It may sound strange, but I agree with you on the economies of scale. It is only a matter of timing. Not now.

In fact, the Finnish armed forces approached the reservists around the time Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula, requesting views and comments on the future – same way as this EU forum.

I remember posting an opinion that we do not need as many fighter jets, combat helicopters and main battle tanks as Russia. But we must have

Cheap missiles defeat expensive vehicles. Asymmetric defense. (TBC)

One more note on the specialization and economies of scale of national armed forces.

NATO has influenced the armed forces of even the non-NATO members in the EU. Training, standardization and harmonization of practices and equipment in those countries increasingly follow NATO’s lead.

It also appears that the focus is shifting from defense to deterrence. In the past, Finland’s doctrine was territorial defense within its borders. The strength of war-time reservists, artillery guns and type of missiles reflected this. More recently, the armed forces have bought cruise missiles to increase their capabilities for precision strikes at a long distance (Navy >200 km with Gabriel V and Air Force > 350 km with AGM-158 JASSM). In its final offer, Lockheed Martin even offered JSMs (> 200 km) and AGM-158B JASSM-ERs (> 925 km) for F-35s.

One wonders whether this is what NATO allies seek should Finland submit a NATO application.

The last first. Strategy today dictates that you can not have a sole defensive military. Reminds me of the pliers maneuver on the east front. In German "Kettle Schlag" or kettle blow. When you are not offensive, the enemy just need to have far reaching weapons and time. Then you are out. It is suiside to not have the ability to return fire. The sword will always beat the shield.

You keep talking about a Russian attack?? Do Finland know that in the EU constitution, there is a defense alliance. If one EU country is attacked - The European countris are obliged to come and help!

Further more - try to ask yourselves - what would Russian achieve with a war with Scandinavia? More land like they can not habitate like Sibiria? Do they need land? Are Finland more raw-material rich than Russia? I do not understand the fear. Really hope Putin and EU soon meets and get on a better note than today. Just like in 2014.

Russia is more likely to attack Belarus than Finland. Its troops are already in Ukraine (Donbas & Crimea) and Georgia (Abhasia & South Ossetia). Expansion is the Leitmotiv of Russia.

The attack always comes from the East. This is the lesson of the past 1000 years. Finland is not preparing for an offensive from Sweden or Norway.

The reason for a Russian attack is always different. This time it could be the NATO expansion to Russian borders. Russia prevents this by creating “frozen conflicts” in the candidate countries.

However, you should look at the capabilities instead: “Do not listen what the mouth says; see what the hands are doing.” Can Russia attack? How? If so, are you fully prepared for it?

In 2018, Trump and Putin met in Finland. Telephone conversations between president Putin and Niinistö are also commonplace. Maybe the High Representative of the EU should learn Russian to speak the same language with Putin, so to speak.

A few examples does not sufficient convince you. The long way is to start sometime around 89 and fall of a wall. Russia was even suggested of some to go into Nato. At that time it would have made Nato outdated. China was not on many peoples lips. It was not realistic to consider what actually happend with the Greater China region in about 30 years time. Their embassy was bombed and nobody cared. Clinton made fun of Jeltsin. He drank his sorrow away because he was politically bought of an very rich elite from outside, in his last electoral round. Then Putin took a constructive decision and brought Russia home. I understand why so many Russians adore him. Nobody talks about that there is a majority against him. Of course the time will end him - because people get tired of the same face over and over again. People always have a lot of blame - in any country.

France has a long history with Russia. As I mentioned earlier, until 2014 things were going pretty well I will say.

Continued.
During the Georgia - Russian war in 2008, which you repetitively raise concern about - as I remember, it was Georgia that in the shelter of an Olympics attacked a Russian diaspora in a region there. Russia was prepared and came to rescue. Do you have other information on this matter?

I know war is ugly. I know that the value of life is decreasing the further you get from Europe and a few other countries around the world. I am certain Russia is not the softest partner to do a round of war with. But so is many other nations. I do believe the present war in Yemen is not for fun, as an example.

Georgia in my mind… according to Wikipedia:

The Russo-Georgian War was a was between Georgia, Russia and the Russian-backed self-proclaimed republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The war took place in August 2008 following a period of worsening relations between Russia and Georgia…

By 1 August 2008, South Ossetian separatists had begun shelling Georgian villages, with a sporadic response from Georgian peacekeepers in the area. Artillery attacks by pro-Russian separatists broke a 1992 ceasefire agreement. To put an end to these attacks and restore order, the Georgian Army was sent to the South Ossetian conflict zone on 7 August…

Russian troops had illicitly crossed the Russo-Georgian state border and advanced into the South Ossetian conflict zone by 7 August before the Georgian military response…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War

In my mind, Georgia did not play the game very well with Russia.

People in different countries have different views of Russia.

The Russian border seems to be the dividing line. Countries with a common border with Russia appear to feel the threat more than those farther away. France and Portugal may see Russia as a lesser threat than Ukraine or Belarus.

