EU-NATO Axis Now Using Mass Migration to Mug Finland of Its Neutrality

Sauli Niinisto: “I am sure that individuals, families around Europe, feel a bit unsafe.”  

One doesn’t need to be a professional Euroskeptic like Farage, or Le Pen, to assume that the Finnish president was referring to the septic shock of the EU’s ongoing migrant crisis when he made the above comment. What with anti-rape pants, pepper spray, and guns all selling out in places like Austria, Germany, and Sweden- that would be a reasonable, if perhaps bitter assumption.  

But think again:

The Finnish President’s shock confession, to the delight of liberals and open border fanatics everywhere, had absolutely nothing to do with illegal migration. The comment was aimed exclusively at Russia and was made within the context of a discussion on how ‘Brussels can make us all feel safe’- in other words, yet further NATO expansion, now into Finland, coupled with ratcheted up mass migration: the core policies driving the globalist elites who have hijacked Europe.  

To fully appreciate how the specter of mass migration can create a climate of fear and disorientation to the extent that Russia can so plausibly be portrayed as ‘a threat to individuals and families around Europe,’ it is first necessary to complete what the EU-NATO Axis despises: an objective analysis of its motivations.            

In its expansionist plans to create an armed front against Russia modeled on evil Nazi Germany’s strategic posturing on the eve of Operation Barbarossa- two countries are key to securing the EU-NATO Axis’ vast chain of defences from the Arctic to the Black Sea: Finland and Bulgaria.  

While Bulgaria has been assimilated by the EU through the staple bribes of free movement and EU dole outs, thereby securing the southern flank should Turkey prove unreliable-the wealthier and more cautious Finns are holding fast to their long-cherished neutrality with a meager 21% of the country’s population of 5.5 million favoring full NATO membership. Yet for the EU-NATO Axis and its globalist crusade against Russian sovereign democracy, Finland’s 1340 km border with Russia, if a bridge too far, remains absolutely vital.  

A new Mannerheim Line:

In the event of the EU-NATO Axis overreaching into the Russian geocultural sphere, Russia will obviously have the upper hand in the core areas of the Baltic, Belarus, and Ukraine.

The vast Finnish border however is a plausible line of attack and NATO’s planners, aware of the lessons of the Dec-Jan 1939-40 ‘Winter War’- not to mention the obvious wider strategic implications learned from World War 2 and Finland’s odd positioning as an Axis ally, may well view Finland as the staging post for counterbalancing Russia’s guaranteed tactical success on the Eastern Flanks.  

But there’s only one problem: The educated and politically articulate Finnish public just won’t play along. Not even luring Finns into an EU Army to obfuscate the militarization of the border and chill popular fears of the inevitable implosion of relations with Russia is likely to hoodwink the wily Finns. 

Hence, viewing the Finnish psychosphere itself as a prime target for a softening-up disinformation offensive activates the pro-Brussels media to hype Russophobia: Finns are asked to believe that Russians are already ‘buying up land’ for early military advantage, that dual Finnish-Russian nationals are a ‘fifth column,’ and that a new northern iron curtain is preferable to the stable trade relations with Russia that the thrifty Finns highly prize.

Tellingly, the liberal Scandinavian media has even accused Russia of weaponizing mass migration via the so called ‘Arctic route’ and it is here that the EU-NATO Axis’ mask slips to reveal the kind of ugly truth that alone can put Finnish President Sauli Niinisto’s comments into their proper context.

What comes next can only be understood if one views Scandinavia as NATO itself perceives it-as an integrated whole where both Finland and Sweden need to be jointly assimilated. Needless to say, both Nordic countries joined the EU in 1995 and any NATO enlargement will see them joining the Alliance in lockstep.

So let’s be perfectly clear, what happens in Stockholm’s migrant dominated suburb of Rinkeby, or in Malmo- is integral to ownership of the Finnish security narrative.  

Despite Sweden’s descent into hell being so well documented it’s unarguable, liberals and Russophobes have turned the issue into bloody ideological trench warfare.

Their ultimate aim isn’t to either confirm or deny that mass molestation, rape, drug trafficking, and suburban riots are taking place- but rather to spread fear and insecurity.

Confusion and a loss of basic moral judgment are the true goals wrapped around a ruthless dogma where the objective reality that mass migration is a disaster is denounced as a perversion of morality, a sin, a crime against the self and society. The lie becomes not only the triumph of the subjective, but salvation itself. Indeed, following on from Trotsky’s maxim that the terrified can be made to believe anything, the central tenet of the EU-NATO Axis is that objective reality does not exist.    

In short, Finns must be herded into NATO, their rationalism eclipsed by abject self-loathing as they are trapped into believing they can neither defend themselves as individuals, nor their families. All that is then needed is for political correctness to fashion a compensatory enemy for the battered Scandinavian psyche: Russophobia thusly becomes a way for beleaguered Scandinavians to reaffirm their manhood- while comfortably maintaining the fiction of their liberal values.

If the Finns are the sheep and migrants are the howling sheep dog, the shepherd is the EU-NATO Axis.

Liberals will always return to Sweden in their hurried defence of immigrant rapists and smirking bearded children even as the Russophobes fan the flames because the fact that Sweden’s crucifixion remains horrifying news oozes just enough poisonous hate to convince the shaken and the terrified that Russia really does threaten ‘families and individuals all around Europe.’    

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.