Stronger Russia needs to be considered, says F. Intelligence

[Tiriol]

Meanwhile, in Finland...

Chief of Intelligence: Stronger Russia needs to be taken into consideration

Finnish security policy needs to take the growing economic and political strength of Russia into consideration, says Admiral Georgij Alafuzoff, Chief of Intelligence at the Finnish Defence Forces.
"Ten years ago experts said that Russia would never be a cause for concern, because it is so weak. Now experts say that in 10 to 15 years Russia could be the world's fifth-largest economy", Alafuzoff said at a seminar in Helsinki on Monday.
Alafuzoff pointed out that Russia's own experts have predicted that Russia will become involved either directly or indirectly in some large conflict in about the 2020s or 2030s.
The cause for such a conflict would be competition for political and economic influence.

"They are not saying that Russia would attack, or be a direct military participant, but it is nevertheless ready to use military strength for promoting political goals", Alafuzoff said to Helsingin Sanomat.
Possible factors influencing the emergence of conflicts include the crumbling of nation-states, disputes over control of transport connections and natural resources, and the collectivisation of natural resources.
The last two of these are connected with the status of the Baltic Sea. The sea is seen by Alafuzoff as an umbilical cord for Russian imports, which could be one possible reason why Russia is taking a closer look than before at its neighbours in the Baltic Sea area.

The chairman of the Parliamentary Defence Committee, Juha Korkeaoja (Centre Party) spoke about the preparations for a security and defence policy report.
Finland spends 1.27 per cent of its GDP on defence. Korkeaoja says that the government's report raises the question of how much Finland should spend on defence in the future.
"I do not believe that the relative proportion of the defence budget can increase significantly", he said to Helsingin Sanomat.
"One key question in the long term is also, if we will continue to have conscription. No other EU country has quite the same kind of system that we do."

[Darth Wong]

Russia is also giving us cause for concern in Canada, what with their obvious intent to seize our northern territories. Although in our case, that's uncomfortably close to Alaska and the Americans would have something to say about that too, so we wouldn't have to go it alone.

[Kane Starkiller]

Canada and USA have already signed agreements that allow each other's militaries to operate in the others territory which includes navy.
I doubt Canada has anything to worry about.
Heh, Americans, can't live with them can't live without them.

[His Divine Shadow]

Russia is also giving us cause for concern in Canada, what with their obvious intent to seize our northern territories.

I'm sorry, I can't detect if this is sarcasm or not

[Illuminatus Primus]

Russia is also giving us cause for concern in Canada, what with their obvious intent to seize our northern territories. Although in our case, that's uncomfortably close to Alaska and the Americans would have something to say about that too, so we wouldn't have to go it alone.

The U.S. will almost certainly side with any you-or-Russia choice in the possession of northern territories dispute, and thus we would have to go to war at your side - Article 5 of NATO demands it as part of collective security; an attack on integral territory certainly qualifies. Even without us siding with you in the dispute, any real conflict would require attacks directly upon your forces or undisputed territories.

[His Divine Shadow]

Anyway as for our own sakes here in Finland, well the EU is making itself Russias future bitch by becoming dependant on their gas, lots of potential future problems there, we ought to remedy this via building nuclear power for ourselves.

And I personally do not really feel good about the direction Russia is heading, or their repeated violations of our airspace. Not to mention that stuff can change 180 degrees in a decade, just look at the situation 10-15 years before WW2. So at this point I think a NATO membership might be in order.

[K. A. Pital]

Admiral Georgij Alafuzoff

made my day.

Is that Georgiy Alafuzov? I think we actually had his relative as a Soviet Admiral (Alafuzov too)

[Tiriol]

Admiral Georgij Alafuzoff

made my day.

Is that Georgiy Alafuzov? I think we actually had his relative as a Soviet Admiral (Alafuzov too)

I'd suppose so. The name appears to be a Finnish version of earlier Russian origin, although I can't be sure, of course. There is, though, some unintentional comedy in the fact that a military officer with a Russian-sounding name is warning us about the strengthening of Russia and urging us to be vigilant.

[Ritterin Sophia]

And I personally do not really feel good about the direction Russia is heading, or their repeated violations of our airspace.

Well first off you need to declare how high your 'airspace' is, then you need to be able to back up that declaration. As far as I'm ware, there's no existing treaty that declares how high national airspaces go, so Finnish airspace is only about as high as you can intercept foreign aircaft.

[Sidewinder]

Anyway as for our own sakes here in Finland, well the EU is making itself Russias future bitch by becoming dependant on their gas, lots of potential future problems there, we ought to remedy this via building nuclear power for ourselves.