The former Russian Republics – like the Baltic countries that were swallowed by Soviet Union – still have people who have seen the dark (in)side of Russia. Even the former Warsaw Pact countries on the orbit of Soviet Union may still feel the gravity of their situation – like the Polish President and a delegation flying to attend an event commemorating the 70th anniversary of Katyn massacre in 2010.

In the last round, the line was drawn from Arkangel to Astrakhan. It is less clear now between the EU and Russia. Where do we draw the red line?

Lets stick with the first major expansion of Russia during Putin. Georgia. It seems like a trap made by Russia when I read your explanation. I am sure Russia can come up with other details that will show a cruel treatment of Russians in Georgia.

But to make this bring something constructive - do you agree on this was the first major expansion or invasion or what ever - in the ruling of Putin?

Could I tempt you to see another youtube video?

This is because of your persistent view on Russia and Russians.

If you take into consideration their history under tyranny and only recently have become freedom. I know people on vacations often mention Russian behavior as uncultivated. If someone urinates on a man, dont come afterwards and postulate that he stinks of urine. (Do you have this saying in Finland?).
What I mean is, they have been treated badly by their leaders all thru history, so now everybody complains they are uncultivated. Would it not be more constructive to open conversations with them? They are, by all means, our neighbors.

If you want to see real life in Russia, try this one - she is honest - search: "Yeah Russia" on youtube - lots of videos mostly from far east. Notice how similar they are in the European lifestyle all the way to the Pacific Ocean.

Technically it was President Medvedev who ordered the war in Georgia, but in practice it must have been Putin who was behind the operation.

I do not know what really happened in Georgia. But it does look similar to an earlier incident: how Russians started the Winter War in 1939 with a false flag operation (Shelling of Mainila).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShellingofMainila

Thank you for the Youtube video recommendation! As mentioned before, I have nothing against Russian people. Those whom I know are nice individuals. They are also the largest foreign minority in Finland (80K) – ahead of Estonians (50K) – coming from all walks of life.

Russian rulers have been the real problem (for centuries) – both for the citizens and neighboring countries.

I suppose you agree that Georgia is the first major event. The second was Crimea, do you agree on that?

Please look back - things tend to happen simultaneously. Like there is fashion for clothes, there is fashion for land grabbing. Some of Russia´s formere opponents started out with land grabbing. Going for raw materials. Putin went for an important naval base or 2.

In my opinion this makes sense in a sane way. A brutal calculation that will give some advantages on cost of some sacrifices. Both sides are on the board here. And please do not take this for my personal opinion, I strongly dislike violence and blodshed, hope for a peaceful, green, future with law and order and justice for all.

Concerning Putin - if you agree on this Crimea is the number 2 serious incident, what I am trying to prove is the sanity of Putin. You see any of these 2 aggressions from Russia (invasive military attack) gives meaning. It makes sense in the head of an authoritarian leader - continue

continued -
It makes sense because Putin has the majority behind him on Crimea. It was Russian until1950 something, then illegal against the Russian constitution handed over to Ukraine. It makes sense because of what happened to the government in Kiev - a democratic elected government was replaced with one not democratic elected. It makes sense because of what happened in with Kosovo. Not that I personal agree, but overall it makes enough sense to me to say this to you and Finland and every EU country. Putin will not invade Nato or EU! You can sleep comfortable at night. It is a propaganda thing that have to do with distraction - so voters will not ask unpleasant questions to the elite. In an intelligent mans head, he will not invade Nato or EU. Please think about it and do not let propaganda rule you night sleep.

Putin’s moves make perfect sense to me. The first reason is “probing with a bayonet”. The second is “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe in the 20th century”.

He first probed in Georgia – and got away with it. Two small victories (Abkhasia & South Ossetia). After that, he must have thought: let’s try something bigger – and annexed the Crimean peninsula. In no time, it was a done deal. Encouraged by these victories, he launched an offensive in Donbas. It seems that there he bit more than he could chew. Let’s see what happens in Belarus.

Putin is targeting candidate countries for the EU and NATO. Georgia had submitted an application for the NATO membership. Ukraine was open about its European ambitions. In Montenegro, Russian spies organized a coup attempt, while interfering in elections elsewhere in Balkans.

In the EU and NATO, Russia operates covertly, exploding an ammunition depot here, assassinating people there, and conducting cyber-attacks everywhere. Who will draw the line?

Okay I am now out of ammunition. I can not really see if you are part of the propaganda or what? I feel like on the matter Putin, I could just as well discuss with John Bolton or Dick Cheney. Rumsfeld is dead so him I wont mention. RIP.

It is not in the interest of EU to build up a conflict with a large and during history important partner both during war times and peace. Russia was coalition partner i both great wars!! Realize that the short cold war is over.

How can you not see Georgia as an incident that really does not threaten the EU? And how can you not see the willingness from Putin to accept the downside of taking Crimea (former Russian) back - its population was largely Russians. It most important naval base and the master key to the black sea.

No way is this making me think, now he will go insane and invade Germany or Finland or Bornholm for that matter. How on earth???

