I know this is a bit controversial topic, but I am curious from opinions here.

IMHO, this will produce many side effects on other EU countries in long term. For instance on Ukraine aid and armour supply

by manninaki

9 comments

  1. Can you elaborate how this will affect Ukraine aid and armour supply? I don’t see the connection.

  2. Not sure why you drag Ukraine into this. I’d say that’s a different situation all together.

    My personal opinion is that abstaining on that vote was a neutral vote, Finland is known for the neutrality after all

  3. Vote neutral, stay out of trouble, no big deal. Makes sense to me at least

  4. > According to Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen (NCP), Finland would have voted in favour of the resolution if it had clearly condemned the attack by the terror group Hamas.

    This is why I personally agree with the decision.

  7. UA scenario is well defined with a clear antagonist and a clear defender. it is also crystal clear who is full of shit, and who is mostly right. mostly.

    the resolution as it is written right now removes all possibilities of staying truly neutral and precise, and as it is right now – is basically a IDF blowjob, written in fluent diplomatese. we do abhor hamas and its allies yes but in resolutions, you follow your own worldview.

    care to explain the correlation between these two?

    Slovakia shifted because they elected putins lapdog, really simple.

  9. a cowardly decision but very much in line with finland’s own situation, aka being tied down by not only the newest membership of nato but also buying weapons from israel (the sling of david is a must buy this black friday i gather). furthermore, members of this government have actively embraced and encouraged israel’s actions, like defense minister häkkänen or christian democrats leader, presidential hopeful essayah, not to mention the crazy faction of twitter.

    overall, even ’rational actors’ defending this decision like PM orpo or secretary of state valtonen are clearly pushing a narrative more favorable to israel: the UN resolution did condemn the killing of civilians in israel and palestine (or gaza) and even called for the release of hostages from all sides, ’mentioning hamas’ is an unnecessary litmus test in this dire a situation.

Leave a Reply