Swedish Left Politicians Sent Letters to Palestinian Terrorists

The Finnish Broadcasting Company reported that Swedish left-wing politicians had sent letters of encouragement to Palestinian terrorists imprisoned by Israel. One of the recipients was Ahmad al-Moghrabi, who had ordered an attack on a family gathering in which eleven people, including two small children, were killed.

The Swedes had asked Palestinians living in Sweden for a list of people to whom they could send letters, and the Palestinians had provided them with such a list, which included terrorists.

The Swedish politicians are now expressing regret over what happened and blaming the Palestinians for their mistake. The fact remains, however, that even in Israel, people are presumably not imprisoned — at least not for long periods — without good reason. Not even Palestinians.

It remains to be seen whether what happened will have any effect on support for the Swedish left-wing party. And if it does, whether the effect will be positive or negative from their perspective — in other words, whether there is a pro-terrorism sentiment among Swedes of immigrant background who typically vote for green and left-wing parties, or whether they have already adopted the Western view that terrorism is unacceptable under any circumstances.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle Using Taxpayer Money to Mislead?
Burning a Man Alive Led to Life Imprisonment
Who Is Responsible: The Donor or the Recipient of Aid?

"Abdul B" Drove Into a Pride Crowd

The German Pride community experienced firsthand what it feels like to live as a sexual minority in an Islamist culture when "Abdul B" drove into their celebration and then went on a rampage with a machete. As a result, one woman was killed and at least 15 people were injured.

Abdul B (picture below) was already known to the authorities as someone with Islamist views. Nevertheless, like many others of his kind, he had been allowed to live freely in Berlin.

* * *

The terrorist attack on the Pride event can, of course, be dismissed as an isolated incident—if one wants to. Or rather: because one wants to.

It could just as well be seen as an inevitable consequence of Germany's immigration policy, in which Islamist extremism has not been adequately taken into account. This interpretation is supported by the fact that this was not a one-off event; Islamists have previously carried out terrorist attacks in Germany as well.

Perhaps the most significant consequence of last night's terrorist attack will be a further increase in support for the immigration-critical AfD party in Germany. According to opinion polls, around 28 percent of Germans currently support the party, making it the country's most popular political party.

Germany also has the left-wing BSW party, which is likewise critical of immigration. However, its support has fallen to around three percent after reaching as high as nine percent a couple of years ago. It remains to be seen whether left-leaning voters who favor its economic policies will return to the party thanks to "Abdul B."

* * *

While reading about the events in Berlin, I could not help thinking how beneficial it has been that Finland's immigration policy has become more pragmatic through the measures introduced by the current government, under the leadership of Minister Mari Rantanen (Finns Party). It remains to be seen, however, whether these reforms will continue under the next government or whether it will begin reversing the progress that has been made.

This is a genuine concern, as opinion polls show that support for Prime Minister Petteri Orpo's (National Coalition Party) government has fallen to 39.1 percent, while the Social Democratic Party (SDP), the largest opposition party, has become by far the country's most popular party. One factor contributing to this has been the party's strong support among foreign-language speakers, which, in the author's view, reinforces what is described as the party's irresponsible immigration policy.

For that reason, it would be worthwhile for Finnish Social Democratic voters to pause for a moment and consider what kind of Finland they wish to leave to future generations. Should it be a state governed by the rule of law, rooted in Finnish culture, where law, order, and equality between people prevail?

Or should it become a multicultural hell in which public disorder is a constant reality and the rights of women and sexual minorities are threatened by extremist Islamist ideas rooted in seventh-century beliefs?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Will Tomorrow’s Elections in Germany Be a Turning Point?
Will European Culture Collapse Under the Weight of Islamic Immigration?
Afghan's Rampage in Germany Signals the End of the Value-Liberal Era in the EU

The Finnish far left has difficulties with terrorism and antisemitism

Fresh news reported that the United States has classified the German Antifa group as a terrorist organization. What makes this newsworthy is that Li Andersson (Finnish Left Alliance) has visibly supported its activities.

