Every day, attacks, advances, breakthroughs, etc., are reported.
However, the front line situation appears quite stable in these provinces that Russia declares as its own. Mainly in Donetsk, Russia has captured more territory and advanced towards Donetsk’s 50km long defensive fortification.
Of course, the past is no guarantee of the future
https://x.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1960009272865309020?t=DggawDzmfAcopSWGhRthVg&s=19
I don’t understand. Why can’t we appeal to the special situation that is clearly underway in Europe, more so than in a long time? Incomprehensible lamenting. Hopefully, the Defence Forces (PV) can build fortifications in peace, well, surely some busybody will be found to oppose that too 
According to WSJ, Exxon is already holding secret negotiations about returning to Russia’s oil fields.
https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/exxon-rosneft-russia-oil-talks-f524e81f?mod=hp_lead_pos3
After huddling with President Trump in Alaska, President Vladimir Putin told reporters Russia and the U.S. could do more business together—for example, between their Pacific coastlines.
“We look forward to dealing,” Trump replied.
What the two leaders didn’t say: Behind closed doors, their countries’ biggest energy companies had already sketched out a road map to going back into business, pumping oil-and-gas fields off Russia’s far-east coast.
Putin wants to expand on the map, something to be admired in the Kremlin; Trump wants trade and deals. Small countries get to act as pawns.
Yep, and for example, Neste Kilpilahti will return to Russian oil as soon as the political possibilities/prerequisites exist for it. Money is “cold” in the sense that it finds its way to where there is the greatest need for it, as long as the basic prerequisites are in place. In Russia’s case, it requires at least a stable and lasting ceasefire signed by agreement.
Unfortunately, history has shown that agreements signed by Russia (and before that, the Soviet Union) have no value or meaning, as it tends not to abide by them itself. They have always only bought it a moment in time to make its next move.
Edit:
I do agree, however, that the ruthlessness of money will follow the path you mentioned. It will find its way.
This is also true - completely agree about this disrespect for agreements, etc., from Russia’s side.
This will also happen in the forest industry. Large amounts of wood are used in Finland, and when the goal is for forests to remain carbon sinks, our own forests are not enough for both.
Negotiations have therefore already taken place during the Biden administration, although at that time, efforts were made to save over 4 billion USD in assets from there. Everything was eventually seized by the Kremlin, and the company wrote them down.
Now a return is being planned with new investments.
Greed and immorality aside, aren’t alarm bells ringing at all here if billions were lost three years ago and now a return is being made to the same country with the same administration still in power? As a shareholder myself, I would be quite concerned about such a move. The assurances are like “trust me bro,” when it has been seen that no sanctions or similar measures affect the Kremlin’s decision-making in any way.
Imagine if Fortum were to start building new power plants in Russia now, or Nokian Tyres were to erect a new factory, say, in Moscow, when the St. Petersburg factory was practically expropriated for a pittance.
An authority cannot choose which rules to follow. What could have been done well in advance is to CHANGE those rules, i.e., laws and regulations as needed, so that we wouldn’t be stuck with such an issue. For example, that in planning matters related to national security, the appeal procedure can be bypassed by a decision of the Parliament/Government, etc. I don’t know if such provisions already exist. I assume that if they did, they would have been used.
TL;DR The sitting government could react to things proactively by changing laws. This is usually not done until it’s too late.
An authority who knows their business and understands what is at stake can certainly tell the permit applicant how to apply for it and what kind of exceptions, etc., to use so that things get done.
But the generic rule-stamping authorities of ‘rule-bound Finland’ truly don’t understand, don’t know how, and therefore cannot be flexible in anything.
It’s purely a lack of discretion, nothing else. For example, when it comes to permitting projects of national defense significance, there’s no need to examine every pile of flying squirrel droppings on its migration route in a laboratory, nor even to notice them.
The article states the following:
"Levä emphasizes that Tukes (Finnish Safety and Chemicals Agency) does not, in itself, take a stand on the necessity of constructing the facility, but rather must comply with the law.
– This concerns construction that significantly impacts the environment and an activity requiring a chemical safety permit under the Chemical Safety Act. The prerequisite for granting a chemical safety permit for a high-risk explosive factory is a legally valid zoning plan."
“The city management of Pori and Tukes agree that legislation should be made clearer for projects like the Noormarkku TNT factory.”
Foresight has been attempted from Pori’s side by stating that they “don’t have the energy to zone now”/are in a terrible hurry, and this has clashed with the Chemical Safety Act, which does not have similar room for interpretation. Both parties unanimously state that the law is not good. This could have been prepared for in advance by changing the laws. It wasn’t changed. For some reason, the ministry is very reluctant regarding these matters. The decision to change them proactively must come from the government, which leads the ministries.
