Search

The author claimed that the United States demanded Ukraine to stop attacks on Russian oil refineries, but he stated that Russia was not asked to stop attacks on Ukrainian civilian targets. He mentioned that Ukraine proposed a reciprocal ceasefire for energy-related targets. #Ukraina #Venäjä #konflikti #UA #US #RU (translated)

Henri Vanhanen criticized Donald Trump's actions in the Ukraine war, noting that he declared agreements about which there was uncertainty, while pressuring Ukraine in a way that benefited Vladimir Putin. As a recent example, Vanhanen pointed to Trump’s announced energy ceasefire. According to him, Volodymyr Zelensky heard about it practically for the first time from the media, Russia had not confirmed the agreement, and continued, according to Zelensky, attacks on Ukraine's power plants. Vanhanen asked what kind of ceasefire it was if the other party did not know what had been agreed upon. He suggested that Zelensky had to be cautious of Trump’s criticism to avoid being blamed for obstructing peace. Vanhanen referred to the Financial Times reporting that the United States threatened to cut off arms and intelligence supplies to Ukraine unless the country stopped attacks on Russian energy infrastructure. He also wrote that Trump agreed to buy Russian diesel, demanded Ukraine to cease attacks on Russian oil refineries, and encouraged a change of leadership in Ukraine. Vanhanen estimated that the war in Iran and the resulting fuel prices, the upcoming midterm elections, and the need to show results might explain Trump’s urgency to secure an agreement. According to him, Trump aimed for cheaper diesel and a visible peace political achievement, while Putin would benefit from a decrease in attacks on Russia’s energy sector. Vanhanen noted that the alignment of these goals seemed to occur at Ukraine’s expense. Vanhanen stated that he did not oppose a ceasefire if it protected Ukrainians and also bound Russia. However, he observed that for Trump, merely declaring an agreement seemed to suffice, even without information about its terms or Russia's commitment. Vanhanen assessed that Russia would benefit from a situation in which the United States sought a quick agreement and Ukraine was cautious not to offend Trump. In such conditions, he believed Putin could gain concessions from Trump without Russia needing to win against Ukraine at the negotiating table. #Ukraina #Trump #Venäjä (translated)

Jarno Limnell wrote that the United States' purchases of Russian diesel would bring revenue to Russia's war chest. According to him, Donald Trump simultaneously demanded that Ukraine stop attacks on Russian oil refineries and change its president. Limnell assessed that this meant a significant change in the strategic situation of the war. #Venäjä #Ukraina #diplomatia (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that Donald Trump's Russia policy may not have been guided by a coherent strategy. According to him, Trump made decisions one by one, seeking quick political gains, and then had to fix the consequences. In his assessment, Vanhanen linked Trump's diminished commitment to arming Ukraine, the energy price increases resulting from the war in Iran, and the recent diesel trade with Russia. He believed that trade could bolster the Russian economy and give Vladimir Putin a means to pressure Ukraine into halting strikes on Russia's oil refineries. Vanhanen also criticized Trump for condemning strikes that he claimed weakened Russia's war economy. Vanhanen noted that Trump’s administration had not sought significant new funding from Congress for arming Ukraine. According to him, previously agreed deliveries had continued, and European countries had purchased American weapons for Ukraine. He stated that Trump was not fundamentally on the side of Ukraine or Europe but was primarily pursuing his own interests. According to Vanhanen, Finland's security should not be built on the assumption that there is a plan behind Trump's decisions that would turn in favor of Europe. He urged preparedness for the possibility that U.S. aid could be delayed or smaller than expected, to strengthen the availability of defense equipment and air defense, and to deepen cooperation with Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Britain, Poland, and the Baltic countries. He also believed that Europe should be able to support Ukraine and maintain economic pressure on Russia by its own means. #Trump #Venäjä #Ukraina (translated)

