Finland should attend the next BRICKS summit. That would strengthen its ties with a rising economic powerhouse. Meanwhile, the Western alliance is experiencing a departure from its ranks. Ever more countries are filing membership applications to become members of BRICS.
It’s regrettable that Finland, once a staunch peace advocate, is now at the forefront of NATO expansionism. This aggressive stance undermines Finland’s traditional role as a peacekeeper and poses a severe threat to regional stability. Coupled with the EU Commission’s warmongering and its leader’s alleged corruption, Finland risks finding itself on the wrong side of the fence.
Several countries, either members or intending to join, are expected to attend the upcoming BRICS summit in Russia. The summit would play an essential role in forthcoming economic changes that rattle the global economy in the coming months. One of the most notable changes is ceasing to use the U.S. dollar as a trading currency and creating its banking system to overcome the U.S.-led sanctions affecting some of the members of the BRICS. The move would also make the Western sanctions less effective and allow the global economy to be more accessible from Western hegemony and man-made disasters like regional clashes, thus leading to global economic turmoil.
Despite Finland’s strong alignment with the Western coalition, it can potentially strengthen relations with BRICS countries. This strategic move could help mitigate the adverse effects of NATO’s aggressive expansionism and the U.S.-led economic coercion on countries that the United States sees as adversaries. By doing so, Finland could play a significant role in promoting global economic growth and stability.
Defining Moments in Finland’s History
The three events transformed Finland from an autonomous state focused on diplomacy and peace into a country that now advocates aggressive NATO expansionism and warmongering.
On January 1, 1995, Finland joined the EU, becoming a member of a wannabe totalitarian regime.
Since then, the EU has transformed from a bloc meant to unify Europe, strengthening its economy and defensive capability, to a warmongering bloc of nations that preaches NATO expansionism and uses coercion, corruption, and blackmail to achieve its will.
The current EU policy is that you either yield or face the consequences.
Some European countries have faced criticism from the EU Commission when they expressed differing opinions about EU policies. However, they remain committed to prioritizing their country’s well-being over what they perceive as corrupt practices within the EU leadership.
On April 4, 2023, Finland became a fully pledged NATO member.
NATO membership meant that Finland had to adjust its foreign policy and global perception to align with NATO; it had to become a viable military deterrent with NATO support.
To accomplish this, Finland had to enhance its defensive capabilities and revise the training it offered to its conscripts. For decades, the Finnish army’s training strategies have been defense-oriented, but due to its new role, it must focus more on offensive capabilities.
It is only a matter of time and aggressive U.S. lobbying efforts when Finland could soon host the U.S. nuclear deterrent on Finnish soil. It comes in the form of nuclear strike-capable missiles housed in selected military bases in Finland, which are occupied by U.S. military personnel.
On September 1, 2024, Finland ratified the Defense Cooperation Agreement (DCA) with the United States, thus allowing the U.S. military to occupy Finland.
The Finnish government viewed this as a win-win for Finland; some viewed it as the beginning of the deteriorating foreign relations with its long-time neighbor, Russia. Many still struggle to recognize that Finland had no noteworthy natural enemy that could have imposed an imminent threat to Finland before joining NATO and ratifying the DCA agreement.
The future of Finland may involve direct strikes on Finnish soil or intentional border violations by the Russian army, whether by air or land. The blame for these potential actions lies squarely on the U.S. hegemony’s decision to wage war on its long-time adversary, Russia (then Soviet Union).
Finnish politicians overlook this and many other adverse effects of the NATO and DCA agreement. The government’s narrow-minded view of things is solely dictated by the narrative of its long-time ally, the United States.
The Presidents Who Shaped Tomorrow
The last two presidents of Finland have had a lasting effect on the country’s well-being. The former president, Sauli Niinistö (2012-2024), was and is still a vocal supporter of NATO membership. His decision to join was finalized after Ukraine was invaded. The false narrative of the U.S. also led Niinistö to seek long-term defense cooperation with the U.S., resulting in increased tension in the region.
The incumbent president, Alexander Stubb, alienates Finland from its long-term trading partners. Continuing the work of his predecessor, Stubb keeps offering Finland’s steadfast support for NATO and the U.S. Unless Stubb can widen his perspective and see beyond his pro-America stance, Finland will eventually lose its self-rule.
The cycle of wrong can be mended
It is still not too late for Finland to change its course of action as it has yet to face the post-war situation in Europe if the never-ending war in Ukraine reaches a political settlement. However, like many other things affecting Europe today, it is in the hands of the U.S. government.
The power change in Washington could tip the balance in Europe. According to the latest unconfirmed news, the strong contender to become the 47th president of the United States has warned allies to stop funding Ukraine and negotiate a settlement between warring factions. That, among other affairs, would also affect Finland.
Although post-war Ukraine will need years of rebuilding and stabilizing, it will create business opportunities for Finnish companies and know-how. However, advertising Ukraine as a potential “business opportunity” is misleading, considering the events that led to the evolving situation. Russia alone isn’t responsible for the events that have led to the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians as well as military personnel and immense material loss on both sides. There is clear and present evidence that for decades, the aggressive NATO expansionism has caused regional conflicts all over the globe. Therefore, Ukraine would not be an exception to the rule.
Finland has become a part of the NATO narrative, thus making it complicit in the alleged war crimes and other atrocities NATO commits today and in years to come.
