Brexit’s Consequences for the World and Finland
The United Kingdom held a referendum on leaving the European Union. So far, the UK has not officially informed the European Union of the results of the referendum, so the exit process has not begun in practice. Instead, the UK has announced that it will inform the EU officially only in early 2017. This has raised suspicions that Brexit could be possibly ruined, and now we are in a gray area. However, it is impossible to be half pregnant. International business must evaluate the situation as if the UK were already no longer a member of European Union and act accordingly. This is how it will be for the rest of the world. The present European Union is unable to act as a reliable partner in the globalized world until Brexit has been completed. Who is going to take the European Union seriously now? Will the union be approached with or without the UK now? No formal agreements can be made to bind the crippled European Union. Would new international agreement bind also the post-Brexit UK as well as the post-Brexit European Union? The arguments which were presented to support the Brexit are also valid for the rest of the European Union’s member states and even more so for the countries which are part of the Euro arrangements like Finland. The European Union has lost its credibility and most European leaders have lost their trust in the EU and are now, for example, turning to negotiate directly with Russian Federation. Recently, only three member states’ prime ministers - those of Germany, France and Italy- discussed the future of the EU in Napoli, Italy. These separate meetings do not increase the confidence of other member states.
British Prime Minister Mrs. Theresa May has assured that Brexit will be followed through and that the referendum will be honored. The English language has been the unofficial language for the EU, but when the UK leaves the EU, what will be the position of the English language then? No doubt France and Germany will push their national languages to replace English. The rest of the EU will just follow this battle. Language problems could become one more reason for the disintegration of the EU.
When Brexit will be finalized, the UK will be a sovereign player in global affairs. Most probably, the UK will gather her former Commonwealth nations and become a strong player on the same level as the USA, the Russian Federation, China, India etc. The EU, meanwhile, will be no player at all as it wastes its resources on internal frictions. The EU, after all, has no leadership.
When the Euro was established, the reason was the unification of West and East Germany. The UK was against the unification but France agreed if Euro would be established. German industry accepted this, as it would also bind Italy to the common currency. Constant devaluation of the Italian Lira had been a headache for the German autoindustry as Italian Fiat was able to extract benefits from the German through devaluation.
Within NATO, Brexit-UK will be more sovereign and therefore more powerful.
It has been said that the EU has been moving ahead via conflicts/crises. It needs them. Are they created artificially? What could such crises do to solidify the EU co-operation, to prevent the UK from leaving the EU? Such crises can only lead to another European or world war. When Finland illegally joined the EU via cheating, the one and only argument it had was security reasons. There is no doubt that Finland was looking for protection from the then Soviet Union, while now it has rejected the 1947 Paris Peace Agreement in spite of the Russian Federation.
Just recently, on Wednesday, August 17th, 2016, Finnish Foreign Minister Timo Soini and Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallström met in Stockholm and agreed upon a unified line for discussions with Russia. Bilateral discussions are supposed to be held with Russia on security in the Black Sea, the very idea for which came from Russia in early August. Sweden has already received official invitation for meetings, but Finland has not. Timo Soini declared openly and officially on foreign, Swedish soil that he would not agree to any bilateral discussion with Russia since Finland has not received any official invitation. No doubt Timo Soini is panicking now. One should always wait to receive an invitation before giving sensitive answers.
"I think in general these kinds of contacts and negotiations should be on a wider scale," said Soini. "I don't think it's feasible for there to be discussions between two countries on these issues.”
Soini´s declaration is in the least a provocative slap in the Russians’ face. Soini and her colleague Mrs. Wallström also agreed to travel together on international affairs. Timo Soini is “hiding under the skirt” of Mrs. Wallström, a disgusting show if Finland considers itself to be a sovereign state.
On Friday, August 19th, Finnish Defense Minister Jussi Niinistö announced that the planned and agreed upon visit to Moscow of Mr. Jukka Juusti, the ministry’s permanent secretary, will be postponed in order to not make any impression that Finland has agreed to any bilateral discussion with the Russian Federation on the Baltic sea security issues. This decision was made by the presidential committee earlier on Friday morning.
