Why Should Ukraine Trust Donald Trump After Being Let Down by Barack Obama?

The Trump administration has assured that a possible peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia would “fully safeguard Ukraine’s sovereignty.” This is of course a good thing in principle, but it appears in a strange light given that Ukraine’s sovereignty was, in theory, already secured by the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.

In that agreement, Ukraine gave up the Soviet nuclear weapons stationed on its territory, and in return the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom promised not to use or threaten to use economic or military means to coerce Ukraine or alter its borders. France and China later joined them.

As a result of these great powers’ “commitment,” Ukraine interpreted the memorandum as guaranteeing its security and handed over the nuclear weapons in its possession to Russia. This led, in 2014, to Putin deciding to risk Western reactions and annexing Crimea to Russia.

* * *

Putin’s gamble paid off, as the Crimea operation—carried out by Russian soldiers known as “little green men”—did not lead to practically any consequences. This was despite Russia clearly violating the Budapest Memorandum, using as a pretext the obvious falsehood that Ukraine’s government was illegitimate.

At that time, the United States was led by Barack Obama, who did impose some sanctions on Russia but decided not to intervene further in the aggression. In doing so, he ended up convincing Vladimir Putin that no strong U.S. counterreaction should be expected from a military attack, even when he violated existing international agreements that were interpreted as security guarantees.

* * *

The question, then, is what now guarantees that Ukraine will receive sufficient Western support under a new agreement, should Russia at some point decide to continue its military campaign? Would Donald Trump or one of his successors act like Obama did in 2014? In other words, if a new attack occurred, would political condemnations combined with some sanctions and limited military aid again be considered sufficient?

Given all this, I fully understand why Trump’s assurances do not appeal to Zelensky and other Ukrainians. And instead of the agreement he is now proposing, Ukraine demands for its security NATO membership—which Trump’s peace proposal forbids—since it would at the very least significantly increase the risk for Russia that the West might use military force if it embarked on a new offensive.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is the EU a Real Player in World Politics—or Just a Paper Tiger?
Peace in Ukraine Would Be a Risk to Putin
Why Do Russians Tolerate Broken Infrastructure?

Donald Trump Has Unleashed a Dangerous Development

The Finnish Member of the European Parliament and General Pekka Toveri stated on social media that "it seems quite clear that the USA will no longer receive intelligence from the West except in a limited manner. It is not worth revealing one’s own sources to Putin’s henchman."

So, this is where we have arrived in just over a month of President Donald Trump’s presidency. There are still nearly three years and eleven months to go, so one must watch with considerable dread what will happen during that time to the unity of Western countries and their ability to resist Russian and Chinese efforts to expand their own power.

This was also noted by Swedish Lieutenant Colonel Joakim Paasikivi, who stated that "it is becoming increasingly clear that the United States cannot be trusted, and the less interest the U.S. has in supporting other countries, the more its influence diminishes... This means that we have returned to the era of imperialism, where large, powerful nations believe they can divide the world among themselves. This is a dangerous development."

It remains to be seen what will happen in global politics in the coming years. At this point, the only certainty seems to be that the world will look very different a few years from now than it did just a month ago—and certainly not for the better, even if Europe manages to unite its efforts. Not to mention what happens if the continent's leaders fail to do so.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Too Many Finns Share Trump’s Inability to Comprehend
Europe Needs Leadership and Urgent Defense Actions
Political Rhetoric Like Trump-Zelenskyi’s Has Deep Historical Roots

Changing the Clocks Reduces Trust in the European Union

The European Union will once again switch to standard time tonight. This happens despite the fact that 84 percent of Europeans would prefer to completely abandon the foolish and costly practice of changing the clocks twice a year.

I call it costly because it has been proven to cause fatigue, impair memory, concentration, and attention. In addition, people’s reaction times slow down, increasing their likelihood of making mistakes. This raises the risk of accidents and mishaps—and these errors don't improve work quality either.

On the other hand, there is no demonstrated benefit to the clock changes themselves. To understand this, one must be able to distinguish between the act of shifting the clocks back and forth and the impact of time zones on people. Even though daylight saving time might suit people well, its benefits could be achieved simply by a permanent shift to a later time zone—meaning the abandonment of the shift back to standard time.

Despite all these well-known facts, the clocks are still being adjusted. And the reason is none other than the inability of the European Union and its member states to implement a decision that has already been made in 2019.

Therefore, I would like to ask Ursula van der Leyen and the other members of the Commission, as well as the Members of the European Parliament, how they think this inability fosters people’s trust in the Union or its effectiveness in promoting the well-being of its citizens.

And yes. I am well aware that my question is rhetorical, and that every single European knows the answer. And the real answer to my rhetoric certainly doesn’t help promote the good things for which the EU was created.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The EU Is Suffocating Under Double Bureaucracy
EU Decision-Makers Did the Bear a Disservice
During the Eurovision song spectacle, the incompetence of EU officials was revealed

Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!

