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?

Neanderthals Mated with Denisovans, Exceeded Modern Human Diversity

Neanderthals and Denisovans were prehistoric humans who interbred to some extent also with members of the human lineage that led to modern humans. In this context, an international research team – Diyendo Massilani and colleagues – has now published the entire genome extracted from DNA isolated from a Neanderthal fossil that lived about 110,000 years ago. This is the first male genome determined from this species.

The Neanderthal man in question had died in Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains, the same location where Denisovans also lived at times. According to the research group’s results, the man belonged to a human group that was more closely related to another Neanderthal found in the same cave, who had lived about 10,000 years earlier, than to his counterparts in Europe or to a Neanderthal from another cave in the Altai Mountains who lived about 80,000 years ago.

The genomes of both Neanderthals from Denisova Cave that have now been sequenced contained genes originating from Denisovans, indicating that the species interbred with each other at least in the Altai region more than 100,000 years ago. This was surprising, because later Neanderthals from the Altai region or from Western Europe show no evidence of such interbreeding.

Based on DNA – specifically the extent of homozygous chromosomal regions – it was also possible to conclude that Neanderthals living in the Altai region 120,000–80,000 years ago lived in smaller and more isolated groups than later European Neanderthals (54,000–40,000 years ago). In addition, the researchers observed that the genome sequences of Neanderthals belonging to these populations differed from each other more than the genomes of the most genetically distant modern human populations (the Mbuti of Central Africa and the Highland Papuans of New Guinea).

* * *

The study I have briefly described above is unlikely to be directly applicable for commercial purposes. Instead, it satisfies our curiosity and fulfills our need for knowledge: the opening up of the ancient world is undeniably fascinating.

Perhaps even more important than curiosity and the desire for knowledge, however, is that as science advances, humanity’s awareness of itself and of the world increases. And over time, this influences the way we see ourselves and the world we live in.

It is, of course, true that this perspective does not affect all people in the world equally: there is a significant difference, for example, in how the Taliban in Afghanistan and secularized Europeans perceive the world. Whereas the former are guided by the writings of a prophet and war leader who lived in the 7th century, the latter make their everyday decisions based on modern scientific knowledge—though usually without explicitly realizing it.

The contribution of paleogenomics—the field represented by the study described above—may not be decisive in this broader picture, but it is not negligible either. Awareness of the lives of our ancient relatives in small, isolated populations, their interbreeding with each other—and with our ancestors—and the extinction of those lineages provides important context for understanding present-day humanity and its peoples.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Surprising Story of Europe’s Hippos
The Historical Merging of Human Groups
American black population more vulnerable to the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2

Iran at a Crossroads: From Islamist Rule Toward Democracy?

Iranians are protesting—according to Finnish news sources (Yle, Uutissuomalainen)—because of the deterioration of the country’s economy. According to these reports, the background lies in the sanctions imposed on Iran by Western countries, but I would believe that the unrest has also been influenced by the religious leaders’ earlier saber-rattling toward Israel, which ended in humiliation.

The Islamists who lead the country have resorted to harsh measures against the demonstrators, and the situation has therefore escalated. By contrast, President Masoud Pezeshkian has urged the interior minister to listen to the protesters’ “legitimate demands.”

* * *

An interesting additional dimension to this situation has been introduced by Reza Pahlavi, the son of the shah who ruled the country before the Islamist regime. For some time now, he has been seeking to stir the Iranian people into revolution. Yesterday he published a message on social media in which he called on “the people of Iran to join in with the nationwide strikes and protests: government employees, workers in the energy and transportation sectors, truck drivers, nurses, teachers and academics, artisans and entrepreneurs, retirees and those who have lost their savings—everyone, unite and join this national movement.”

In addition, he called on “Iranians abroad—from Australia and East Asia to Europe and North America—to redouble your activities within the framework of the ‘Rise Iran’ campaign to amplify the voice of the Iranian people to the media, international institutions, foreign governments, and parliaments.” and declared that “we will win because we are united and we are many.”

