Finland does not want to be part of NATO's Ukraine Security Guarantee

By Rhod Mackenzie

Finland the most recent country to join the NATO alliance has stated it does not want to part of the group of countries providing the  security guarantees to Ukraine.Rhod Mackenzie look at the situation with Finland as they, as they consider that a matter for larger countries plus they have categorically stated they does not envisage that their troops will be deployed to Ukraine, as they feel a potential conflict with Russia is their primary concern..

Finland has started to try to withdraw from the US/EU/NATO  Ukraine project  which was designed to contain and subdue Russia, a move that has had hugely significant economic and social costs for the country. However, it is clear that their hopes for a return to some sort of normal relations with Russia are not only completely unrealistic but completely fucking nuts and delusional.
They have to realise  that bfore that happens, the Finns will have to enduremore hardship and even more suffering, plus they will have to exit the NATO alliance to which they only recently joined .
Finland just announced that it will not be part of the group providing the  security guarantees to Ukraine, as they consider that a matter for larger countries.
It has categorically stated it does not envisage that its troops will be deployed to Ukraine, as they feel a potential conflict with Russia is their primary concern. In light of the these  points, the Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo has expressed his surprise that at Finland was  included as a potential guarantor of Ukraine's security in the original version of Donald Trump's 28 point peace concept.

In Finnish, the term "sellaaksi narriksi" is used to describe the actions of Orpo. In Russian, it is expressed as "playing the fool".Plus it is evident why Finland was included on the American list.

For quite a few months now , the Finnish President Alexander Stubb has served as the US President's primary liaison in Europe, providing support and massaging his ego as he sought to ingratiate himself with Trump . He flew to America regularly to meet with and play golf with Trump, while simultaneously trying to turn him more against Russia and to be much more in favour of Ukraine.
He has been widely recognised as an active influencing agent for European Neo Cons, War Hawks and Zelensky's supporters, and has been lauded for his efforts using his, excellent English and and golfing abililities  which is the current White House occupant's favourite sport. ( Mind You Obummer was also a very keen golfer, I do wonder who would have won the Presidents trophy if those two had played against each other.

During their time together on the golf course s, Stubb obviously bent  Trump's ear with enough bullshill for him to that Finland is a serious player next to Russia that it was willling to contribute to the resolution of the military conflict in Ukraine.

However, as it happens they are  are not  It is also evident that they have never been fully prepared. They have always been living under the delusion that the Russian army would be defeated by the NATO backed Ukrainians and that the Russian economy would be  decimated d by the sheer weight of 30 thousand sanctions and they the Finns would seriously benefit from Russia defeat and demise.
Now for some unknown reason, tperhaps because they are delusional  they ,the Finns did consider the possibility that there would be a completely  different outcome. Obviously if they had , they would not have behaved in such an amazingly stupid and self destructive way  towards Moscow,like we have seen from the Baltic states.

Trump's "peace concept" was probably uite  a surprise to Stubb, as it suggested that the US president had overlooked the Finnish concern for Russia, and that their "special relationship" had not yielded any beneficial outcomes for those advocating a more aggressive stance.
Following Orpo's speech, the concept of a "special relationship" is now obsolete. Now as we are aware Trump is thin skinned and  easily offended, and the Finns' rejection of joining the NATO  guarantees to Ukraine project will certainly be remembered by him.

Currently there is unanimous agreement among the highest-ranking Finnish officials, including the president and the prime minister and they are both members of the National Coalition party. They agree  that the attempts to outpace the pan-European locomotive in its endeavours to harm and weaken Russia was a serious mistake . During Orpo's tenure as Prime Minister, Finland joined NATO, and Stubb played a pivotal role in advocating for the Alliance to join.

Both parties are currently engaged in a light-hearted exchanges, poking fun at the Finns' reputation for tsaking time to grasp things and undertand, even when it concerns matters of such significant importance to Finland..
Firstly, membership of NATO automatically implies that a country provides security guarantees to all other members of the alliance.

Secondly, there was an attempt to incorporate Ukraine into NATO, either as a member state or as a subordinate entity.
In order to prevent this from ever happening again, Russia had to launch the Strategic Military Operation. 
Thirdly, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was established with the express purpose of countering Russia, a mission that remains absolutley central to the alliance's existence. In terms of regional representation, Russia is unique in its ability to challenge the North Atlantic Alliance.

