Search

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)

Non-fiction writer Ari Haasio said that there would be no Finns without immigration. He described Finland's story as a narrative of its people: they had changed both society and the notion of Finnishness, and they did not remain stagnant. https://t.co/JVAY5tRSDC #maahanmuutto #Suomi #kulttuuri #FI (translated)

Urho Haho wrote that he had been amused by the panic of the National Coalition's Niilo Heinonen and his partners. According to Haho, Heinonen tried to commit the city to what he described as fanatical climate goals together with the Greens in the Oulu city council. Haho believed that Heinonen was now presenting himself as right-wing, even though he was not distinguishable from the Greens in Oulu. #politiikka #Oulu #ilmasto (translated)

Mats Uotila wrote that the EU had a new social climate fund that, according to him, motorists would practically finance while refueling. He mentioned that the fund would pay for, for example, energy renovations for Greeks and said he nearly used an ugly word to describe the situation. https://t.co/BgKQyJ6HMV #ilmasto #EU #sosiaalisuus (translated)

ProFin wrote that, according to him, Ukraine had not heard about the ceasefire announced by Trump. He suggested that Trump might think he could announce a ceasefire without the parties knowing and hinted that this was influenced by the voices he heard in his head. #Ukraina #Trump #politiikka (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that Finland should take seriously Russia's alleged plans to assassinate leaders of the European defense industry. According to him, European intelligence services had warned that Russia had intensified its assassination plots targeting business executives. Possible targets included not only large arms manufacturers but also smaller defense technology companies, especially manufacturers of drones and their components. Vanhanen referred to a plan revealed in 2024 to assassinate Armin Papperger, CEO of the German company Rheinmetall. He wrote that more recent intelligence data indicated broader and more systematic actions beyond individual cases. According to Vanhanen, Russia's intention was to undermine the European defense industry, intimidate its business leaders, complicate support for Ukraine, and disrupt the strengthening of Europe's defense capabilities. Vanhanen urged an urgent assessment of whether the protection of key personnel in Finland's defense industry is adequate. He suggested that the security police, police, and defense administration work together with companies to identify individuals at special risk and ensure preemptive action against threats. He proposed, if necessary, strengthening personal protection, enhancing counterintelligence efforts against companies, and improving information sharing among authorities. According to Vanhanen, Finland should not wait for the first attack on its territory before preparing. https://t.co/xVZMYe1R7e #Puolustusteollisuus #Venäjä #Suomi (translated)

Keijo Kaarisade wrote that when condemning the oppression of women, it was agreed, in his opinion, to speak vaguely about religions and cultures without referring to Islam. He criticized that a member of the National Coalition Party had been assigned to the matter and they themselves had followed along, and said that he would have to explain the issue to the imam again with Petteri. https://t.co/bbPqxHiqBm #naistenoikeudet #uskonto #kulttuuri (translated)

Mika Merano wrote that he had observed that some people who consider themselves conscious held the view that opposing Islam was racism. He questioned this interpretation and wondered why a Finn who converted to Islam but still viewed it and its teachings as harmful to Western modern democracies would, in his view, be considered a racist towards another Finn. Merano stated that he did not understand the logic of this reasoning. #rasismi #islam #demokratia (translated)

Sture Fjäder wrote that his party was in third place and the support for the PS had increased. According to him, the party's support would not grow unless its chairman announced that the National Coalition Party would not join a blue-red government. Fjäder mentioned that the discussion was heated about whether the National Coalition Party would join a blue-red government instead of a right-center government, and estimated that this would undermine the party's support. #vaalit2027 https://t.co/FI3ByOSP3i #vaalit #politiikka #puolueet (translated)