Further highlights about the new system change

We all can feel that there is a fundamental change taking now place in the system of international relations. However, most of us don’t still, at least officially, acknowledge where this immediate change will take us. Thus, we will have several incoming elections where the voters must elect their candidates in a way without knowing about how these newly elected representatives will act in the near future. Is this correct towards those who will be voting and those who will be elected?

I have only three points to discuss this matter shortly here:

1. Let me remind you about history: it has occurred many times that representatives of a State have had to make ad-hoc decisions without consulting with the electorate in advance about a possible outcome of the negotiations. This is anyways acceptable as the representatives have been given the power to make decisions they find most suitable and favourable in the said situation by the electorate.

2. We have the populist side and the liberal (globalist), free democracy side, of which I belong to the latter one. Let us still approve that even globalism has its negative sides, as well as so-called free market economy. If we will choose free market economy, as an endgame solution, we will end in a global situation where the power is in very few hands and the liberalism as well as the freedom to choose and the freedom of change will be gone.

3. Altogether, at the moment it looks like all the systems adopted solely will lead to an unacceptable result and therefore I still would prefer that the world allowed different systems and different ideas to learn from each other.

And, my answer to my own question is: It is correct by the representatives that have been voted to make decisions, to do as they find best, if this is the meaning of the electorate. It is as well correct by the electorate to let the elected representatives to take necessary decisions in case the electorate has not reserved to itself a sole voting right in certain matters or in certain intervals regarding specific issues (for example the right to choose a president in Finland every six years) or in case this right has been given to the electorate by the elected representatives or by the national law.Finally, there are still plenty of matters to be reserved to decisions by those who really have the capacity for that.

Kategoria(t): Uncategorized | Kommentoi

The System Change in International Relations is taking place just now

The EU will have its next leaders’ summit on Friday, 3rd of February 2017 on the island of Malta. So far so good. However, since the political global situation is very tight at the moment, it is more than advisable that the EU leaders will also make good decisions in this summit and such decisions that will also be carried out swiftly.

The possibilities of the EU to become a greater power in the global system are imminent and so are the threats to become a midget in the same theatre. Therefore, there exists a clear need of the Member States of the EU to form a strong and trustworthy Cooperative Body of the EU to be able to act both in peace time and at war and in crises.

In fact the EU needs its own common military power strenghtened clearly. We might no longer be dependent solely on the powers of the Nato and/or peacetime cooperation. The EU countries should together unite their powers, in order to be in fact a reasonable and trustworthy power by itself in Europe.

In case the EU cannot by itself form a trustworthy world power it may be either divided or recognized only as a regional semi-power.

We must also recognize the multipolarity of the world today. There are several great powers in the word today both economically and militarily: regarding economics only the great powers are at least: The EU, the USA, China and Japan; and regarding the military powers the great ones are at least: The USA, the Nato, Russia, China and the UK. Even the EU could be a great military power in case its forces were common and would work jointly under a common leadership, both civilian and military.

At the moment the USA has to recognize that it has already lost a great deal of its military global power de facto and that it may gain some of it back only by adjusting its behaviour towards its neighbours and rivals. Thus it could be advisable to understand the real politics of the world and accept the power of Russia regarding Crimea, as well as making a non-enlargement treaty of Nato together with other Members of the Nato with Russia and at the same time reduce the amount of nuclear weapons worldwide. There could be more steps towards more nuclearfree world inclusive e.g. nuclearfree area of the South China Sea and of the Baltic Sea area and so on.

Kategoria(t): Uncategorized | Kommentoi

The absolute need for the sustainable global development

Let us for a second claim that we have at least more or less solved the following threats against mankind: wars, famines, dehydrations and diseases. What is then the largest remaining threat to ourselves? Its just we ourselves or in fact the reality that we are far too many to give our world to the next generation as a little better place to live than during our time. We have made the sustainable development extremely difficult to establish in the new circumstances.

Let me now get back to the beginning of my text. Actually, I do not believe that we would yet have solved the following threats towards us, at least not wholly: wars, famines, dehydrations, overmigrations and diseases. However, we have made good progress. Nevertheless even the threats have changed form, for example, we didn’t bother earlier much about cyberattacks and new kinds of viruses or about the need to stop traffic in certain areas due to heavy air pollution.

Fortunately, I believe we have a very simple way to solve the problem of overpopulation of the globe, which is to sign a global treaty between all the peoples of our globe to allow for a period of certain time only one child per family, globally. Due to the automatization and robotisation we human beings must reconsider the global rules and we may prosper in the future only together not alone and not solely basing our wellbeing on national ideas. We need global rules more than ever. And most of all we need to carry out our treaties and obey our common rules to the full.

Kategoria(t): Uncategorized | Kommentoi

Möjligheterna till det nordiska försvarssamarbetet i en möjlig krissituation blir allt klarare

Avseende det möjliga försvarssamarbetet mellan Sverige och Finland i en kris-/krigssituation är det ytterst viktigt at inse i vilka slags områden kan man ha snabb taktisk nytta av ett sådant samarbete. Därmed utesluter jag från denna text samarbete som innebär träning, logistik osv. och går direkt till ett möjligt samarbete för att avgöra faktiska krissituationer. Det första valkriteriet till ett samarbete är att Sverige ligger betydligt mer söderut än Finland medan Finland ligger betydligt mer norrut än Sverige. Naturligast är då att Finland bör försöka hjälpa Sverige med resultat i dess mer södra distrikter medan Sverige bör försöka hjälpa Finland med resultat mer i Finlands norra delar. Bägge länderna får därmed bära mest ansvar för sina mellersta kärndelar.