Saara Huhtasaari criticized Petteri Orpo's reaction to the agreement on diesel deliveries between Trump and Putin, describing it as a "terrible disappointment." She characterized Orpo as a European puppet and said he only reacts when the superpower agreement does not fit his narrative of virtue signaling. According to Huhtasaari, Orpo, Alexander Stubb, and the entire European line have been a disappointment for years. She criticized the support given to Ukraine funded by taxpayers, the sanctions against Russia, which she claimed harmed those who imposed them, and the criticism from the United States when, according to her, Washington did not follow Brussels' line. Huhtasaari wrote that the diesel delivery agreement had led to the condemnation of the erosion of sanctions and the accumulation of Putin's war chest. She claimed that the same parties had been supporting the diversion of billions to Ukraine for years and attacks on Russian oil refineries while also wondering about high fuel prices. #EU #Trump #Putin (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that the agreement announced by Donald Trump with Vladimir Putin to bring millions of tons of Russian diesel to the global market would be very bad news for Ukraine. According to Vanhanen, the arrangement would give Russia new opportunities to earn from energy exports, even though its war of aggression in Ukraine would continue. Vanhanen assessed that the agreement could help Russia mitigate the economic impacts of the strikes on Ukraine's oil refineries. He wrote that the strikes had caused problems and fuel shortages for Russia. In his view, facilitating Russia's energy exports would also reduce the pressure on Putin to negotiate an end to the war. Vanhanen considered it possible that the promised deliveries might not materialize, as he claimed Russia's refining capacity had suffered from the strikes. Vanhanen speculated that Trump was aiming for lower fuel prices in the United States before the midterm elections, but questioned the agreement's impact on prices. He also found the political message of the agreement concerning: in his view, the Kremlin could present it as evidence that Russia is not isolated and that the U.S. president is willing to do business with it. According to Vanhanen, the agreement could place Ukraine's strikes on Russia's oil industry in conflict with Washington's fuel price objectives. He urged Europe to prepare for greater responsibility in supporting Ukraine and pressuring Russia, and maintained that Russia's war economy should not be helped to recover. https://t.co/gpRe9acHoW #Ukraina #Venäjä #Trump (translated)

According to the author, peace had become a side issue in the negotiations about Ukraine, and what was central was the United States' share of Russian energy. He estimated that the negotiations would not lead to a lasting peace. The author stated that the war had closed the Strait of Hormuz and raised the price of oil, and he assessed that Putin had not promised Trump anything without concessions. https://t.co/YEn2YcxxQr #Ukraina #rauha #energia #UA #US #RU #IR (translated)

The author stated that Trump announced he had agreed with Putin that Russia would immediately start delivering millions of tons of diesel to the global market and the United States. He criticized the agreement and claimed that the Kremlin could use the revenue from the deliveries to destroy Ukraine. In addition, he estimated that attacks on Ukrainian oil refineries would end up on Trump's blacklist. https://t.co/fTln4ptN4p #Trump #Putin #Ukraina #US #RU #UA (translated)

Päivi Korpivaara wrote that Neste had made its best ever result from January 1 to June 30, 2026, with a profit of one billion euros. According to her, there was no real competition in Finland after the closure of Teboil, even though the state owned 44 percent of Neste. Korpivaara claimed that the government could do nothing about the situation and accused oil companies of robbing the people. She considered Jani's action to be right. #Neste #öljy #kilpailu (translated)

Tanja Aidanjuuri wrote that the plan in Helsinki to ban advertising of fossil fuels could, according to her, cost the city nearly 100 million euros in advertising revenue. She criticized the proposal as unnecessary and absurd and listed as examples of potentially restricted advertising gasoline and diesel cars, flights, cruises, synthetic clothing, plastic products, and fossil fuels. Aidanjuuri described that the Greens in Vantaa could, in her opinion, follow the same line and that advertising would then practically be limited to, for example, veggie sausages, rainbow flags, and new mosques. She also pointed out that taxpayer money would be used for the handling of the matter. Aidanjuuri cited a proposal stating that the advertising ban would be investigated in the preparation of the next outdoor advertising agreement for Helsinki's public areas and that the advertising agreements of Urban Traffic Ltd would also be taken into account. The assessment would examine, among other things, the legal boundaries of the ban, its climate and environmental impacts, effects on the city's economy, the city's own communication and marketing, as well as the media landscape. The proposal also mentioned the possibility of examining advertising's ethical principles more broadly and limiting outdoor advertising from entities considered to violate human rights and particularly polluting industries. #Helsinki #ilmastonmuutos #mainonta (translated)

Jukka Lepikkö wrote that crude oil exports from the Middle East had returned to levels prior to the beginning of the Iran war and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. According to him, the United States had gained control of the strait, and some oil was passing by it. Lepikkö assessed that Iran appeared almost defenseless. #Iran (translated)