It remains to be seen how prominently the Finnish mainstream media will report on the actions of our Member of the European Parliament. So far, I have not observed this happening.

For my part, I note that this case should be taken seriously within the Left Alliance, and that a thorough discussion should be held about the party’s stance toward various organizations. This would demonstrate a commitment to peaceful democracy.

There is also an excellent opportunity to take the first steps in this direction right now. Andersson and the party chair Minja Koskela could clearly state that they do not approve of their youth organization’s chair Pinja Vuorinen’s recent demand to make Finnish society unsafe for Jews, and take action to replace her with someone who shows greater respect for human rights.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
When Should the Independence of Palestine Be Recognized?
Iran Exposes the Finnish Green-Left as Intellectually Dishonest or Lacking Values
Expert Statement Highlights Russian Hybrid Threat Over Migration Across the Mediterranean

Estonia Needs Its Own Air Force

Finland’s Air Force’s operations outside the country’s borders are restricted — in peacetime — by national regulations according to which fighters do not — without a separate decision — fly in other states’ airspace. Now, however, Estonian politician Kalev Stoicescu has asked Finland to change its practices in this respect.

The background is that Estonia itself does not have a proper air force; the defence of its airspace is handled by fighters from other NATO countries stationed at the Ämari base. In the Baltic Sea area in particular, it may happen that Finnish fighters can react to Russian border violations more quickly than those departing from Ämari.

For Finland the problem is that we have a 1,340-kilometre border with Russia. That gives us more than enough to monitor — and, if necessary, to intercept — without expanding the area under surveillance to the south of the Gulf of Finland.

Therefore I am of the opinion that the Estonians would be better advised to consider establishing their own fighter fleet rather than asking the Finns for help. Of course that would be expensive, and the size of Estonia’s economy does not allow for funding a very large fleet, and so would not enable them, in a real crisis, to fend off the Russian Air Force on their own.

On the other hand, an Estonian squadron would not have to operate alone; it would rather complement the support the country already receives from NATO. Through this, Estonia’s defence of its airspace against intruders would also be substantially improved compared with the present.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland’s Response to Unauthorized Aircraft Entering Its Airspace
Russia’s Aging MiG Fleet vs. Finland’s Modern Air Power
Finns - Among the World’s Best

Ukraine Risks Losing Western Trust by Muzzling Corruption Watchdog

The Ukrainian parliament decided yesterday to approve a law that limits the independence of the country's anti-corruption bureau and the anti-corruption prosecutor's office. The law came into force immediately with the signature of President Zelensky.

In practice, this means that corruption investigations will now fall under the authority of the Prosecutor General – who is appointed by the President – thereby stripping the investigation process of its independence from the country’s top leadership. As a result, it effectively prevents any meaningful investigation into corruption linked to Zelensky and his administration.

The change is reportedly driven by suspicions of collaboration between anti-corruption bodies and Russian operatives. If these allegations are true, the matter is of course extremely serious and cannot be ignored. This is the case even though, from an external perspective, the measures taken by the administration appear questionable.

On the other hand, it is clear that – as one of the most corrupt countries in Europe – Ukraine has no place in the European Union until its deeply rooted “customary” corruption has been thoroughly eradicated. Therefore, this decision may seriously damage the country’s aspirations to become part of the Western community. And if the new law is found to enable corruption within the top leadership, it is highly likely that it would also collapse the EU countries' willingness to continue military support for Ukraine.

For this reason, perhaps the most important domestic political task for Zelensky’s administration is to demonstrate through its future actions that the purpose of the new law was not to shield the country’s elite from corruption investigations, but solely to eliminate the identified security risk linked to Russia. To support this, it is essential that the actions of Ukraine’s top officials are closely and credibly monitored as a condition for continued Western economic and military support.

PS 21:20. It seems that Zelensky has understood the risks brought by the change, or at least is yielding to the pressure from citizens. That’s good, because – as I wrote – the risks were too great. Nevertheless, Ukrainians must figure out how to keep the Russians out of Ukrainian affairs.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Can Trump Resist the Kremlin’s Lure? 
Finnish Winter war showed the way to help Ukraine
Will an attitude lead Ukraine into EU?