As the year changes tonight, I would like, for my part, to express the hope that Iranians will finally succeed in toppling the Islamists from power and move their ancient homeland from medieval totalitarianism toward democracy—and begin a process that, over time, would lead to a weakening of religious fanaticism throughout the Middle East and Central Asia.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Donald J. Trump
Finnish Ex-Military Chief: U.S. Likely Halted Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program
Will Power Change Hands in Iran?

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?

Russia’s Aging MiG Fleet vs. Finland’s Modern Air Power

According to the Finnish Defence Forces Commander Janne Jaakkola, “three MiG aircraft would not stand a chance against F-35 fighters, JAS Gripens or FA-18s. In that sense, there was no military threat. A rapid kinetic response would have been a mistake.”

The statement referred to MiG-31 fighters that had entered Estonian airspace, and it is understandable insofar as this aircraft type is far from new: production began back in 1979, and the first planes were delivered to the Soviet military as early as 1982. In that respect, it is rather amusing that such aircraft are still part of Putin’s active air force inventory.

* * *

The most recent MiG fighter is known as the MiG-35, which, according to its manufacturer, belongs to the so-called fifth generation of fighters, featuring stealth characteristics designed to make radar detection more difficult. However, the aircraft deployed in the war in Ukraine have—at least according to Western sources—been said to be lacking compared to their American counterparts.

The Russians, however, claim that the MiGs flown in Ukraine are still undergoing testing, so that deficiencies can be identified and corrected before mass production begins. Until then, the bulk of the Mikoyan–Gurevich fighter fleet remains the outdated MiG-31s seen over Estonia—still the fastest fighter aircraft in the world.

* * *

The obsolescence of Russia’s aircraft is naturally good news for Finland, which will soon receive its first F-35 fighters. Even the current Finnish Air Force fleet—the F-18 Hornet—is, according to the Commander, superior to the MiGs in question. That said, the Hornet is roughly from the same era as the MiG-31, its maiden flight having taken place already in 1978.

On the other hand, the MiG-31 and F-18 Hornet have never faced each other in aerial combat, so Jaakkola’s statement about the latter’s superiority is not based on combat experience but most likely only on assessments derived from technical specifications. For that reason, it should be taken with a grain of salt—though I myself believe in the superiority of Western technology over Soviet-era production.

Nor, judging by history, is there reason to doubt that Finnish pilots would be more skilled than their Russian counterparts.

* * *

Finally, it should be noted that the most well-known Russian next-generation stealth fighter is the Sukhoi-57, which has been used—and also shot down—in the war in Ukraine. In 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that a total of 76 such aircraft would be procured for the country’s air force by 2028.

It would be interesting to know whether our Defence Forces’ Commander also regards the newer Sukhoi and MiG-35 fighters as clearly inferior to their Western counterparts—or whether he sees them as being capable of holding their own in combat against American and European aircraft.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Did Russia Realize the Risk Was Too Great?
Did a Finnish Fighter Jet Rush to Intercept a Russian Sukhoi Yesterday?
Finns - Among the World’s Best

When Should the Independence of Palestine Be Recognized?

Many states have recognized the State of Palestine. In other words, they have recognized something that does not even exist.

Finland is not, at least for the time being, part of this group. But now the entire Finnish green-left – the Social Democratic Party, the Greens, and the Left Alliance – have demanded that Finland’s government recognize the State of Palestine. In other words – I repeat – recognize something that does not even exist.

President of Finland Alexander Stubb has left this matter to the government and parliament, meaning he has promised to sign the recognition if such a proposal is placed on his desk. It has not yet been presented, but according to Prime Minister Petteri Orpo, “the government is still processing the matter, but our main policy, as decided in the foreign and security policy report, is that we promote the two-state solution.”

In practice, the government is unlikely to make such a proposal to the President, since its other main party, the Finns Party, as well as its smallest party, the Christian Democrats, oppose recognition. The President has also acknowledged this, saying: “Somehow I don’t believe I will receive this proposal before the UN meeting next week.