Is the Finnish budget able to support such an endeavor? (No offense intended, but I thought a nuclear powerplant costs millions, and that's before the costs of maintenance and that of the disposal of nuclear waste.)

And I personally do not really feel good about the direction Russia is heading, or their repeated violations of our airspace. Not to mention that stuff can change 180 degrees in a decade, just look at the situation 10-15 years before WW2. So at this point I think a NATO membership might be in order.

That may be to Finland's benefit, but will France or Germany allow your country to join NATO? It might raise less controversy than Ukraine and Georgia's attempts to join, but as Wikipedia states Finland was "an autonomous Russian Grand Duchy," who knows what the Russians will think?

[His Divine Shadow]

And I personally do not really feel good about the direction Russia is heading, or their repeated violations of our airspace.

Well first off you need to declare how high your 'airspace' is, then you need to be able to back up that declaration. As far as I'm ware, there's no existing treaty that declares how high national airspaces go, so Finnish airspace is only about as high as you can intercept foreign aircaft.

So what you mean is we need to shoot down the next russian plane that does it?

[Tiriol]

And I personally do not really feel good about the direction Russia is heading, or their repeated violations of our airspace. Not to mention that stuff can change 180 degrees in a decade, just look at the situation 10-15 years before WW2. So at this point I think a NATO membership might be in order.

That may be to Finland's benefit, but will France or Germany allow your country to join NATO? It might raise less controversy than Ukraine and Georgia's attempts to join, but as Wikipedia states Finland was "an autonomous Russian Grand Duchy," who knows what the Russians will think?

We have been independent from Russia for over 90 years. We fought against the Soviet Union in World War II to remain that way. I haven't heard about a single Russian source that would still consider Finland to be a part of even a dream of Geater Russia or something like that. Is something that has happened almost a century ago is still so relevant? Finland was all but independent during the Grand Duchy era in any case - all what we didn't have was a foreign represantion. Our documents even spoke of "Grand Duke of Finland" instead of the Tzar, because he ruled Finland in that position.

[His Divine Shadow]

Is the Finnish budget able to support such an endeavor? (No offense intended, but I thought a nuclear powerplant costs millions, and that's before the costs of maintenance and that of the disposal of nuclear waste.)

It's not like we are a poor country. We are even building a final storage repository scheduled for opening in 2020.

Besides in the end nuclear power is not more expensive than other forms, it provides lots of cheap, steady electricity and a plant lasts a very long time. So the fact of the matter is more like we can afford to build a few nuclear powerplants over the years. We cannot however, afford this bullfuckery with trying to ignore nuclear and building natural gas, wind power and coal.

Thats going to ruin our economy, leave us unprepared for the future and likely increased prevalence of electric powered transport and make us bitches for foreign fuel sources. Atleast we have some domestic uranium sources and we can reprocess the waste we have.

[Tiriol]

Is the Finnish budget able to support such an endeavor? (No offense intended, but I thought a nuclear powerplant costs millions, and that's before the costs of maintenance and that of the disposal of nuclear waste.)

It's not like we are a poor country. We are even building a final storage repository scheduled for opening in 2020.

Besides in the end nuclear power is not more expensive than other forms, it provides lots of cheap, steady electricity and a plant lasts a very long time. So the fact of the matter is more like we can afford to build a few nuclear powerplants over the years. We cannot however, afford this bullfuckery with trying to ignore nuclear and building natural gas, wind power and coal.

Thats going to ruin our economy, leave us unprepared for the future and likely increased prevalence of electric powered transport and make us bitches for foreign fuel sources. Atleast we have some domestic uranium sources and we can reprocess the waste we have.

To add to what His Divine Shadow said, Finland has a strong pro-green element in its politics. I'd say pro-environment, but unfortunately many of these environmentalists constantly rally against the nuclear energy option, having blind faith and confidence in that wind and solar power are the way to go. The political party Green League - Vihreä liitto - is a continuation of this belief in politics. These comparatively speaking rather strong elements - and the fear of Chernobyl happening in Finland in the minds of a common man - keep the nuclear energy option downplayed.

And yes, Finland probably could afford more nuclear plants - and most certainly so if we don't rush it and try to build them all at once. But at this rate by the time the public opinion shitfs towards nuclear energy, we won't have much time left to build them and then we are in trouble.

[K. A. Pital]

We fought against the Soviet Union in World War II to remain that way. I haven't heard about a single Russian source that would still consider Finland to be a part of even a dream of Geater Russia or something like that.