Activism Without Truth

Politically left-wing Palestine activists seem to have an exceptionally poor grasp of facts. The latest example of this came yesterday, when Palestine Action Finland defaced the office of the Norwegian-Finnish ammunition and weapons manufacturer Nammo with red paint, claiming that the company had participated in Israel’s actions in Gaza by supplying weapons and ammunition to its army.

In reality, Nammo has not supplied weapons or ammunition to the Israeli army since it began its operations in Gaza to root out Hamas terrorists. The Nammo products currently in Israel originated from the United States, to which they were sold in 2008. About 15 years later, they made their way from the U.S. to Israel.

This raises the question: what should we think of people who resort to acts of terror without even bothering to check whether their so-called justifications are true? Not to mention that through their actions, these activists effectively showed support for the very terrorist act that started the war.

Likewise, this group of people seems unaware—or fails to grasp the significance—of the fact that Western countries have supported the Palestinians with massive sums of money over the years, much of which has been used to support terrorist activities, such as the construction of an extensive tunnel network in Gaza. For that reason, they cannot be considered blameless in the current suffering of the region’s inhabitants.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
UN Security Council Resolution Draft Risks Encouraging Terrorism
Why Hamas Is Unwilling to Give Up Its Weapons
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!

It’s Time to Teach Putin: The Age of Empire Is Over

Finland's Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen does not have high expectations for the peace negotiations taking place in Istanbul, Turkey, on Thursday. Her view does not even depend on whether Russia's dictator, Vladimir Putin, attends or not.

Valtonen stated that Putin’s presence would make little difference. This is because, according to her, Putin has demonstrated through his actions that he merely wants to continue subjugating Ukraine and will not agree to any solution that Ukraine could accept in the long term.

Her statement reflects a realism grounded in facts. And for that reason, Western countries — both in Europe and North America — and especially the administration of Donald Trump, should take her view as the starting point when considering a resolution to the war in Ukraine.

This point was also emphasized by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who announced that he would travel to Turkey regardless — but made it clear that Trump must understand Putin is the true obstacle to peace in Ukraine.

According to Zelensky, Trump must, above all, accept that Putin lies, while Ukraine is doing its part to pursue peace and has no intention of delaying the process. He also noted that if Putin fails to appear, it would serve as definitive proof that he has no intention of ending the war.

The significance of the Istanbul meeting remains to be seen. But it underscores the urgent need for EU countries to finally ramp up arms production to meet the demands of today’s geopolitical reality — and, through that, provide Ukraine’s military with sufficient support to first force the Russian army onto the defensive and ultimately drive them back, militarily defeated, to Russian soil.

In other words, the time has come for EU decision-makers to show Putin that the era of imperialism is over — even for Russia.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Warnings from Jussi Halla-aho and Igor Girkin About Europe's Near Future
When the War Comes Home to Moscow
Putin Faces a Heavy Price for His Hesitation

Good luck to Chancellor Friedrich Merz!

The coalition negotiations in Germany have been concluded, and as a result, the next Chancellor of the country will be Friedrich Merz from the Christian Democrats (CDU). His government is scheduled to begin its work in the early days of May. The coalition will include the CDU, CSU, and SPD, and with this, Merz sent a message to the President of the United States, stating that "Germany is back on track."

Naturally, the government's effectiveness remains to be seen, but it will certainly not be helped by the fact that Germany's economic growth is expected to slow to almost zero in the near future. On the other hand — as we have all noticed — at least the trade war between the US and the EU, previously threatened by Donald Trump, has for now been called off by both sides.

According to Merz, the incoming government plans to significantly increase the country's defense spending and will also provide comprehensive support for Ukraine.

Domestically, the government faces pressure from the AfD, whose support has recently risen to match that of the CDU/CSU according to the latest polls. 

However, it remains to be seen how the government's policies, especially its program described as critical of immigration, will affect the popularity of different parties in the coming years.