The Palestinian extremist organization Hamas has carried out a massive terrorist attack in Israel today, resulting in the killing and assault of women and the shooting of anyone in their path (I won't provide a link, but supporting material for this viewpoint can be found, for example, on messaging service X). This is in no way acceptable, even considering Israel's establishment over 70 years ago in the Middle East despite the fact that it was difficult at the time.

Next, we can expect to see Israel striking Hamas's support areas in Gaza and causing significantly more damage to Palestinian property than Muslims could achieve even with a surprise attack. Palestinians can only blame their war-mongering leaders for all of this.

The fact is: Palestinians had an alternative. This was articulated by Finland's President Juho Kusti Paasikivi, who stated after World War II, "Acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom." By this, he meant that Finland had a large and dangerous neighbor to the east with whom it had to get along.

Based on this, Finland adopted a neutral stance towards the Soviet Union and established a close commercial partnership that benefited both parties. At the same time, Finland refrained from needlessly provoking its eastern neighbor but ensured the readiness of its own military forces.

This approach continued beyond the collapse of the Soviet Union until Putin's Russia's attack on Ukraine. At that point, Finland realized that the facts had changed as Russia had shown that it cannot be trusted. Therefore Finns sought NATO membership at a time when Russia's military forces were tied down in Ukraine. This way, Finland's security is still assured, but it remains open to cooperation with Russia if it returns to the community of civilized nations by recognizing Ukraine's 2013 borders and making peace.

For Palestinians, it would be wise to accept the existence of Israel, acknowledge its overwhelming military capability relative to their own, and work together with Israelis while abandoning the foolish dream of driving Jews into the Mediterranean. By doing so, time and economic prosperity would gradually improve the bitterness between Jews and Palestinians, ultimately providing Palestinians with the opportunity to live as part of Israel or even as an independent state, if both parties believe they can trust each other.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
History of Finland XV: Paasikivi-Kekkonen doctrine
A new Government for Israel, but why doesn´t it solve anything?
Explanation of Finnish attitudes towards Israeli and Palestinians

Hussein Al-Taee, an Islamic militant and a member of the Social Democratic Party of Finland

Next Sunday, Finland will hold parliamentary elections, and one of the candidates for the Social Democratic Party is Hussein Al-Taee. He has an immigration background and is known for his work in Nobel laureate Martti Ahtisaari's peace mediation company. 

However, it has been revealed that Al-Taee sympathizes with militant Islam and dictatorships, and has been suspected of having connections to the intelligence service of Iraq. He may also have had a task to interfere with Finnish policy and help members of Shia militia immigrate into Finland through the international asylum system. Additionally, Al-Taee has written antisemitic texts, but he apologized for his mistakes after they became public.

Despite these concerning revelations, Al-Taee was still accepted as a candidate for the Social Democratic Party in the elections. Furthermore, he published a video in Arabic where he suggests that immigrants are taken from their parents by force.

In other words, Al-Taee is spreading the same kind of disinformation in Finland that is used in Sweden to hinder the integration of immigrants from the Islamic world into their new home. Furthermore, he has made it clear that his positive views on militant Islam have not changed.

Therefore, as the people of Finland, we must question whether the Social Democrats should continue to support Mr. Al-Taee. They should admit that they made a mistake by nominating him as a candidate for Parliament and discourage voters from supporting him. If they do not take action before the elections, they should cancel his party membership immediately after the election, regardless of the outcome.

We must also consider whether allowing Al-Taee to remain a member of the Social Democratic Party obstructs Finnish immigration policy and endangers the country's security. If so, the party leaders and the entire organization may be unworthy of the trust of the Finnish people.

The original blog post in Finnish:
SDP:n on erotettava Hussein Al-Taee

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Ayatollahs in Iran demonstrated their ridiculousness
Sweden already in trouble - Finland following
Riots in Sweden: what next?

Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin is quickly losing her national credibility

Formerly admired by the world, the Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin is quickly losing her national credibility in politics. One significant step in this was her unfounded promise to donate Finnish fighter jets, which will be decommissioned in 2026, to Ukrainians.

It was surprising that the Prime Minister returned to the issue earlier this week and got retired Major General Pekka Toveri to comment on the matter. According to him, "sometimes it would be better to admit a mistake and learn from it rather than getting oneself deeper into the mud". He also confirmed the earlier mention by the Commander of the Finnish Defense Forces that the current fighter jets will be used until the end of their life before they are replaced.

Another strange thing that has been seen in the ongoing April parliamentary election debates is that the Prime Minister has started shouting at her competitors (an example) in a way that is not usually seen in the rather restrained Finnish politics.

Such behavior does not inspire any trust in ordinary people in Finland, let alone in the case of a prime minister seeking to continue in the country's leadership. Therefore, it is quite easy to predict that Sanna Marin does not have a very good future in our country's politics - and that after the elections, she will do everything in her power to get a well-paying position in the EU. Perhaps her undoubtedly considerable beauty will help in that.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Did the Finnish Prime Minister promise Hornet fighter jets to Ukraine?¨
Reducing taxes, enhancing export and paying the governmental debt
The beautiful PM of Finland has driven herself into a trouble