* * *

For my part, I state that if a new independent state is created in Palestine, I am ready to support its recognition immediately. On the other hand, I do not wish under any circumstances to recognize something that does not even exist.

In this, I follow the model set by Western countries over a hundred years ago – including Germany, which was at war with them – who decided after Finland declared independence in 1917 that recognition would not come until Soviet Russia itself recognized the new state. This led the ruling Senate of Finland to turn to Lenin’s Council of People’s Commissars.

After various stages, Lenin then acknowledged the facts as they were and recognized Finland’s independence. After that, Western nations followed suit one by one, and there has been no ambiguity about Finland’s independence since, even though the Soviet Union tried to occupy the country during World War II – on two separate occasions.

This is the same model I am prepared to recommend for the recognition of Palestine. That is, let the Palestinians lay down their arms, make peace with Israel, and agree on the conditions under which an entity made up of the West Bank and Gaza could achieve independence. And let Finland, in that context, acknowledge the reality – and grant recognition to the new state only then.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Did Finland Remain an Independent Democracy After World War II?
When Should We Recognize the Independence of Palestine?
Palestinian Youth Require More Understanding, Less Aggression

Responding to Russia’s Challenges Is Essential

This morning’s news reported that Poland’s air defense destroyed Russian drones. And this did not happen in Ukraine, but in the airspace of Poland, a NATO member.

Taking into account the recent interference with the aircraft carrying the president of the European Commission, as well as the earlier bombing of a factory in Ukraine owned by Americans and the damaging of EU and UK buildings, it is becoming clear that this is not about accidents but deliberate actions. And such actions can only have one purpose: to test the unity and readiness of Europeans and especially NATO.

At the same time, it is clear that the more loosely the West responds to Russian actions, the more certain it is that Russia will continue to challenge them. The only question is where and in what way.

In this situation, the greatest danger lies with the smallest border states, namely the Baltic countries. Estonia, for instance, has recently been subjected to several airspace violations, the latest just a couple of days ago.

Thus, the question arises: if the West responds weakly or not at all to Russia’s provocations related to the war in Ukraine, could a surprise attack be ahead? For example, a blitzkrieg directed at one of the Baltic states, with the goal of occupying the entire country so quickly that a reluctant NATO would not have time to intervene?

To prevent such a scenario, it is important that Western countries pull themselves together, recognize the obvious facts, and respond forcefully to Russia’s provocations in Ukraine and in its immediate border areas. In doing so, they would send Vladimir Putin the clearest possible message: that there are no easy victories for him in EU and NATO countries—only bitter defeat.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Ukraine’s Missiles and Russia’s Forced Recruitment Set to Topple Putin’s Regime
The War in Ukraine Came Close to Me
Donald Trump’s Meeting With Vladimir Putin: The Advice He Needs

Stalled Melting of Northern Polar Ice Buys the West Time to Strengthen Arctic Capabilities

One of my greatest interests is the visibility of predicted climate change in the surface area of northern sea ice. Therefore, dear readers, allow me to return once again to this topic, as I have not reported on it for some time in this English-language blog.

According to the August statistics, the average surface area of northern sea ice last August was the seventh smallest in its recorded history, which began in 1979. This was because, over the past year, the ice cover was larger than in August of 2024, 2020, 2019, 2016, 2012, and 2007.

This fact fits well with the already established picture that northern sea ice shrank rapidly from the 1990s until 2007, after which its surface area has shown nothing more than random variation. This reality is also illustrated in the figure I have drawn below, where the X-axis shows the ice area in millions of square kilometers and the Y-axis shows the years.

The maximum extent of Arctic sea ice is usually reached in September, so later this month we will see whether the amount of navigable, ice-free water in the Arctic Ocean exceeds that of previous years. Based on the above statistics, this does not seem likely—but neither does it seem entirely impossible.

The size of northern sea ice naturally has its own scientific significance, particularly in the context of the threat of climate change. In addition, it carries major practical geopolitical importance, since during President Trump’s administration the United States has observed that Russia is clearly ahead of others in this respect.