What is clear, however, is that for the EU, the success of Merz’s government in both domestic and foreign policy would be important. Therefore, it is only fitting to wish him success in his new role.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
What will post-migration Europe look like in the future?
Will Tomorrow’s Elections in Germany Be a Turning Point?
Afghan's Rampage in Germany Signals the End of the Value-Liberal Era in the EU

Ukraine's Struggle Is Also Our Struggle

As I write this, President Volodymyr Zelenskyi is having a phone conversation with the U.S.'s Donald Trump. Hopefully, the two men will this time find common ground on how to achieve a just peace in Ukraine—one that does not encourage Vladimir Putin, who mocked Trump yesterday, to continue his military campaigns in Ukraine or elsewhere in Europe.

With this in mind, it was promising to hear from Finland's President Alexander Stubb that the situation on the Ukrainian front is much stronger than one might assume from the news flow. At the same time, he stated that he trusts Zelenskyi more than Putin.

Zelenskyi also just announced on social media that: "We are grateful that the voice of Finnish parliamentarians in support of Ukraine within the European institutions and in the international arena is pro-Ukrainian and loud." This was nice to hear, as the vast majority of Finns, due to our own history, can relate to the situation of the Ukrainian people—and understand that Ukraine's struggle is also our struggle as Finns.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Putin's Threat Bolsters European Border States' Defense Against Russia
Questionable Achievements of Donald Trump's Foreign Policy
Finnish weapons are being tested against the Russians in Ukraine

Now It's Putin's Turn to Show His Hand

Ukraine accepted Donald Trump's ceasefire proposal and regained U.S. support in its fight against Russia. At the same time, Trump's attention shifts to Russia, where President Vladimir Putin may be facing a similar predicament to what Volodymyr Zelenskyy experienced earlier.

According to Putin's spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, Russia's leadership will not take a stance on the proposal until they have been in direct contact with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. The Kremlin is waiting for them to provide details of the agreement.

The Kremlin also stated that a phone call between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump is possible. According to Peskov, this call could be arranged very quickly.

According to Finnish analyst Arkady Moshes, it is more unlikely than likely that Russia will accept the ceasefire proposal. This is because if the front line is frozen now, part of Russia will remain under Ukrainian control, which Putin would not accept, as Kursk would become a daily topic of discussion.

On the other hand, the Russian army has recently performed well in Kursk, so for Ukraine, it is crucial at this moment to stabilize the front line. If successful, Putin would not— to borrow Trump's phrasing— be left holding a hand of empty cards.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Trump's Indecision Benefits Putin – Deadly Consequences for Ukraine
Nuclear Debate in Sweden and Lithuania’s Treaty Withdrawal
Donald Trump’s Reliability as an Ally Has Proven to Be Questionable

Peacekeepers in Ukraine: A Rational Move After All?

It seems that deploying peacekeepers to Ukraine might actually be a reasonable course of action. This is because Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has expressed his frustration over the UK and France’s proposal to send NATO peacekeepers after a peace agreement is reached in Ukraine.

According to Lavrov, the deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine is completely unacceptable, as it would only escalate the war that Russia itself initiated. As if Putin’s army weren’t already doing everything in its power to win the war.

Meanwhile, Finland’s Defense Minister Antti Häkkänen announced that Finland is launching a new support program for Ukraine, focusing on domestic defense industry orders. The first decision involves a €660 million funding package, based on Ukraine’s critical needs, the suitability of products for transfer, and the production and delivery capacity of companies.

The equipment will be delivered to Ukraine as part of future military aid packages. According to Häkkänen, Finland’s defense sector will be modernized over the next 10 years, including the development of entirely new products.