Georgia (2008) and Crimea (2014) are done deals.

The war in Donbass, or Eastern Ukraine, continues. In terms of territory and casualties, it is a more serious offensive than Georgia and Crimean peninsula combined. But what I am interested in, is Belarus. What will happen over there? Who should have a constructive dialogue – Belarus, Russia, international community?

In short, I see Russia violating international law by invading or interfering with the candidate countries for the EU and NATO membership. For some reason, most of these ex-Eastern Block countries escaped from the Soviet Union as soon as they could (2004 and 2007), and did not join Putin’s Eurasian Economic Union (apart from Belarus and Kazakhstan).

EU and NATO countries are safer. Unless you drink tea with Polonium or wear underpants with Novichok.

Putin does not become more aggressive because you split the Ukraine conflict in 2 parts. For me we talk about Georgia 2008 and Ukraine 2014. This is why I mentioned the propaganda issue, a typical trick. Also to mix national homicides into the mix does not worry me, that Putins former red army will come here and attack Denmark. Sorry, I do not buy into it. It is what it is and that is propaganda from people like Bolton and others who dislike cooperation and trade and prosperity of this continent. Keep them divided.

I just got reloaded.
You are aware of that being a political opponent is often not helping on your health. This apply to every place on earth. Often, I think, it is not controlled from the top, but performed by supports in secret small, almost neo-nazi groups, extremely nationalistic and could also probably serve in secret services, counter intelligence, military intelligence, political back groups, home guard units, private security groups, etc. Someone close enough to the power to outsmart the system and not get caught. Do you think Mahmoud al-Mabhouh died of old age?

Belarus? I have not heard that one yet. Is Alexander Lukashenko not a good president for Putin?

Or do you think the people will overthrow him and Putin then will invade Belarus?

Either way, Putin does not want Nato too close to Moscow. I believe and hope the hawks will be feed at home or are too busy with the Taiwan Strait to not pump gasoline on this one.

What we need - after have convinced Putins tanks will not wake Finland up in the morning, nor Baltic States - is a conversation. Or many. I really like Merkels approach. We need to open up, not shut down. We need trade and not guns. Cooperation.

Great to hear!

I remember the case. He was assassinated in Al Bustan Rotana hotel in Dubai. Since then, the hotel has changed its name. More recently, the top Iranian miliatary commander Qasem Soleimani was killed in a US drone strike in Baghdad. One man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist.

The assassinations of political opponents do not sound a very democratic way to stay in power. But they are not uncommon. Quite recently (in 2018), Jamal Khashoggi was assassined by several agents of the Saudi Government. Benazir Bhutto was murdered in 2007, Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, Martin Luther King Jr in 1968, John F. Kennedy in 1963, Mahatma Gandhi in 1948, Tsar Nicholas II (and his family) in 1918, Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914 and Julius Caesar in 44 BC.

It is difficult to determine the chain of command for such crimes.

Regarding your post on More propaganda ..

What to say, this has rung every where the Anglo Saxons had a chance. It is fabricated, fine tuned, tested and retested. Now it is 7 years old and people are getting seek of it. Putin is on the way back to normalize relations with old trading partners. To every ones benefit.

Do you know why? Because the truth have a habbit with winning. To create reality on lies is only good for some time.

Regarding your post: "In my view, there are two issues."

If you want something done tomorrow, start today. I do not agree with you on this one. You point at countries that will not right away mutually serve each other like EU and Albania, at least not the way an increased trading, cooperation and development between Russia and the EU. We should be able to deal with both at the same time. Russia is extremely important in my view.

I agree. A murder does not justify another murder. A crime is a crime. An eye for an eye makes two blind eyes.

As for Georgia and Ukraine, I predict that Russia will prevent countries from joining the EU/NATO. Moldova and Belarus are already done deals (fait accompli); Finland and Sweden will be the real test, when they apply for NATO. Russia creates a “buffer-zone” to EU/NATO.

Putin is happy to build North Stream pipelines through the Baltic Sea and elsewhere to Europe. Russia needs money. The coffers are empty. What could they sell? Oil and gas.

It is much more important to complete and consolidate the fragmented EU market(s). Real-time SEPA transfers of funds already move from Finland to Spain without extra fees. Mobile phone calls from Spain to Finland cost the same as at home; no roaming charges for “international” calls within the EU borders. Eventually, new and clean energy will replace oil and gas.

The EU can become the largest internal market in the world for most goods.

I am glad we can end the "Putin is a lunatic - who plans to take over the Globe and first on is Scandinavia and the Baltics.

Take a good look at him next time he visits Macron i southern France or dances in Austria at a wedding. How was the Anglo Saxon press so succesful?

I am happy for every trade partner the EU can find, the bigger the better. It seems like USA have increased it oil import from Russia this year to be the biggest ever!

There are perspectives in the relationship countries like France and Austria are doing with Russia. Alone they can not master it, but the combined power will make eg. spacecrafts better. Scale of economy.

All the stuff you write about EU are music in my ears.