The Early Effects of Finland's Tightened Immigration Policy

Finnish immigration policy has led to an increase in sexual and violent crime. A recent example is 29-year-old Munir Suleyman Weyrah, whose sentence was reduced by the Court of Appeal to two years and ten months in prison after the District Court's ruling.

In addition, he was ordered to pay his victim €8,800 in compensation for emotional suffering. The amount is laughable considering that, after the assault, the victim has no longer been able to live in her own home.

Of course, the rape committed by Munir was only one case among many similar ones. Nor do I believe it will change the views of those Finns who have supported previous immigration policies any more than the large number of similar incidents that came before it.

As a result, Munir will undoubtedly have many who follow his example. And Finnish women will continue to "enjoy" forced sexual acts and the small compensation payments that follow from them.

* * *

This will happen despite the fact that Finland's current government has made many changes to immigration-related legislation. Moreover, previous mistakes in immigration policy have also been acknowledged in many other EU countries.

Unfortunately, those decisions are not yet reflected in the asylum statistics. During the past twelve months, the largest groups receiving positive asylum decisions have been 380 Somalis, 301 Afghans, and 140 Iraqis. These figures can be compared with the corresponding statistics from 2023, when the Orpo government took office: asylum was granted to 258 Afghans, 246 Somalis, and 174 Iraqis.

One positive development is that while Finland deported 120 Iraqis, 29 Somalis, and no Afghans in 2023, over the past 12 months deportation decisions have been issued for 214 Iraqis, 40 Somalis, and 26 Afghans. Admittedly, the numbers of deported Somalis and Afghans remain well below the numbers granted asylum, but in the case of Iraqis, the trend has reversed.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Sensible Immigration or Moral Posturing?
Swedish Ministers Condemn Antisemitic Protest Outside Jewish School
Attempted Homicides in Finland Reach Highest Level of the 2000s

During the Eurovision song spectacle, the incompetence of EU officials was revealed

During the Eurovision spectacle, the confrontation between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip has escalated to a new phase. This means that the terrorists' last stronghold is becoming the target of an Israeli attack, and therefore the army of the Jewish state has ordered civilians to evacuate from the eastern Ramallah area.

There seem to be three reasons for this. Firstly, to prevent civilian casualties, and secondly, to prevent them from being used as human shields by terrorists. Thirdly, reducing the population may facilitate the discovery of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

All of this is happening despite the disapproval of Israel's evacuation orders by Charles Michel, the Belgian chairman of the European Council. So, would he, as a high-ranking EU official sometimes referred to as the EU president, think it better if Palestinian terrorists were given the opportunity to use human shields, thereby increasing the number of civilian casualties in the Gaza conflict? Or should the hostages captured by Hamas be left in their hands?

According to Michel, "all efforts must continue to achieve a sustainable ceasefire agreement. The EU is committed to a just and comprehensive peace based on a two-state solution."

This repeats the mantra that only complicates the situation in the Holy Land, as not all Palestinians accept a two-state solution, nor will Israelis sit idly by in the face of continued rocket attacks and other acts of terror. Therefore, to solve the Palestinian problem, creative thinking is needed instead of incessantly advocating for a two-state solution, as I provided an example last Christmas.

It would also be good if the President of the European Council had heard of Finland´s former President Juho Kusti Paasikivi and understood that acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom.

In the short term, this would mean following the example of US President Joe Biden. That is, understanding that a ceasefire would begin tomorrow if Hamas released the hostages. According to Biden: "Israel said it's up to Hamas, if they wanted to do it, we could end it tomorrow. And the ceasefire would begin tomorrow".

This (too) raised the question of how the European Union chooses its high-ranking officials. Apparently, not based on logical reasoning or strong understanding.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Christmas gift to the Holy Land
Palestinian responsibility
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!

Religious authority and the Iran strike on Israel

Ancient Persia was a powerful empire of its time, stretching from Macedonia and Libya all the way to the borders of India. In contrast, modern-day Iran is a backward theocracy led by religious fanatics, where the people - especially women - are subjected to the yoke of medieval religion.

In recent years, the country has witnessed an incomprehensible drama by Western standards, where women have refused to comply with the demands of the morality police, despite being raped, tortured, and killed in large numbers.

Undoubtedly, all of this has affected every Iranian in one way or another, polarizing society. For example, many Iranian opposition figures in exile have stated that the recent airstrikes by the ayatollahs on Israel do not have the support of the entire nation, even though they were in response to an Israeli operation in Syria that resulted in the deaths of three Iranian generals.