It remains to be seen what Lavrov thinks about these plans. Or will he stay silent and hope that Russia doesn’t have to revert to 1950s technology in warfare?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
President of Finland Asked Whether There Are Top Politicians With Serious Intellectual Limitations
Finland Boosts Military Self-Sufficiency and Support for Ukraine
Putin Set a Goal — Failure Would Be an Embarrassment

Russia’s War Rages On – And the World Keeps Funding It

According to a recent report, EU countries are spending more money on Russian fossil fuels than on financial aid for Ukraine. In 2024 alone, the EU purchased Russian oil and gas worth €21.9 billion but provided Ukraine with only €18.7 billion in financial support. Of course, in addition to this, the EU has donated military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

Nevertheless, this situation highlights that the EU has failed to reduce its energy dependence on Russia, which is waging a war of aggression. It also plays a part in the fact that Russia’s energy exports have declined by less than a third.

Or can this even be said? After all, the total value of Russia's oil, gas, and coal exports in 2022 was €356 billion, but in the previous year—2021—only €264 billion, and in the following year—2023—€250 billion. That’s roughly the same scale as last year, when it amounted to €242 billion.

The figures above clearly show that the world’s nations do not actually care that Russia attacked its neighbor. Or at the very least, they are not willing to sacrifice their own comfort to support Ukraine’s defense struggle.

One can only hope that this situation changes—and quickly—not only in the EU but also in other countries worldwide, including Donald Trump’s United States. If not, one must start questioning whether President Trump is, after all, "in Putin’s pocket," as was already suspected during his previous presidency.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
President of Finland Asked Whether There Are Top Politicians With Serious Intellectual Limitations
Finally, Finland Speaks the Truth Without Fear!
Zelensky Condemns Fico’s "Immoral" Support for Putin

Blame the Philanthropist Or Understand the Facts

Every person who follows current events even a little understands that the mass migration from developing countries to Europe has led to a new type of crime, with extreme manifestations seen this year in e.g. Magdeburg, Germany, or earlier in Paris, France.

More common forms of immigration-related crime, however, include sexual crimes directed at women—sometimes even mass rapes—as well as the formation of gangs among young immigrants and their battles, for example, over control of drug markets. And, of course, the humiliation crimes committed against the native children.

Unfortunately, it seems that not everyone has the understanding needed to acknowledge these facts. This was exemplified—once more—when a book was published in our country, Finland, claiming that the root of the immigrant problem lies with the native people.

The logic of the book's authors is that the arriving immigrants have supposedly been pushed to the margins of society, and their offspring made to believe that they can never belong to the community. This marginalization, the book argues, has been achieved by failing to provide these people with sufficient support upon their arrival.

In reality, however, these immigrants have received more support in Finland than any other group of migrants before them (an example and another). And yet they are the first group to cause widespread and shocking levels of crime. Not even the Ukrainians who arrived afterward have caused such issues.

Therefore, the true reasons behind the problems caused by immigrants from developing countries must be sought within the newcomers themselves. Do they have a culture that is incompatible with Western society? Or is there a pattern of mate selection among them that has led to inbreeding and, as a result, unstable behavior and reduced intelligence?

We all know the answers to these questions, of course. What I fail to understand is why someone has published a book blaming the philanthropist—for that is what taking in immigrants in need truly is—while completely ignoring the other factors leading to the phenomenon in question.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Immigrants, Gangs, Decisions, and Self-Interest
Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?
Should the Dutch Do Something About the Fact That Immigrants Don't Tolerate Visiting Jews?

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

On the Consequences of Russian Inability in Syria

The Syrian revolution demonstrated that Russia does not have the capacity to wage two battles simultaneously. In other words, its resources are fully committed in Ukraine.

This should be clearly understood in Western countries. Moreover, the obvious conclusion should be drawn: Russia can also be defeated in the war in Ukraine by increasing support for Zelenskyy's army.

Increasing this support is particularly advantageous for European states because a Russian victory in Ukraine would sooner or later weaken the security of European countries. Additionally, the future U.S. president, Donald Trump, has declared his goal to shift responsibility from the United States to EU countries.

One key figure in this matter is Germany's Christian Democrat Friedrich Merz, who is currently in Kyiv negotiating what kind of support Ukraine will need in the future. He is also very likely to take his place as Germany's Chancellor after the elections next February.