In this sense, the slowdown of ice melting is very good news for the free Western world, as it gives the U.S. and other nations interested in northern maritime regions more time to build up their own capacities for operating in the Arctic. At the same time, this particularly benefits my home country of Finland, which is indisputably the world leader in building icebreakers and stands ready to offer its expertise to other nations as well.

Previous thought on the same topic:

Big Deal in the Cold North: Finland vs. Canada
Northern Sea Ice Area Has Not Responded to Exceptionally High Temperatures
Ice Sheet Losses in Antarctica and Greenland

Burning a Man Alive Led to Life Imprisonment

One of the consequences of the immigration policies practiced by Western countries has been the emergence of Islamist terrorists in Europe. This naturally means a deterioration in the security situation in the West, but also an increased burden on judicial and prison systems.

This came to my mind while reading a news article stating that a "Swedish man," Osama Krayem, had participated in the murder of a Jordanian pilot in 2014 and has now been sentenced to life imprisonment for war crimes and terrorism. The same man had previously been sentenced to 30 years in prison for the 2015 Paris and 2016 Brussels terrorist attacks.

Osama Krayem grew up in Malmö, the Swedish city most affected by immigration, and became radicalized already as a teenager. When the opportunity arose, he traveled to Syria and joined the terrorist group ISIS.

According to the court proceedings, Osama Krayem led the pilot of the plane shot down by ISIS into a metal cage and guarded it until it was set on fire with the man still alive inside. Thus, the sentence handed down now is undoubtedly well deserved, though it naturally cannot undo what was done.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Activism Without Truth
Western Countries Have Neither a Reason Nor a Need to Accept Asylum Seekers from Syria or Gaza
Three Islamists Arrested in Finland on Suspicion of Belonging to a Terrorist Group

 

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?

Getting Populists to Govern Responsibly: What the Netherlands and Finland Can Teach Us

The Dutch government collapsed because the Freedom Party (PVV), led by Geert Wilders, withdrew from the coalition. The reason for this was that Prime Minister Dick Schoof's coalition government failed to implement the strict immigration policy outlined in the coalition agreement quickly enough.

In other words, Schoof and the other coalition parties did want the Freedom Party to support their policies, but they were not, in turn, willing to advance the issues that are of utmost importance to the PVV. As a result, new parliamentary elections will be held in the Netherlands on October 29.

This case is interesting from a Finnish perspective, as Finland also has a government that includes an immigration-critical party, the Finns Party. It has supported initiatives important to the other coalition parties, and as a consequence, has lost much of its support and its position in local politics in municipal and regional elections.

Nevertheless, the Finns Party remains strongly committed to the coalition because the government has, at the same time, pursued a much stricter immigration policy in line with the party’s demands—thus advancing issues crucial to itself and its core voter base. As a result, current, or remaining, supporters of the Finns Party are more satisfied with the government's actions than supporters of other parties.

This is something that should be noted in other Western countries as well. In most of them, immigration policy has been at odds with the will of the people, so a change is bound to happen sooner or later.

This means a stricter immigration policy, in exchange for which immigration-critical parties brought into government understand the necessity of supporting parts of the coalition program they may otherwise dislike. At the same time, forming coalition governments becomes easier and the will expressed by citizens in elections is more accurately implemented.

After all, isn't that ultimately the purpose of democracy? To carry out policies that reflect the will of the people as expressed in elections?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Should the Dutch Do Something About the Fact That Immigrants Don't Tolerate Visiting Jews?
A woman's logic, Putin's test, and the Netherlands' change
Attitudes towards immigrants are not becoming more positive in Western countries

When Should We Recognize the Independence of Palestine?

According to a recent opinion poll, 44 percent of Finns would like to recognize the State of Palestine. This group consists mainly of voters from the Left Alliance, the Greens, and the Social Democrats. On the other hand, on the political right, supporters of the National Coalition Party and the Finns Party are more opposed to the idea than others.

There are hardly any differences between age groups, but women are more inclined than men to support the establishment of a new state in the Middle East—despite the fact that women’s rights would likely not be realized there. Finland’s President Alexander Stubb, for his part, has stated that Finland should also recognize Palestine if the United Kingdom, France, or other major countries do so.