Finland and the Russian Federation have valid agreements on bilateral relationships, so-called good neighbor agreements. These first became valid on July 11th, 1992, according to whose article 2 the parties are to have constant mutual discussions on international and bilateral issues on the highest state level as well on lower political levels. Article 2 reads:
“The contracting parties shall regularly engage in dialogue at the highness administrative level of state government and at other levels of their countries, as well as develop relations on mutual and international issues. They will promote contacts in various fields between their parliaments as well as central government, regional, and local authorities. They shall negotiate bilateral relations in a constructive spirit on the basis of mutual interest and respect.”
Sopimuspuolet käyvät säännöllisesti vuoropuhelua korkeimman valtiojohdon tasolla ja muulla hallitustasolla maittensa kehityksestä sekä keskinäisistä ja kansainvälisistä kysymyksistä.
Ne edistävät kanssakäymistä eri aloilla kansanedustuslaitosten kesken sekä keskushallinnon, alueellisten ja paikallisten viranomaisten kesken.
Ne neuvottelevat kahdenvälisiä suhteitaan koskevista kysymyksistä rakentavassa hengessä ja molempien etuja kunnioittaen.)
Undoubtedly, Timo Soini's refusal of discussions and the postponing of Mr. Juusti´s visit to Moscow do not accord with what was already agreed upon in 1992. If there are no discussions, then how can things be sorted out? By just having another war to force the weaker party to enter negotiations!?
There are clear signs that a new great war is being prepared. It seems that the idea is to destroy Russia in a single enormous blow. This would also require the use of nuclear weapons. Finland’s air force, for example, has been practicing refueling its Hornet fighter planes in the air with USA tanker planes over Finnish skies. Where would this capability be needed other than in a surprise attack on Russia? Preparations have been constantly made with USA/NATO military organizations and operations on Finnish soil and abroad. Agreements have been made to allow the USA/NATO commanding general full rights on Finnish territory for any military purposes. Also, according to these agreements, the Finnish Army must give the US/NATO full support at its own expense. This agreement was the so-called the Memorandum of Understanding signed on September 4th, 2014 at the NATO Wales meeting between US/NATO General Philip M. Breedlove and Chief of Finnish Military Forces General Jarmo Lindberg. This agreement is a clear cut betrayal of the Finnish nation. General Jarmo Lindberg has and had no right to sign such an agreement. It seems to be a clear, soft military coup d’état like the trial one recently seen in Turkey.
There is no serious movement in Finland to leave the European Union, as such opinions cannot see the day of light. Censorship is strong. Official Finland is hanging in the EU like a person in a rope to be hanged. The process of Finland joining the EU itself was a grand deception. One obstacle for Finland joining the EU was the 1947 Paris Peace Agreement on ending the Second World War for her part against the the Allied nations, including the Soviet Union (Russia) and the United Kingdom with her colonies/dominions. To overcome this problem, Finland decided to unilaterally nullify the whole agreement in secret Operation PAX in 1990. This was high treason and a violation of international law. Finland should have openly cancelled the Paris Peace Agreement with the other signing parties or informed other European Union member states to include this agreement in the list of juridically binding agreements for the whole EU and her member states.
In Jaakko Blomberg’s book “Desire for Stability” (ISBN number 9789510378083), the following is written on page 255:
”Päätöstä (Pariisin rauhansopimuksen vesittäminen) oli Helsingissä valmisteltu hyvin pienessä piirissä, koska operaation (PAX) vuotaminen julkisuuteen olisi voinut vahingoittaa sitä pahoin. Tasavallan presidentti (Mauno Koivisto) informoi tehtävistä päätöksistä eduskunnan ulkoasiainvaliokunnan puheenjohtajaa Markus Aaltosta perjantai-aamuna 21.syyskuuta (1990) ennen valtioneuvoston istuntoa”.
The rough translation is as follows:
“The decision (to nullify the Paris Peace Agreement of 1947) was prepared in Helsinki within a small group, because if Operation (PAX) would have been revealed, then its publicity could have been damaging. President Mauno Koivisto informed the chairman of the parliament’s foreign relations committee, Markku Aaltonen, only on Friday morning on September 21st, 1990, just before the cabinet meeting.”
The first plans for Operation PAX were prepared by René Nyberg in the Finnish ministry of Foreign affairs on April 10th, 1990 according to his article in Kanava magazine from January 15th, 2008. The plan was presented to Jaakko Blomberg, at that time chief of the political department of the Finnish ministry of Foreign affairs.