The Iranian strike itself had little military impact, as Israel's air defense successfully intercepted the hundreds of drones and ballistic missiles sent by Iranian and Yemeni Houthi forces. Reports do not mention any casualties from the strike, but they do note that some people were wounded - including one child victim.

It remains to be seen how Israel will respond to Iran's attack. At this stage, the only certainty is that the consequences are significantly more serious for the Persians than what was seen in Israel last night.

All of this could have been predicted well before Iran's attack. And so, it begs the question: why was the attack launched last night, even though the outcome was known to be dismal for the aggressor?

One possible explanation could be that, as a result of the violence faced by women, an increasingly large portion of Iran's population is fed up with the clerical regime. Consequently, the country's religious authorities have decided to exploit Israel's strike in Syria to foster national unity and sweep the discontent raised by human rights issues under the rug.

Using military action to overcome political difficulties is an old and tested method. The most famous example is, of course, Margaret Thatcher's initiation of the Falklands War, which boosted her political approval rating from 25 percent at the start of the war to 59 percent within a couple of months.

And let's not forget the unity of the Finns who had just fought a civil war only two decades earlier when the Winter War began with the Soviet Union's attack. Nor the Ukrainians coming together to resist the Russians after they violated the young state's independence.

If indeed the strengthening of leaders´ domestic political position is behind Iran's attack, it is a bold gamble. Even though the people will undoubtedly rally behind their leaders after Israel retaliates, the mullahs will find themselves in a precarious position after a losing war when searching for those responsible for the defeat.

And that - in the best-case scenario - may even lead to a revolution, resulting in Iran's transition from a theocratic regime to secular power. And Iranian female students may look quite different from what they do now.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The demands of the vandals
Ayatollahs in Iran demonstrated their ridiculousness
Independence day of Finland now and 83 years ago

The procrastination of Western countries is paid for with the blood of soldiers

Russia has recently achieved success in the ammunition-starved Ukraine. News reports indicating the increasing success of Putin's army day by day suggest that even the rapid collapse of Ukrainian defense is possible.

Three factors have enabled this development. One is the procrastination of the Trumpian House of Representatives in sending new aid packages. Second is the irresponsible defense policy of most EU countries in recent years, resulting in depleted weapon and ammunition stocks. And - as we know - it's hard to make something out of nothing. Additionally, behind it all is the Ukrainian government's inability to mobilize enough men to the front lines.

* * *

Apparently, French President Emmanuel Macron has understood that the situation in Ukraine is currently completely untenable, as he even raised the issue of sending Western troops to assist Zelensky's army. This would undoubtedly mean facing Western casualties and Russian counter-reactions in one way or another.

Western populations are by no means prepared for returning filled coffins. And their home fronts will not withstand large-scale losses. Therefore, Macron's proposal did not receive immediate support from Finland or other Western countries either.

The future commander of the Estonian Defense Forces, on the other hand, suggested granting Ukraine permission to use Western weapons also on Russian soil. This is because Estonians have learned from their history that "when Russia attacks, the war must be taken to its territory. Otherwise, we will lose it. This rule still applies."

Behind both proposals likely lies the idea of not only direct military impact but also of undermining the Russian home front. In other words, the clearer the war is visible to Russians, the more resistance is likely to arise against Putin's administration's war policies. And the more difficult position the country's dictator finds himself in domestically.

* * *

It's quite clear in this situation that Ukraine's army will collapse for sure unless it receives swift material aid from the West. Loss is also certain in the longer term if a vast number of capable Ukrainian men or women are not urgently called up and trained into Zelensky's army.

In this context, it's also worth noting that every recapture of a village surrendered to the aggressor seems to demand a massive human sacrifice in Ukraine, with fallen soldiers. Therefore, the Western countries' incapacity for effective aid to Ukraine will, in the best-case scenario, demand the lives of tens of thousands, or - if the situation persists - even hundreds of thousands of soldiers.

It's justified to say, therefore, that the delay of Western countries will be paid for with the blood of soldiers. First in Ukraine and - if Putin ultimately wins the war - later most likely also in the militarily weaker Russian border states. And eventually, possibly even in Finland.

The original thought in Finnish:
Länsimaiden viivyttely maksetaan sotilaiden verellä

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Polish Minister for Foreign Affairs reminded Russians about their nightmare
Desperate cry of Russians
Finnish general praised the Ukrainian air strike