* * *

All of this reminded me of Finland’s own independence from Russian rule. The Declaration of Independence was approved by the Finnish Parliament on December 6, 1917, shortly after the October Revolution.

After that, Finland began seeking support for its independence from Western countries, but they were unwilling to recognize it. Support was first sought from Germany, which initially promised to raise the matter in the peace negotiations with Russia in Brest-Litovsk. However, this did not happen; instead, the Germans said they would wait for Soviet Russia to recognize the new state first.

Consequently, the Finnish government sent a request for recognition of independence to Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany, France, and Britain. Recognition was not requested from Russia, as it was thought that it would be more inclined to approve the matter once the Western powers had already done so.

This hope turned out to be in vain, as the Western countries urged the Prime Minister to turn to the Bolshevik government of Russia, led by Lenin. The Finnish Prime Minister, however, was reluctant to do so, as he did not want to acknowledge the Bolsheviks as the legitimate rulers of Russia.

Eventually, on December 22, the Finnish Parliament decided to seek recognition not from the Bolshevik government, but from the Russian Constituent Assembly, which was expected to convene soon and where the majority was made up of Russia’s more moderate left-wing parties. Germany, however, intervened and pressured the Finnish government to approach Lenin’s Council of People's Commissars instead.

This is what happened, and Lenin did recognize Finland’s independence. He did so because he believed that supporting the right of national minorities to secede would further the Bolsheviks’ main goal—the spread of the socialist revolution. In his view, the separation should only be temporary, as he assumed that the small nations breaking away from Russia would later voluntarily rejoin either the Russian socialist federation or a broader worldwide Soviet union.

* * *

As for myself, when it comes to recognizing Palestinian independence, I believe the time is not yet right. After all, there isn’t even a theoretically independent Arab state in the Holy Land that would meet the criteria for statehood.

However, I would be ready to recognize Palestine immediately after Israel does. In other words, I would act in the same way that the Western countries did when they eventually recognized Finland’s independence.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Gambling Addiction and the Shadowy Instigator
The Complete Demilitarization of Gaza: What Would It Mean for the Palestinians?
Independence day of Finland now and 83 years ago

Elections in Venezuela Do Not Offer Reason for Optimism

Although Western countries have long been more or less functioning democracies, this is not the case everywhere. The world’s first socialist state, the Soviet Union, did collapse under its own impossibility back in 1991, but that doesn’t mean socialism lacks support in today’s world.

An example of this unfortunate fact was seen over the weekend in Venezuela, where the socialist party received as much as 83 percent of the vote in Sunday’s parliamentary — or National Assembly — elections. In addition, a group close to the socialists gained another six percent.

The Venezuelan opposition gathered only 5.17 percent of the votes. This was influenced by the fact that many opposition leaders had urged their supporters to boycott the elections, claiming that President Nicolás Maduro had fraudulently won last year’s presidential election. This view is also shared by the international community.

It remains to be seen what Venezuela’s socialists will do with their electoral victory. However, their use of power so far does not offer much reason for optimism.

According to Wikipedia: "During the 21st century, under the leadership of socialist populist Hugo Chávez and his successor Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan economy has collapsed, prompting millions of citizens to flee Venezuela. GDP has fallen by 80 percent in less than a decade. The economy is characterized by corruption, food shortages, unemployment, mismanagement of the oil sector, and since 2014, hyperinflation. As of 2024, inflation has stabilized at 59.61%."

This can be compared to the time before the socialists came to power. Back then, Venezuela's economy was growing strongly, and for example, GDP per capita rose by as much as 400 percent between 2003 and 2010 — in just seven years. A similar development can hardly be expected based on the election results we’ve just seen.

Of course, Venezuela is just one of many countries that still believe in socialism, but in practice, it is a fairly representative example of its kind. And that is why it’s worth wondering why socialism still enjoys so much support around the world — not only in developing countries but also in prosperous Western nations like Finland.