One can only hope that German voters and Merz himself understand that they hold a rare opportunity to change the global political situation for the better. And if they do, other Western countries will resolutely follow their example.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Revolution in Syria: What Comes Next?
Western Nations Should Act Decisively On Two Fronts Against Russia
Will Trump Push Ukraine Toward Peace by Breaking U.S. Promise?

Vladimir Putin Places His Trust in the Bottom-Feeders of Humanity

Today, I read an absurd news story. According to it, fifteen Finns attended a meeting held in St. Petersburg, Russia, at the end of September, under the name "Peace, Nature, and Cooperation in the Baltic Sea and Arctic Regions."

There, they demanded that the escalation of the war in Ukraine "must be stopped immediately and that Western countries should cease arms deliveries to Ukraine." Additionally, they called for Russia to be allowed to participate in next year's "Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe" summit.

In a declaration crafted at the meeting, they stated that "peace will be achieved through diplomacy, cooperation, cross-border actions, active involvement of the diaspora, and a feminist agenda that emphasizes protection, meaningful participation, and prevention at all stages of conflict." In other words, they were spreading Russia’s dishonest propaganda.

It’s unfortunate that fifteen of the signatories are Finns, including, among others, the chair of the Finnish Communist Party (Liisa Taskinen) as well as two representatives of the Finnish Women for Peace movement (Ulla Klötzer and Lea Launokari).

Neither of these movements has any notable support, and I can’t recall ever hearing of any of the people mentioned above. I also don’t recognize the names of any of the other Finnish attendees, and the list does not include Finland’s most well-known Putin supporter, Johan Bäckman, who recently obtained Russian citizenship – and will hopefully be sent to the Ukrainian front as cannon fodder.

In other words, the gathering consisted of a group of traitors whose foolishness is being exploited by Russia’s dictator, Vladimir Putin. Perhaps the most telling aspect of this news is what it reveals about the situation of Russia and Putin, as it’s difficult to imagine that anything but desperation would drive the self-made tsar to rely on such bottom-feeders of humanity.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Highlights of the BRICS Meeting in Kazan, Russia
Vladimir Putin is Leading Russia into an Economic Ruin
The Social Democrats of Germany Supporting Putin

Message to Palestinians Who Want to Burden Finland's Healthcare System

A little over a year ago, the Palestinian Hamas organization decided to carry out a spectacular strike on Israel. However, after the initial celebrations, joy turned to sorrow when the target of the attack decided to utterly destroy the organization itself.

Now, the Palestinian government has asked Finland to take care of those wounded in the war of Gaza, as well as others in need of assistance. According to the organization's Minister of Health, "the children should come first. Especially children with cancer and those who have lost limbs. Additionally, there would be those to whom we wouldn't be able to provide surgical care, even if our hospitals were operational."

However, they failed to mention what would come after the medical services were up and running with the help of the children. Would terrorists, innocent women, or war criminals be next?

The Palestinian representative also forgot to mention that there have been many civilian casualties - at least partly because the terrorists of Hamas have operated from hospitals and hidden among civilians, such as in schools.

Despite all of this, support for the Hamas terrorists among the Palestinian population has not decreased—as one might expect from reasonable people—but has instead increased, even among the population of the West Bank of the Jordan River, which is typically more peaceful than Gaza. As a result, there are now even more supporters of violence among them than those who favor peaceful activities.

Based on what I’ve written above, I do not support transferring Palestinians—not even their otherwise innocent children—into the already resource-strained Finnish healthcare system. Instead, I urge the Palestinians to lay down their arms, hand over the Hamas terrorists to be judged by the courts, and direct their efforts toward peacebuilding and the creation of well-being in the areas they govern. In doing so, they can also eventually help the victims of the catastrophe started by Hamas.

Finally, I repeat the message I’ve already sent to all Palestinians, one whose significance they should consider very carefully. It’s a saying that goes, "a foolish head makes the whole body suffer." This, in a nutshell, explains why the Palestinians—and their children—are currently in such a poor situation.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
What will Happen Tomorrow, on the Anniversary of the Attack by the Terrorists on October 7th Last Year?
Palestinian Youth Require More Understanding, Less Aggression
A Fair Peace Proposal for Gaza

How to Increase Fertility Rates: A Finnish Solution

According to an article in Helsingin Sanomat, birth and total fertility rates have declined in Finland, much like in other Western countries. The development has been rapid, as in 2011 the total fertility rate for women was still 1.87, but by 2023 it had dropped to 1.26, the lowest figure ever recorded in the country.

