Lessons for EU Citizens from the Ceuta Episode

The events in Ceuta have led Europeans to wake up. Or at least almost all of them, since 22 EU countries – Germany, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden – have signed a letter calling for effective protection of the external borders, action to prevent illegal entry, and support for Spain. Finland’s signatory was Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party).

It is regrettable, of course, that five countries have expressed their desire to see the continuation of the modern-day mass migration by refusing to sign the demand. They are Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and Portugal, whose motives are – at least to me – rather difficult to understand, because this is not about immigration in general but specifically about illegal immigration.

* * *

The Finnish Government evidently takes illegal immigration seriously, since Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party) immediately instructed her ministry’s officials to prepare the measures required for closing Finland’s EU internal borders. According to her, the purpose is to ensure that the “decisions required to close the internal borders can, on the basis of this preparatory work, be made very quickly if the need arises.”

In other words, neither Rantanen nor Finland is unilaterally closing the EU’s internal borders, but rather creating the capability to do so quickly if necessary. This is important because, in the absence of both the necessary legislation – and the political will – the Finnish Government was forced in 2015 to stand by helplessly as large numbers of illegal immigrants poured into our country from the western border.

As a result of the preparations now under way, the steps required to close our country’s EU borders will in future already be prepared in advance, meaning that shutting them can be accomplished with a single order from the Government. And as a result, the internal movement of illegal immigrants into our northern land will come to an end.

* * *

It remains to be seen whether Finland will ever need the legislation currently being prepared. In any case, the events in Ceuta turned out to be a brief episode, possibly caused by organized – perhaps even state-sponsored – crime.

This is because there is no way to get from Ceuta to mainland Europe without border checks. Thus, it was not a route that could have led to a repetition of the events of 2015. Consequently, the Moroccans who had rushed there soon returned to their home country.

In the end, the whole Ceuta episode concluded happily, just like a fairy tale. Instead of the modern-day mass migration taking another step forward, it reminded EU politicians that it is better to prepare in advance than to find themselves searching for illegal immigrants all over the Union.

That is why it is difficult to understand the stupidity demonstrated by the power-holders in Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and Portugal by refusing to sign the demand mentioned at the beginning. Perhaps, in their next parliamentary elections, the citizens of those countries will understand that they would be well advised to consider giving their votes to politicians more responsible than their current rulers!

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
From Burden to Benefit: Reforming Immigration in Finland
Sensible Immigration or Moral Posturing?
Why is Somalia unwilling to meet Finland’s conditions for continuing development cooperation?

The Left Wants to Grill a Swedish Minister Over His Son’s Past – What’s Really Behind It?

Swedish society is famously in disarray as a result of its immigration policies. Sweden has climbed to the top of the Western world in areas such as sexual crimes, shootings, and explosions. As a result, the Swedish police have warned their Finnish colleagues to prevent a similar development in Finland.

In this context, it was interesting to note the recent controversy in Sweden involving the Minister for Migration. It emerged that the minister's son has participated in activities of the far-right martial arts group "Active Club" and has also had connections with other far-right groups. Consequently, the political left in the country has demanded the minister’s resignation.

The minister himself has stated that he has no intention of resigning and that his son is no longer involved with far-right circles. However, the minister had previously emphasized the responsibility of parents for criminal and violent youth—something that appears to be unforgivable in the eyes of the political left, as it can easily be interpreted as criticism of the parents of violent immigrant youths.

As the Swedish parliament's summer session ends, the entire political left in Sweden is seeking to summon the minister for a hearing on the matter. This seems to be an attempt to gain public visibility and local support among the immigrant-origin population.

The latter motive would be logical, as although immigrants from developing countries have traditionally voted for left-wing parties, an increasing number of them have turned to support the party Nyans—that is, an Islamic party that now threatens the left’s dominant position among so-called "new Swedes".

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
EU Commission Should Take Migration and Related Crime Seriously 
Police to Finnish Graduates: Leave Fireworks, Blades, and Booze at Home
Why Integration Policy Must Confront Cultural Conflicts

The Finnish Stabber Has a Long Track Record of Violence

I wrote yesterday about the mass stabbing that took place in Tampere, in which a Finnish man injured four people. Over the course of today, more information about the case has come to light, prompting reflection on the fairness of the Finnish justice system.

The Finnish Broadcasting Company (Yle) has reported that the man arrested for the crime has previously been convicted of multiple violent offenses. He was charged with attempted manslaughter for an incident in June 2023, in which he stabbed a sleeping acquaintance in the stomach.