Admittedly, here the socialists don’t want to call their economic thinking socialism. Instead, they "only" aim to raise taxes and transfer as many of society’s functions as possible under the responsibility of the public sector — in other words, to implement socialism without naming it for what it is.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Marx in the Classroom: How Ideological Education Shaped Careers and Values
Does China prove the superiority of market economy?
Lessons from Venezuela

Could Mohammed Sinwar’s Death Mark a Turning Point Toward Peace

Israel has come under increasingly critical scrutiny in Western media due to its ongoing fight aimed at destroying the terrorist organization Hamas, a fight in which it has used questionable tactics such as blocking aid shipments and relocating populations from one place to another, even abroad. So far, however, Western criticism has not appeared to influence the actions of the Israeli military.

It is, of course, extremely unlikely that Israel will succeed in completely destroying Hamas. Nevertheless, it is quite possible that the organization’s ability to continue operating will be significantly diminished.

In this context, the reported discovery of the body of Hamas's military wing leader, Mohammed Sinwar, in a tunnel located in the grounds of a hospital in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, is excellent news for Israelis and for all people around the world who oppose terrorism.

So far, however, the discovery has not been confirmed by either Hamas or the Israeli military, so it is still wise to hold off on major celebrations in Jerusalem or anywhere else. And to hope that Hamas will finally understand that it must release the remaining hostages and lay down its arms, so that the rebuilding of a future for the Palestinian people can, once again, begin.

In addition, all Palestinians should consider whether it might finally be time to acknowledge the facts and seek to build their future by recognizing the existence of the State of Israel and striving to establish cooperation with its Jewish residents. And to hope that such a path is still possible after nearly 80 years of ongoing hostility.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Why Hamas Is Unwilling to Give Up Its Weapons
Understanding of Facts is Increasing in the Middle East
Western Countries Have Neither a Reason Nor a Need to Accept Asylum Seekers from Syria or Gaza

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

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

Iran Rejects Direct Nuclear Talks with U.S., Calls Them Pointless

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called direct nuclear negotiations with the U.S. "pointless" as Iran refused to engage in such talks with the United States.

This was a response to U.S. President Donald Trump, who had said on Thursday that he wanted to negotiate directly with Iran. According to Trump, the parties would understand each other better without intermediaries, allowing negotiations to progress more quickly.

According to Araghchi, it is futile to negotiate directly with a party that threatens violent actions and violates the UN Charter. The minister also said that U.S. officials present differing positions among themselves.

In addition, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stated that Iran could only negotiate with the United States "on an equal footing." Iran has also denied accusations from the United States and Western countries regarding the development of nuclear weapons, insisting that its nuclear program is intended solely for civilian purposes.

It thus remains to be seen whether President Trump will succeed in enticing the Iranians to the negotiating table. However, it is already clear that if Israel has even the slightest suspicion that Iran is on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon, it would not hesitate to strike the mullah-led state with extreme force.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Israel’s Strike on Iran: Ripple Effects for the Middle East, Russia, and Global Stability
Iranian Missile Attack was Followed by Humorous Flowers
Mentally Elementary-School-Aged Were Attacked, But Will Iran Come to Their Aid?

Western Countries Have Neither a Reason Nor a Need to Accept Asylum Seekers from Syria or Gaza

After the Syrian revolution, many believed that a new and better era was dawning for the country. This was despite the fact that the HTS alliance, which came to power in December, has an Islamist background.

However, the persecution of Syria’s minorities recently made headlines, after which President Ahmed al-Sharaa promised to end the violence and arbitrary executions. Now, however, it has emerged that Alawites who fled to Lebanon have a different view.

According to one of them, “Bashar al-Assad is a murderer, but al-Sharaa is even worse. Words cannot describe the horrors.” 

A Christian, on the other hand, claimed that government forces had shot his father. According to him, “The troops entered our house, and my father was the only one home. Otherwise, we would all be dead.”