The reason for this worrying trend is not a reluctance to have children, as 80 percent of Finns still want to have two or more children. Instead, one of the main reasons for the low number of children is that Finnish women are postponing childbearing to a relatively late stage in life due to the demands of education and careers, and likely also due to a societal climate that idealizes youth and singlehood.

Unfortunately, female biology is such that fertility declines rapidly after the age of 30. As a result, the choices made in life often lead to unwanted childlessness.

The Finnish government has not remained inactive on this issue. It has commissioned a population policy report that proposes a financial incentive for having the first child before the age of 30.

According to the proposal, the incentive could range from €10,000 to €30,000 and could be tied, for example, to a mortgage or student loan. Alternatively, it could be used to reduce taxes.

The report also suggests increasing education about fertility in schools and investing in fertility treatments by providing more resources to the public sector, reducing waiting lists, and thereby ensuring the highest possible effectiveness of the treatments.

In regard to the latter, the government has already made a proposal that would provide state support for fertility treatments in the future. However, it remains to be seen whether the other proposals in the report will also be implemented in Finland.

In my view, this matter is becoming urgent, as the Finnish population is aging rapidly with the rising median age, and immigration to Finland does not seem to attract enough people whose skills would be useful in a knowledge-based society. On the contrary, it seems to be increasing the proportion of the population that needs to be supported rather than leading to effective employment of the newcomers.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Humanitarian immigration does not provide a solution to Finland's demographic dependency ratio
The Finnish Government is Unanimous on Fixing the Country's Economy
Why Can't Finland Find Workforce?

New aid package keeps Finland as one of Ukraine's biggest supporters

Finland is located next to Russia and is therefore one of the countries that might become a target of Vladimir Putin's aggression if he achieves even a partial victory in Ukraine.

For this reason, the Finns decided to join the Western defense alliance, NATO, immediately after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The nation was quite unanimous in this decision, even though before the invasion, the so-called "NATO option" had not been particularly popular among the public.

The Finns’ perspective changed because Russia's attack on Ukraine showed that the previous policy of appeasement was insufficient to prevent Russian aggression. For the same reason, Finns are currently quite united in their belief that Ukraine must be supported in its fight for independence.

For this reason, Finland is now sending its 25th aid package to Ukraine. After this, the total value of the defense material sent will rise to €2.3 billion, keeping Finland among the countries that have provided the most support to Ukraine in relation to the size of its economy.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland Must Avoid Ukraine’s Fate
Will Russia Test NATO's Article Five?
Ukraine can and will stop Putin

Finns are backing the government making difficult decisions

The problem commonly associated with democracies is that when the government has to make unpleasant decisions for public finances, voters tend to shift their support to the opposing parties. Thus, there is a temptation for leaders not to make economically sound decisions while in power.

In this sense, the situation in Finland is interesting. The right-wing government that came to power last summer has planned labor market reforms, cuts to public services, and reductions in income taxes to balance the state budget, which was heavily indebted during the previous government's term, and to revitalize economy.

These plans have resulted in widespread and ongoing political strikes opposing the reforms. Both trade unions and green-leftist parties are behind these strikes, and even according to citizen surveys, the protests have public support.

However, what makes the situation interesting is that in polls measuring party support, the government's popularity has not declined; instead, it is clearly on the rise. Based on this, it seems that Finns understand that their country's public finances are indeed in need of correction. Therefore, rather than abandoning the parties in power, they are actually shifting towards supporting them.

This bodes well for Finland's future, but of course, only if the ongoing changes by the government lead to results and the public remains supportive for long enough for the economy to turn back towards growth.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Correct minister, ridiculous facts
The people long for strict economic policy
Reducing taxes, enhancing export and paying the governmental debt