However, in January 2024, he was only convicted of aggravated assault, assault against another man, illegal threats, two cases of property damage, and obstruction of an official. According to the verdict, he was supposed to serve a total of two and a half years in prison.

Last month, the stabber also received another six-month prison sentence for assaulting a victim in the fall of 2021. In that case, he had repeatedly struck the victim in the head, strangled them, and beaten them in the upper body with a metal pipe. At the time, he was on probation. He was sentenced to only six months in prison, as his previous conviction for aggravated assault was considered a mitigating factor.

In addition, the man was sentenced to three years in prison for three robberies committed in 2020, when he was 18 years old.

In light of all this, we must ask how the justice system intends to respond to the man's actions from yesterday when the case eventually goes to court. Will he again be granted sentence reductions and be allowed to endanger others’ safety after serving only a short prison term?

Or will the court finally recognize that this is a person who, with near certainty, will sooner or later end up killing one of his victims, and who therefore must be kept behind closed doors for the rest of his life? And if it doesn’t, is it prepared to take responsibility for the death of an innocent person?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Multiple Stabbings Reported in Tampere, Finland
The Stabber Killed Three People in an Extremely Multicultural City
Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?

A New Beginning: Economic Independence in the Hands of Developing Nations

Finland’s Minister of Finance, Riikka Purra (Finns Party), has announced today that Finland will further reduce the funding allocated to development aid. This move is primarily driven by the weakness of Finland’s own economic situation.

The same may sooner or later be inevitable for several other European countries as well, if they aim to get their national debt under control. Therefore, it would be reasonable for developing countries that receive aid from EU nations to take responsibility for their own affairs.

This would mean prioritizing key issues, implementing determined economic policies, and above all, eradicating corruption. However, it remains to be seen whether they will succeed—or whether these countries will plunge into chaos as Western aid diminishes.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Trump’s Tariff Weapon Worked, but Will Finland’s Development Aid Strategy Succeed?
Finland Suspends Development Cooperation with Som
Responsible Development Aid and New Priorities: Finland's Development Cooperation Reforms

Finnish Artists Embarrassed Themselves Over the Eurovision Song Contest

Over the weekend, Finland selected a representative for the Eurovision Song Contest. However, I don’t know what kind of song she sings because I stopped following the competition a long time ago.

I decided to write about it today, though, because many well-known Finnish artists with leftist leanings—Eija Ahvo, Eero Ritala, Minna Haapkylä, and Sara Meller—are demanding that Finland’s national broadcaster boycott the contest if Israel participates. Israel’s representative is Yuval Raphael, who survived Hamas’s terrorist attack on the Nova music festival on October 7, 2023, by hiding in a bomb shelter under dead bodies. Despite this, she still has shrapnel in her head and leg from the attack.

To me, the demand made by these Finnish artists in this situation says everything about their morality. In short, it is murderous, criminal, cowardly, utterly rotten, and downright stupid. And for that, I feel deep secondhand embarrassment on their behalf.

However, everyone is responsible for their own words and actions. And it is not the fault of the rest of us Finns if someone wants to showcase their support for terrorism.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Eurovision Song Contest Funding Faces Pushback Due to Woke Ideology
During the Eurovision song spectacle, the incompetence of EU officials was revealed
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!

The Responsibility for Their People's Future Now Lies with Palestinian Leaders

Fresh reports indicate that Israel and Hamas have agreed on a draft deal for a Gaza ceasefire and the release of hostages. The proposed agreement would be implemented in three stages, starting with the gradual release of 33 hostages over six weeks. Among them are five female Israeli soldiers, each of whom would be exchanged for 50 Palestinian prisoners.

In return, Israel would release hundreds of Palestinian women and children in detention, along with 30 security prisoners serving life sentences. During this period, Israeli forces would withdraw from population centers over 42 days, allowing Palestinians to begin returning to their homes in northern Gaza. Additionally, humanitarian aid to the region would increase significantly.

The term "ceasefire" refers to the temporary suspension of war or other armed conflict. It does not, therefore, signify peace, nor does it imply the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

Achieving peace would require mutual trust. However, at this moment, such trust appears to be lacking among both Jewish and Palestinian communities.

The key lies with the latter; the Arabs of the Holy Land must abstain from terrorism and warfare against Israel. This means no rockets launched from Gaza or the West Bank into Israel, and ideally no deranged terrorists attacking Jewish targets.