The idea was that the Finnish cabinet could have decided to nullify the Paris agreement, especially section III as well as the agreement on mutual friendship and assistance between the Soviet Union and Finland, at its session in the presence of President Mauno Koivisto. Something went wrong as the cabinet did not take any such planned decisions. The protocol of the cabinet meeting dated September 21st, 1990 No. 95/1990 states that the cabinet meeting did not decide anything - only President Mauno Koivisto himself decided what was meant to be done by the cabinet concerning the Paris Peace Agreement as per enclosure of one of the written protocols of 95/1990. In the enclosure, it had been presumed that the cabinet would take the decision, which did not occur. The cabinet also decided to file the statement by President Mauno Koivisto on invalidating the agreement on mutual friendship and assistance between the Soviet Union and Finland. Most probably, the change in plans took place as it was understood that the cabinet could not alter or nullify the Paris Peace Agreement and agreement on mutual friendship and assistance between Soviet Union and Finland. Only the parliament has such authority. Thus, there was the danger of high treason. President Mauno Koivisto similarly did not have any such power to alter or nullify those international agreements, but high treason was committed anyway involving all the participants of the cabinet meeting. Article 22 of the Paris Peace Agreement states also that all changes to section III can be made only by agreement between the Security Council of the United Nations and Finland. Since this did not take place, Finland broke the norms of the United Nations too.
In anticipation that the cabinet meeting would make the suggested decision on September 21st, 1990, the Finnish ministry of foreign affairs issued press release number 277 for September 21st, 1990 which said that the cabinet meeting had made the decision concerning the Paris Peace Agreement. As It has now been revealed, this did not happen. The press release was false and even mentioned that the UK and Soviet Union had been informed of the government’s decision. But this did not happen. The Finnish ambassador in Moscow, Heikki Talvitie, had met with USSR first deputy minister of Foreign affairs, Juri Kvitsinskij, on Monday, September 17th, 1990. Heikki Talvitie gave him a copy of CCCB507/MOS, of the government decision dated 17th of September 1990, that was actually planned to happen four days later. Heikki Talvitie thus misled the USSR, as no such a decision could have been made on September 17th or earlier as the cabinet meeting took place only on September 21st, 1990. What’s more, the cabinet, after all, did not make any of the decisions written on the paper given by Heikki Talvitie to Mr Juri Kvitsinkij. Ambassador Heikki Talvitie must have known that he was misleading his counterpart.
The official reaction of the USSR has been secret for 25 years. A USSR note dated November 6th, 1990, 281/2 to Finland, became public only recently. It asserted that the basis of Finland’s security and defense policy remains unchanged and that the size of her military forces do not exceed the Paris Peace Agreement. Also, Finland is not to make use of any atomic weapons, as per stated in the Paris Peace Agreement.
The UK’s reaction was also furious. The UK’s embassy in Helsinki sent an unsigned letter without any stamp of the embassy press section. In diplomacy, such low level letters shouldn’t be given. The letter confirmed no changes to the 1947 Paris Peace Agreement.
Without a doubt, Finland has clearly broken those assurances not to change her security and defense policy by joining the European Union. Finland has changed her security and defense policy by 180 degrees, including by joining military cooperation with NATO. Finland has even purchased cruise missiles that can be equipped with nuclear heads.
This conspiracy was kept secret as the documents were declared secret for 25 years. Those responsible for high treason in the cabinet meeting have had and still have important positions in Finnish politics for covering their conspiracy to lead Finland into deeper crises and despair.
The participants in the cabinet meeting on September 21st, 1990 were
Mauno Koivisto, president
Harri Holkeri, prime minster
Pertti Paasio, minister of foreign affairs
Pertti Salolainen, minister of foreign trade and now vice chairman of the parliamentary committee for foreign affairs
Ilkka Kanerva, minister of labour, later minister of foreign affairs and now chairman of the parliamentary defense committee
Tarja Halonen, minister of justice and later minister of foreign affairs and president of Finland
Elisabeth Rehn, minister of defense
Jorma S. Aalto, chancellor of justice
When Operation Pax was planned and carried out, there were a number of excesses within the Finnish administration. Even today, there are more excesses, as wrongdoings are hushed up and huge cover-ups are ongoing.