No. And no one wants to. Hell, even old post-Stalin USSR books list Finland as a friendly state, and the USSR wasn't that keen to extend it's frienship.

Finland may rest assured that it's somewhere in the 0,01% of things that bug a common Russian enough to warrant a threat level at all.

[Vympel]

Heck, Finnish irredentists are probably a similar threat to peace (i.e. none).

[Ritterin Sophia]

And I personally do not really feel good about the direction Russia is heading, or their repeated violations of our airspace.

Well first off you need to declare how high your 'airspace' is, then you need to be able to back up that declaration. As far as I'm ware, there's no existing treaty that declares how high national airspaces go, so Finnish airspace is only about as high as you can intercept foreign aircaft.

So what you mean is we need to shoot down the next russian plane that does it?

I'm saying that unlike the Law of the Sea Treaty, no such agreement to determine how high a nations sovereignty extends above its landmass exists for airspace. In other words airspace doesn't exist, and your ability to dictate who can enter the area above your nation is determined by whether or not you can intercept those airplanes and make it damn clear that you can do so. This could be an actual intercept, a highly televised intercept test, or a training exercise.

[Sidewinder]

Is something that has happened almost a century ago is still so relevant?

Humans have a VERY BAD tendency to think so. Note the continuing controversy over the American Civil War. Hell, note the fact that John Paul II was the FIRST pope to visit an Orthodox nation, 945 YEARS after the Great Schism, and that the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are STILL separate entities!

[Tiriol]

Georgian President predicts a possible gloomy future for Finnish security.

Georgian President warns: concessions to Russia could be reflected in Finland

Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili has warned the West not to buckle under Russian opposition to the enlargement of NATO. He said that thinking in terms of spheres of influence can be reflected in Finland as well.
Saakashvili gave his views to Gideon Rachman, a columnist with the Financial Times last week.
"What we are talking about is appeasement. And today it might be Georgia and tomorrow Estonia - and then, hypothetically, Finland. Finland was also in Russia's sphere of influence. It was part of the Russian empire", Saakashvili said, according to the column.
President Saakashvili focused especially on comments by French Prime Minister François Fillon on NATO enlargement.
At the recent NATO summit in Bucharest, Fillon said that the membership of Georgia and Ukraine in NATO "would not be the right response" for the balance of power in Europe, or for that between Europe and Russia.

Georgia and Ukraine hoped to get a membership programme - something of a precursor to NATO membership - at the Bucharest summit. Following intense opposition by Russia, the countries had to make do with a promise that they would ultimately be accepted as members of NATO.
Since the meeting, various assessments have been put forward on the extent to which Russia's sharply negative view on the NATO membership of Georgia and Ukraine might be reflected on how a possible Finnish membership application would be seen in NATO.

However, some positive progress has been made between Russia and Finland.

Russia promises to work against airspace violations
Finnish Defence Minister visits Moscow

Russia says that it is working to put a stop to violations of Finnish airspace by its aircraft.
Finnish Minister of Defence Jyri Häkämies (Nat. Coalition Party) said at the end of a visit to Moscow on Tuesday that Russia had expressed regret over violations of Finnish airspace by Russian planes.
The most recent such violation took place on December 26th last year, when a Tupolev TU-154 transport plane spent nearly two minutes in Finnish airspace.

Defence Minister Häkämies concluded a three-day visit to Russia on Tuesday.
In addition to the airspace violations, Häkämies and Russian Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov and armed forces Chief of Staff Yuri Baluyevski discussed issues related to NATO.
Häkämies said that Russia's views of NATO expansion had remained unchanged, even though President Vladimir Putin had used very strong language earlier in the month to express his opposition to such a move.
"I see no changes there", Häkämies said.

General Baluyevski said last week that Russia would upgrade its military strength on the Ukrainian and Georgian borders, if the two countries join NATO.
Häkämies said that Ukraine and Georgia are in a "special position" with respect to Russia, for historical reasons.
He did not want to speculate on what kinds of consequences Finnish membership in NATO would have on the Russian side. He said that Russia is aware of Finnish policy, and that relations between the two countries are without problems.
Häkämies also assumes that Russian views on NATO will remain unchanged after Dmitri Medvedev assumes the Russian presidency next month.

In their discussions, the Ministers of Defence agreed on closer cooperation in the Baltic Sea, to keep navigation safe in spite of the increase in the number of ships passing through.
Russia is taking a positive view of a Finnish proposal that the countries share information on the situation at sea, compiling up-to-date information on vessels at sea. A similar exchange of information is being prepared for air traffic as well.
The Russians are also to take part crisis management planning for accidents at sea.