At the same time, it is crucial for Israel to act decisively, particularly in the West Bank, to prevent the construction of new settlements and to avoid other aggressive actions against Palestinians. Furthermore, the current and future governments of Israel must work in ways that foster Palestinian trust in their own future.

If these efforts succeed, it might be possible for Israel’s Jewish population to accept the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, as envisioned in 1993. However, if these efforts fail, the conflict will revert to square one, likely leading to renewed hostilities in the Holy Land sooner or later.

Personally, I believe that in this particular situation, the responsibility for the future of the Palestinian people lies primarily with their leaders. If they are capable and grounded in realism, the future of the Palestinian people can be excellent. However, if they repeat the inability of their predecessors to acknowledge facts and act accordingly, the ordeal of the people they lead will continue far into the future.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Two out of three Palestinians support October 7 attack
Palestinian responsibility
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!

Who Is Responsible: The Donor or the Recipient of Aid?

Sweden has decided to terminate its support for the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). Their aid to Gaza will henceforth be channeled through the country’s development cooperation agency, Sida. Additionally, support will be provided via the UN World Food Programme (WFP), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the United Nations Children's Fund (Unicef), and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

This decision is likely a consequence of the fact that UNRWA’s operations have proven to support terrorism and are riddled with corruption. Therefore, the entire organization should be dismantled, or at the very least, all Western countries should follow Sweden’s example and cease financial support.

Finland, however, has resumed its support for UNRWA after a brief hiatus. According to the responsible minister, Ville Tavio (Finns Party), ten percent of the granted aid must be allocated to combating misuse of funds.

Everyone should ask themselves whether this is a sustainable use of emergency aid funded by taxpayers. Or would it be better to halt all payments and redirect the funds to organizations that understand on their own that grants are not intended for corruption?

As for my stance, I declare that there is no reason to assist Palestinians through UNRWA or by any other means until it is guaranteed that the aid reaches its intended purpose. And the responsibility for demonstrating this does not lie with the donor but with the recipient. 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Two out of three Palestinians support October 7 attack
United Nations, corruption and terrorism
Change of immigration policy and development cooperation

Criminal Attack Against Finnish Democracy

This morning, the Finnish Extinction Rebellion, in collaboration with the Swedish group Återställ Våtmarker, defaced the Finnish Parliament House to gain visibility for their political views. That is why I won’t discuss their goals in this writing but will briefly present my own opinion on their actions.

Defacing the Parliament House was a direct attack on Finnish democracy, which is based on decisions made by representatives elected by the people. In making these decisions, all political perspectives are represented according to the weight they hold among the Finnish population.

However, this is not acceptable to the Extinction Rebellion activists and the Swedes involved in the defacement, as they demand for themselves a dictatorial right to decide on the nation’s common affairs. In other words, through their actions, they appear to be criminal usurpers of power who should receive the maximum legal punishment for their deeds and be held financially responsible for the costs - estimated to exceed 10 000 euros - incurred.

In this context, the Kone Foundation, established by the Finnish elevator manufacturer Kone Corporation, finds itself in a peculiar situation. It has publicly funded the activities of Extinction Rebellion, which, at least in the public's mind, makes it partially responsible for what happened. And it doesn't help that you say the funding you approved hasn't been earmarked for defacing the Parliament House.

In this situation, I expect the foundation to take responsibility. That is, to publicly announce the immediate cessation of its funding for the Finnish Extinction Rebellion, to refuse any involvement in paying for the damages caused by the activists, and to unequivocally condemn their actions.

Although the Kone Corporation is not directly responsible for the actions of its foundation, it would be good if the company also condemned the incident and, in one way or another, reprimanded its foundation for its reckless use of funds. This, of course, only if the company supports representative democracy and does not feel sympathy toward criminals—and even then, only if they care about their international reputation.

Finally, I do not believe that the action taken today will increase the acceptability of the activists' goals among ordinary people. On the contrary, it will probably - and hopefully - turn against them.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Relationship Between the Professor and Teemu Selänne
Challenges of democracy: Reflections on political violence and rhetoric in Finnish politics
Is the Finnish left-wing radicalizing?

The Environmental Crime Had Many Cooks, But Who Will Pay?

A couple of weeks ago, an environmental crime took place in Finland that has garnered massive attention in Finnish media. It involved the destruction of a river inhabited by the protected freshwater pearl mussel, caused by repeatedly driving a forestry machine over it hundreds of times.