Finland thus cheated the EU and her member states as well as the Russian Federation in addition to all other signing parties of the 1947 Paris Peace Agreement
Another significant obstacle to Finland joining the European Union was that Finnish banks had very little of their own capital to fit EU rulings. There was no free capital available in Finland to increase banks’ capital, so at that time President Mauno Koivisto initiated an artificial recession so that banks could rob private properties to increase their own capital as required by EU rulings. Some 60,000 companies were forced to go bankrupt and some 15,000 people committed suicide amidst the turmoil. Families were broken and driven to despair while unemployment soared. Mauno Koivisto became the “great Satan” who started the downturn of the Finnish economy by later joining the EU and the Euro. It is possible that Koivisto merely wanted significant unemployment in order to gain dissatisfied voters for his social democratic party. This entire process was a grand violation of local Finnish laws and the constitution. All critics have been silenced while the nomenklatura enjoys high salaries and benefits to keep their mouths shut and agrees to criminal offensives and corruption. For example, lucrative jobs in the EU bureaucracy are given out as rewards while Finnish courts have been given orders to fail any citizens’ cases against banks.
The Finnish delusion in the EU has been made part of the “West vs. East” confrontation, i.e., against the “ugly” and “dangerous” Russia. But in reality, Finland has suffered. Since joining the EU and Euro, the public economy has been in debt, now totaling over €130 billion, some €24,000 per each Finn, and this figure is only increasing. The Finnish economy is incapable of repaying this debt and exports are slowing down. New orders for industries fell nearly 13% during January-June compared to last year’s figures. It is claimed that Finland is the fifth happiest country in the world - President Sauli Niinistö spread this delusion during the recent Rio Olympics. The real fact is that some 700,000 Finns are consuming doctor-prescribed mental pills, “happy pills,” to tolerate living in this European Union hell. This is an enormous number of people for a nation of some 5.5 million people. Most of the addicts are adults still working, but children as well are being given these mental drugs. The poisoning of the whole nation is being done purposefully in order to keep people in peace and silence and not rushing to the barricades. Real unemployment is around 500,000, a huge figure for a population of 5.5 million.
The idea of the EU was created in a time which does not exist any more. The communist Soviet Union does not exist any more and under-developed China has become one of the leading economies of the world. The USA is not as strong anymore as it was immediately after the Second World War. Even early on, the US suffered major defeats in such wars as in Vietnam and Korea. The idea of the EU has become totally false - it is impossible to put all European nations into one bowl and expect tasty soup to satisfy them all.
In his book ”What it means to be a Finn”, Yrjö Niiniluoto wrote already in 1957 that the idea of the EU, ruling all European economies from one place, Brussels, is insane. Yrjö Niiniluoto was the long time chief editor of Helsingin Sanomat newspaper. He died suddenly of a heart attack in South Africa in 1961, like all good and clever men do. The politics of Helsingin Sanomat also began to change with his death.
The grand policy of the European Union has been killing member states and creating just one single state. As part of this process, Finland is to be divided into 18 self-ruling counties with taxing rights. It is obvious that this would reduce the role of the central government only to create a new bureaucracy and costs. In this scenario, we get more bureaucrats who will support the operation and a strong EU for their own benefit.
The EU has not been able to establish heaven on earth. The European central bank is pouring Euros into the market, but the economy is not reviving. Moreover, the EU is suffering from an over supply problem, as European industries are supplying all that is needed but people can’t buy their products. There are no investments while interest rates are zero or even negative. There is no confidence in the EU. EU countries can only survive by leaving the EU like the UK. Just on August 23rd, Finnish prime minister Juha Sipilä said that trust and confidence in the EU must return. But this is impossible as long as the EU soup recipe itself is ugly. People do not want to eat the EU soup like the UK understood with Brexit.
Now is the time for European Union member states and their citizens to wake up to the realities of the new globalized world. The world is more international than just the EU and within the ”cloud”. Europe is not at the center of the world anymore. This new world needs peace, not confrontations. Our late president Urho Kekkonen said that peace can be created by opening gates, not by building new walls.
It is quite obvious that the Brexit referendum is the last nail in the coffin of the European Union, unless an insane new world war is started.