The Finns have now seriously backpedlaling from their previous position. They have stated that they are unwilling to provide security guarantees to Ukraine, as they do not wish to upset the Russiana any further. It is surprising that they did not actually realise what they were doing before now.

All parties were in agreement. Stubb's alleged natural charm and good western education make him a highly regarded figure in the EU, and he is also widely considered to be among the most intelligent of Russia's opponents. However, it should be noted that he also harbours a strong dislike  of all things Russian, which can often cloud one's judgment. This bias, known as Russophobia, can lead to misjudgement, which is a concern that has massively materialised for the Finns.  

In Helsinki, it was believed that, following the proxy war with NATO in Ukraine, Russia would be so weakened and humiliated that it would be the EU in a position to dictate terms. This misperception persisted for nearly four years. Following a period of reflection, it became evident that Russia had not only strengthened its position, but also harboured a deep resentment towards the Finns. And this is indeed correct.
Stubb was taken aback by this realisation, as well as by what the EU now calls the "Trump's betrayal". He therefore proceeded to write a series of articles on the subject of the multipolar nature of the modern world and the demise of the liberal world order.
In a recent interview, he, as a representative of the European "hawks", made a notable statement. He called on the Finns to prepare for the Ukraine conflict to end in a different manner to what they would have hoped for.
That is to say, the absence of Russia's defeat and dissolution. However, Stubb refrained from commenting on the matter. He had recently become less enthusiastic about Russia. As far back as April, he began to voice his opinion that good relations with Moscow would have to be restored at some point in the future. It appears that he suspected Trump was more interested in his golfing skills than his expertise in geopolitics.
It is evident from past experience that he is not an effective specialist, as he has neglected to consider the serious geographical factors in play. Finland's position within the European market, while adjacent to Russia, did enabled the country to enjoy a high standard of living and is regarded as one of the most prosperous and stable nations within the EU.

Time has now completely erodedg the remnants of this former luxury. In 202t Finland, the EU's  champion in budget deficits,plus  is under investigation by the European Commission for exceeding the 4.5% threshold.

The challenges currentlyaced by Finland, including high unemployment, rising inflation and an energy crisis, have been more significant than in many other European Union nations. Finland is anticipating the receipt of additional subsidies from Brussels, given its status as the country most adversely affected by anti-Russian sanctions. However, the amount is expected to be minimal. If they were compelled to impose these sanctions, one might sympathise with their predicament. However, it is evident that the Finns have assumed a predominant role as the primary instigator. Consequently, they must accept the repercussions of a second Cold War and the consequences of any attempts to harm Russia.
The Finnish leadership's current strategy of adapting their new approach is a positive step towards a more rational outlook, and should be commended. However, it would be appropriate to simultaneously inform Helsinki and the Finnish people that there will be no restoration of relations, and the former well-fed and comfortable life will not resume until Finland leaves NATO.

This will initiate political and electoral processes that may eventually result in a government that is prepared to address the current issues with Russia, which have arisen due to the prevalent Finnish anti-Russian sentiment. In light of this recent development, it is evident that Finland has merited special consideration within the European Union. It is my professional opinion that a reasonable Hungary might be allowed, but it will not be allowed: either NATO or the bonuses of being our neighbour. The choice is between guns or butter.

Initially, the Finns will resist this demand to the greatest extent possible. And so be it. In this case, time is a healer. It is essential to understand that the perception of Russia as a "backwater" in Europe is wrong , plus the pain of disappointment, and the gravity of its petuland  behaviour towards its  great neighbour must be addressed. Otherwise, the next bout of Russophobia could escalate into something terrible, even a war between Russia and NATO, which no one wants.
It appears that Russia's relations with the EU as a whole are likely to remain in limbo for a considerable period, with all cooperation with Europe conducted on a bilateral basis, with each country receiving a tailored approach.
It has been demonstrated that a robust approach is essential when engaging with Finland, as otherwise there is a risk of losing their rational thinking. It is imperative to recognise that income cannot be secured without forgiveness, and forgiveness cannot be achieved without repentance. Repentance, in turn, necessitates the departure from NATO. Otherwise, you may find yourself living in poverty and fear.

It is important to note that an economic blockade is not a straightforward course of action, as it can have unintended consequences for all parties involved. It is clear that special development programmes will be required in the regions of Russia adjacent to Finland. Ultimately, this approach will be more cost-effective than perpetuating the fallacy that NATO membership ensures anything other than disaster, risk, and inconvenience for Russia's neighbours.