The case came to light because there happened to be an outsider present at the scene, who pointed out the issue to the machine operator, only to receive a response filled with foul language and a statement that they would continue working as before. Since then, the case has led to a police investigation, but the outcome is not yet known.

In practice, the forest had been purchased by Stora Enso, a Finnish-Swedish forest industry company. It had contracted the forestry work to a harvesting contractor, who in turn had subcontracted the job. The crime itself was committed by an employee of this subcontractor.

However, Finnish news coverage has largely focused on Stora Enso's potential liability in the incident. It hasn't helped that the company has given an open mandate to repair whatever can be repaired at its expense and has suspended wood procurement from all sites known to have environmental restrictions. Additionally, it has reported one site to the authorities where the company suspects illegal activity may have taken place.

As I mentioned earlier, the matter is under police investigation, which will eventually determine who is responsible. Right now, however, it seems to me that Stora Enso has been unfairly placed in the spotlight, as the available information suggests that the company provided proper instructions to the contractor, but the operator did not follow them and continued illegal activity after being warned about it.

In any case, the destruction of freshwater pearl mussels has a price under Finnish law – 589 euros per individual – so the destruction of potentially thousands of animals could lead to compensation exceeding a million euros. It remains to be seen whether Stora Enso, the main contractor, the subcontractor, or the machine operator will be held financially responsible.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Will Orpo's Government Restore Finland to Sustainable Economic Growth?
Forests in Indonesia and Finland
A new justification is needed for environmental activists

Could Kenyans serve as a model for Somalis and Iraqis?

Finnish immigration policy is somewhat unsuccessful in the sense that people from major refugee-producing countries - excluding Ukrainians - have adapted poorly to the job market. Consequently, a significant portion of them relies on social welfare, and many also turn to criminal activities. These facts have led to a negative perception of immigration from elsewhere than Western or East Asian countries by a substantial portion of Finns.

Therefore, I read with great interest an article about a company operating in Kenya that acquires and trains healthcare personnel for Finland. In practice, these individuals have existing education in the healthcare field, and they also receive additional training, including independent study of the Finnish language. The latter is intended to gauge their motivation.

Foreign nurses are welcome in Finland because the country is facing a severe shortage of healthcare professionals. Kenyans have already proven to be good workers, with an employment rate even higher than that of EU citizens.

The facts I've presented above have left me thoughtful, as it seems strange that if Kenyans are thriving in Finland, why can't Somalis or Iraqis achieve the same and settle for living off society's support without making an effort for their own success? If we exclude politically incorrect factors such as genetics and culture when seeking an answer, what remains?

When searching for an answer, it's important not to overlook the possibility that Finns may be doing something fundamentally wrong when trying to ease the lives of people from major refugee-producing countries coming to Finland without expecting them to contribute. Could the solution lie in requiring them to take responsibility for their own lives in the same way Kenyans do when they come to Finland?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why doesn't immigration cause protests in Japan?
100 percent of the violence is related to migration
A Finnish police officer is afraid to speak about the problems of immigration

Palestinian responsibility

I believe that it is in the interest of both Israel and Palestine to establish lasting peace, a two-state solution, and cooperation between these historically mutually hostile nations. I also think that many, perhaps even the majority of people belonging to these nations, share my view.

So the question remains, why hasn't such an understanding been reached despite more than seven decades having passed? The answer consists of several parts. 

By far the most crucial aspect to understand is that while Palestinians may lose a hundred battles, Israel cannot suffer a single defeat. This is because Israel as a democratic state does not annihilate defeated Palestinians, whereas among the Palestinians, there are millions of people and even numerous organizations, with the most significant being the Hamas controlling the Gaza area, whose sole aim is to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean sea.

As an outcome of what I have written above, the citizens of Israel understandably do not dare to take any unnecessary risks. And since Palestinians occasionally launch minor or major attacks against them, they prefer to rely on their military power rather than peace-oriented agreements, even if backed by any superpower.

The significance of the latter has become even more essential after Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2014, despite the safeguarding of its independence by superpowers. An agreement was made when Ukraine obtained independence, where it agreed to hand over the Soviet nuclear weapons located on its territory to Russia. Without that agreement, Russia would not have dared to invade Ukraine in 2014 or again in 2022.

All of this means that it is specifically the responsibility of the Palestinians to promote peace between Israel and Palestine. It requires actions that inspire trust among the two nations so that even Israel finally dares to agree on the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!
A new Government for Israel, but why doesn´t it solve anything?
Explanation of Finnish attitudes towards Israeli and Palestinians