Det vore klokt av Finland kanske att föreslå kristidssamarbete med svenskar avseende försvaret av Östersjöområdet samt om försvaret av norra delar av området.
Detta kunde innebära att den finska marinen och flygstyrkorna skulle deltaga i försvaret av sydligare delar av Östersjön tillsammans med de svenska styrkorna och att de svenska norra flygstyrkor samt artilleristyrkor skulle deltaga i försvaret av de nordliga delarna av både Finland och Sverige.

Det ovansagda kunde innebära att de svenska Archer-haubitzerna belägna i Boden kunde användas för att försvara De nordliga delarna av Finland samt att de svenska JAS/Gripen-planen kunde samarbeta med de finska Hornet-planen i norr samt att de kommande finska korvetterna samt andra finska militärfartyg kunde samarbeta med den svenska marinen också i försvar av de sydligare delarna av Östersjön innebärande även hjälp av det finska och svenska flyget.

Härmed kunde man inte längre påstå att samarbetet skulle på något sätt gynna endast Finland, eftersom Sverige skulle dras in mer österut att inblanda sig i en möjlig krissituation, utan Finland skulle hjälpa Sverige mer söderut i södra delar av Östersjön och Sverige skulle hjälpa Finland mer österut i norra delar av området.

Samarbetet kunde ytterligare förstärkas om minst Danmark skulle deltaga i det i söder och Norge i norr.

Kategoria(t): Uncategorized | Kommentoi

Suomalaisen politiikan näköalattomuus

Harvoin on Suuomen politiikkaa vaivannut nykyisen kaltainen näköalattomuus eli kyvyttömyys päästä pysyvämmälle positiviselle kehitysuralle valtiollisesti ja kansallisesti. Maamme osaajat tuntuvat lähinnä loistavan poissaolollaan.

Kun eilen seurasi eduskunnan budjettikeskustelua tuli surullinen olo: tuntuu siltä, että sisäinen turvallisuutemme on kapenemassa ja eriarvoisuus on lisääntymässä. Tällainen kestämätön kehityssuunta pitää poistaa ja siirtyä aidosti sellaisiin rakenteellisiin uudistuksiin ja innovaatioiden toteutukseen, jotka aidosti mahdollistavat sekä huonoiten toimeentulevien paremmat olot, kilpailukykymme kohenemisen että nykyaikaisemman yhteiskunnan luomisen. Nyt olemme liiaksi kaivautuneet poteroihimme ja tuntuu siltä, että vain valtion lisääntyvä velkaantuminen edelleen toteutuu. Toivottavasti tämä hallitus pystyy toteuttamaan edes SOTE-uudistuksen, työllistymistavoitetta tuskin tullaan saavuttamaan, ainakaan nykyisen hallituksen olemassaoloaikana.

Mikäli sisäinen turvallisuutemme selkeästi horjuu, vähenee myös niiden henkilöiden määrä, jotka pitävät suomalaista yhteiskuntaa puolustamisen arvoisena. Tällainen kehitys olisi maallemme vaarallinen ja soisi mahdollisuuden/tekosyyn jopa joillekin ulkopuolisille pyrkiä puuttumaan sisäisiin asioihimme. Tällaista kehitystä emme varmastikaan tahdo ja siksi onkin tärkeää, että valtiotamme johtavat viisaat henkilöt, jotka kyenevät näkemään metsän puilta.

Kategoria(t): Uncategorized | Kommentoi

Suomen politiikka syksyllä 2016 ja keväällä 2017

Suomen politiikan syksyn 2016 ja kevään 2017 keskeisiä käsiteltäviä asiakokonaisuuksia tulevat olemaan: 1. Tulevat kunnallisvaalit ja 2. Tuleva presidentinvaali. Tulevien kunnallisvaalien osalta toivottavasti ainakin seuraaviin asioihin tullaan panostamaan: a. Puolueiden tuleva kannatus; b. Rakenneuudistusten onnistuminen ja c. Suomen asemoinnin optimoinnin … Lue loppuun

Galleria | Kommentoi

The Alternatives for Finnish Defence

We have read many times arguments about Finland becoming a member of the Nato due to that Finland belongs to the West and in the end it is a question of respect to the Western values or that it is natural that we would be a member in the Nato, since it would be useful and in our interest to belong to all Westernly respected Western organizations. In the Russian side the argument goes mainly by underlining the importance of interests.

Primarily the mainly Russian underlining of the impportance of the interest perspective is more realistic and correlates to the security situation in the real world better than the Western talk about values. This can be seen also in the Chinese response to the decision of the Permanet Court of Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague regarding the South China Sea case whereas China argues that the PCA doesn’t have jurisdiction over the said case and would prefer bilateral negotiations with the Philippines.

Regarding now the security of states around the Baltic Sea, it is very much a question of colliding interests. We should now try to find a common base of different Baltic Sea States to form a system which will enhance the security of this region and not threat to worsen it.

Regarding Finland’s position in this theatre we are on the other hand part of the West due to our memebership in the EU and our enhanced cooperation in the security matters with the Nato, UK and USA, but we have also a long border with Russia and are thus even very much dependent on what Russia is planning to do and what it does. Since Sweden does not want to form a defence alliance with Finland and since it is the only EU member state with which we have a land border, we are very much dependent on the maritime logistics of the Baltic Sea. And we are therefore economically dependent on the free passage through the Baltic Sea.

In the end our alternatives regarding our defence are rather limited:
a. If Sweden applies for the membership of the Nato, we should do likewise.
b. If Sweden doesn’t apply for the membership of the Nato, we should try to grow our defence cooperation with Sweden and with member states of the EU, especially those located by the Baltic Sea and with UK and USA.
c. We should try to establish a common defence of the EU as well.

Kategoria(t): Uncategorized | Kommentoi