At this stage, it is difficult to assess the accuracy of these accounts, as there is no precise information available on the violence that has occurred. Allegations suggest that, in response to uprisings against the new government’s fighters, Islamists have retaliated ISIS-style with arbitrary executions and by kidnapping women as sex slaves.

If this has indeed happened, it is, of course, an extremely serious matter. On the other hand, it is clear that people who have fled Syria are not necessarily reliable sources.

Therefore, it would be important for the intelligence agencies of other countries to obtain more reliable information about what is currently happening in Syria. And if the allegations of crimes described above are confirmed—or especially if they appear to be becoming the new norm—the rest of the world must take action.

Or alternatively, acknowledge the situation and let people live in the reality of their own society without even trying to change it. While at the same time declaring that all cultures are equally good. And to understand that for this very reason, Western countries have neither a reason nor a need to accept asylum seekers from Syria.

* * *

Israel attacked Gaza again some time ago, stating that the reason was that Hamas had been preparing attacks on Israeli territory. This justification became very clear today, when Hamas' military wing announced that it had fired rockets into Israel.

One of the rockets was intercepted, and two fell in uninhabited areas within Israel. The almost certain consequence of this will be an Israeli counterstrike, which will cause even greater suffering for the people of Gaza, who are already experiencing hard times.

Also in this case, Western people should acknowledge that all cultures are equally good. And understand that therefore they have no reason to accept even a single Palestinian asylum seeker.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Uncertain Horizons: Syria's Post-Assad Era
The Need for Asylum Among Syrians Disappeared with the Regime Change
On the Consequences of Russian Inability in Syria

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

Javier Milei and the Great Western Opportunity

The President of Argentina, Javier Milei, criticized phenomena related to feminism, DEI principles, environmental radicalism, and gender ideology at the World Economic Forum meeting. He described mass immigration and the cultural shame of Western nations as self-destructive and called for a historical shift in the West.

By this, he primarily referred to traditional Western values, such as individual freedom and equality of opportunity. In contrast, he viewed their recent challengers—woke ideology and state interventionism—as questionable and as the root causes of the West’s current problems, arguing that they rely on collectivist ideology and work against individual liberty.

Instead of contemporary value liberalism, Milei identified the pillars of Western civilization as respect for freedom and private property, a free market economy, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. He stated that these values inherently include personal responsibility for one’s livelihood, equality before the law, and equality of opportunity.

According to the Argentine president, each fundamental pillar of our civilization has been replaced with a distorted version of itself, leading to a situation where luxuries acquired at the expense of others have become human rights, and institutions have taken on the role of punishing dissenting opinions.

Thus, in Milei’s view, the DEI movement, immigration, environmental radicalism, and gender ideology serve only the expansion of the state and distort Western ideals. Feminism and gender ideology, he argued, have become detached from equality and now promote a struggle between the sexes instead of advocating for the equal treatment of men and women.

He also questioned why Westerners today see themselves as responsible for all the world’s evils and believe they must atone by opening their borders to everyone—even if this leads to reverse colonialism and the collective suicide of Western nations.

In the short term, the primary beneficiaries of this development are political movements that push a distorted worldview, but ultimately, they too will collapse as societies crumble.

* * *

According to Milei, we are now at a turning point, where a historic opportunity for great change is emerging. It remains to be seen whether the West will seize this opportunity.

Winds of change have already swept through Milei’s Argentina, my home country of Finland, Italy, and the USA. Next, it will be up to the German people, who will elect a new parliament on February 23.

At the moment, it appears that the election in Germany will be won by AfD and CDU/CSU, with the former in particular aligning closely with Milei’s stance on immigration. Meanwhile, the green-left coalition advocating progressive liberal values seems poised for a crushing defeat.

It remains to be seen whether change will take place in Germany and across the West. And even if it does, will the people push this transformation far into the future, or will the 2020s be remembered as just another fleeting anomaly on the path of Western decline—much like the era of Constantine the Great in Roman history?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Friedrich Merz Needs the AfD – A Precedent from Finland
Prediction: Sharia law in force in the United Kingdom, Belgium, and France by the year 2044
A white family does not represent real Londoners