed.

In peacetime, a manned aircraft is only fired upon if authorization is given by the national leadership. However, this does not need to be awaited if a Finnish fighter itself comes under fire, or if the intruding aircraft uses its weapons against another Finnish target. In such cases, the pilot has the right to destroy the aircraft that has crossed the border at their own discretion.

Unmanned aerial vehicles, however, are always shot down immediately if they cross into Finnish airspace. Therefore, long drone flights from across the border, such as those seen in Poland, are not possible in Finland.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Russia’s Aging MiG Fleet vs. Finland’s Modern Air Power
Responding to Russia’s Challenges Is Essential
Did a Finnish Fighter Jet Rush to Intercept a Russian Sukhoi Yesterday?

Be Ready: Russia May Launch Another "Special Operation"

The Finnish news outlet MTV3 relayed a story from The Wall Street Journal, according to which Russia plans to move tens of thousands of troops closer to the Finnish border. This is all part of a broader reorganization of Russian forces, focusing on the directions of Moscow and St. Petersburg.

Russia is also building a new railway near the borders of Finland, Norway, and Estonia, while simultaneously expanding existing routes. Naturally, this development is being closely watched in Finland.

A Finnish major interviewed in the article noted that "there are about a dozen places along the Finland–Russia border where mechanized forces can cross... If Russia is building new railways or upgrading old ones, it is important to pay attention to these developments."

Major General Sami Nurmi, for his part, pointed out that for the Russian military, size always matters. It is therefore no surprise that the plans are large-scale, as Putin’s dictatorship anticipates some form of conflict with NATO. 

This was confirmed by Russia’s Defense Minister Andrei Belusov, who stated that Russia must be ready for conflict with NATO. However, it remained unclear who might initiate such a conflict, as President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly insisted that Russia has no plans to attack NATO countries - but that may well be a bluff.

On the other hand, Ukrainians and many Westerners — myself included — fear that Russia may test NATO’s capabilities if its invasion of Ukraine concludes — even by their own interpretation — with some form of victory. This is a concern also voiced by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi.

If the situation escalates, it must first be noted that Russian soldiers who have gained combat experience in Ukraine will form the new backbone of Russia’s army, which is a major advantage compared to the forces of Finland, Estonia, or the Baltic countries, who largely lack real combat experience.

Russian forces are also equipped with material that has been tested under real battlefield conditions, and it appears that their supplies are not running out, despite earlier assumptions. In fact, Russia was producing only about forty T-90M main battle tanks per year four years ago — today they are producing around 300 annually.

According to Finnish assessments, very few of these tanks are actually being sent to Ukraine. Even if they were, the current production lines would quickly replenish them, whereas European defense industries would first need to be rapidly scaled up before reaching comparable output levels.

* * *

Based on all this, it is clear that, first of all, European countries must come to an agreement on strengthening their defense capabilities. Not only that, but they must also prepare ready and functional plans for scaling up to mass production of military equipment if needed.

Secondly, EU countries and NATO should issue clear warnings to Russia against attacking their neighbors and commit to collective defense. This should be done both through NATO, emphasizing the significance of Article 5, and through bilateral agreements.

Finally, I would note that the Baltic countries are at the greatest risk, given their relatively weak military capabilities. In contrast, the armed forces of Finland and Poland are strong and serve as an effective deterrent against potential "special operations" across their borders.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Will Russia Test NATO's Article Five?
Duck emphasizing the urgency of the new border law
Putin's Threat Bolsters European Border States' Defense Against Russia

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

Finland's COVID-19 policy saved approximately 2,600 people from death

The coronavirus pandemic is far behind us, and the SARS-CoV-2 virus that caused it has become just a part of everyday life. Therefore, it is a good time to look back a bit and examine the statistics related to the pandemic.

Among these, death cases are naturally the most reliable, so I will focus on that in this review. On a global level, the pandemic has been reported to have caused slightly over seven million premature deaths.

Is this then a lot or a little? This can be determined by comparing the number of deaths to previous pandemics.

The Spanish flu, caused by the influenza virus, is estimated to have killed 17-100 million people worldwide just over a hundred years ago. This is already a significantly higher number – and considering the increase in the world's population over the past hundred years – it is an astonishingly worse pandemic.

An even harsher ordeal was the bacterial disease known as the Black Death that raged during the Middle Ages. According to Wikipedia, it is "estimated to have killed 30-60 percent of Europe's population, i.e., 25-50 million people, and an equal number in the Middle East and North Africa."

The essential difference between COVID-19 and the aforementioned diseases lies in the advancement of medicine, which enabled the identification of people infected with the coronavirus – and their isolation from spreading it to others – as well as the development of vaccines and treatments that effectively reduced mortality. Therefore, it is clear that if the virus had spread to people a hundred years ago, the impact would have been significantly more devastating than what we have experienced now.

* * *

One interesting topic of discussion has been the difference between Finland's strict and Sweden's more lenient COVID-19 policies. This can be examined by comparing the number of deaths caused by the virus in both countries.

Statistics show that a total of 27,407 people have died from the virus in Sweden. In Finland, the corresponding number is 11,958. The relationship between these numbers can be compared to the population ratios of the two countries. It is seen that about 2.1 per mille of the population died in Finland, and 2.6 per mille in Sweden.

Thus, it can be said that Finland's stricter COVID-19 policy, compared to Sweden, saved approximately 0.5 per mille – or roughly 2,600 lives – from death caused by the coronavirus. Therefore, the difference is not very large, and I do not take a position here on whether it is sufficient to compensate for the negative effects of the policy implemented.

Instead, I state that humanity should continue to prepare for the emergence of zoonotic diseases. Their occurrence cannot be predicted precisely, but it is certain that a new pandemic will occur sooner or later. And therefore, perhaps the most important lesson from the COVID-19 pandemic is that with good prior planning and preparedness, Finns can be spared the confusion witnessed during the coronavirus pandemic.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is the world´s best skier in classical technique, Iivo Niskanen, going to recover from COVID-19
Share of EU recovery funds will turn attitudes more negative
World oceans are filled with previously unknown viruses