An attempt has been made from the Pori direction to use discretion by stating that they don’t have the energy to zone now, and this has clashed with the Chemical Safety Act, which does not have similar room for interpretation.
It feels like some kind of gamble was played here, the reason being the urgent rush to build the factory.
It is possible that the appeal will proceed from the Administrative Court to the Supreme Administrative Court, because this is a precedent-setting case and a very significant project. No matter whose favor the matter is decided, the losing party will appeal. The processing would take an estimated 4-18 months, depending on how urgently the matter is handled.
The worst-case scenario would be if the Supreme Administrative Court determines that the zoning plan is necessary. In that situation, the entire schedule would be significantly delayed. The silver lining would be that the eastern neighbor could not use the project as effectively in its propaganda, claiming that the factory was implemented in violation of Finland’s own laws - or similar.
An authority who acts according to the law acts this way. Authorities have a duty and an obligation to advise if asked and to offer guidance, even if one doesn’t know how to ask. This is the case when the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the authority in question. Otherwise, they guide to the correct place.
Yle has an article about the Flamingo cruise missile developed by Ukraine and its potential targets.
About its range and the weapon’s development process.
This is about acting according to the law. If, in zoning and other permit matters, the project’s initial phase is not conducted in accordance with laws and regulations, it is easier for these appellants to overturn them later in court. Is that what you want?
Although bureaucracy causes a small initial delay, it is still the correct way to do things as they should be done, rather than having to patch up undone matters expensively later – at best, having to cancel the entire project due to a small undone detail.
This is also more broadly related to the security situation and preparedness: Especially in projects involving critical societal functions and their protection, it is of primary importance to do everything as it should be done and according to legal provisions.
From what I’ve experienced sitting in some working groups, changing laws is not a very quick process. Ministries also don’t have idle project managers for law changes or even experts in the field; everyone already has their hands full with work and x number of working groups to lead. Then, when money is requested to hire an expert, the position might be obtained in the next year or the year after, and after that, recruitment takes half a year plus at least half a year before the recruited novice is even somewhat capable of doing anything related to a law change… In the meantime, the world situation will have already changed, politicians will have changed, and an even more important project will have been invented (=political guidance given) for this new official to lead, so we’re back to square one.
I understand the challenges. However, it doesn’t get any easier when known challenges are left for the authorities to solve. And when there is usually no room for maneuver, the end result is this.
Also, a complete overhaul is not always needed; rather, adjustments, e.g., for exceptions, could be added to existing laws.
In this case, I’ll give the blame to Pori’s decision-makers. Pori should have immediately started the zoning process, but they waited. "Pori’s mayor Lauri Inna tells Yle that the city trusts Forcit’s view.
– We know that there is room for interpretation in the new Building Act (rakentamislaissa)." According to the article, Tukes (Finnish Safety and Chemicals Agency) stated the requirements of the law on the safety of handling dangerous chemicals and explosives:
“Section 20 (21.4.2023/798)
Consideration of the plan
In the placement of production facilities manufacturing, handling, or storing dangerous chemicals or explosives, the current and future intended use of the placement site and its surroundings, as indicated in the legally binding plan under the Land Use and Building Act, as well as any plan regulations possibly concerning the area, must be taken into account.”
And I bet that every single opportunity for delay in this construction project will be taken advantage of. After all, it all plays into the neighbor’s hands.
By now, it must be clear even to the slower ones that there is no peace in sight for Ukraine, but rather the killing will continue even more fiercely in the future. According to current understanding, only one state in the world can stop this, and at the moment, it couldn’t care less about doing so. On the contrary, that orange catastrophe-led mockery of democracy has totally switched sides and not only strokes the back of the killer dictator’s hand on the red carpet but also copies his fascist leadership methods for use in his own country.
Therefore, assisting Ukraine and preparing for a potential refugee flow must continue to be on an upward trend. Military aid will follow its own path, and it will continue to flow from Europe to Ukraine. Ukraine’s own missile production capability is also a very welcome development, and it is indeed a potential game-changer in containing and weakening our neighbor’s terrorist state.
On the mental and information front, it is important to counter and silence potential demands and inquiries about opening trade and borders. Our neighbor has shown no signs of retreating from its intentions, so neither should we. Of course, the official reason for the border closure is to prevent hybrid influence, the need for which has not disappeared but rather increased along with the escalation of confrontation and various shows of force.
Shopping by citizens of the terrorist state will therefore not be returning anytime soon, nor will cheap wood or the petrol rush. Growth for the Finnish economy must therefore continue to be sought from a different direction than our Stone Age bloody neighbor. Defense will also increasingly consume our budget for at least the next ten years, and this should somehow be financed. EU burden-sharing is needed here.
At the same time, we will be running around extinguishing various hybrid operations. The terrorist state will undoubtedly observe what happens in the ongoing legal proceedings concerning the cable-cutting vessel, and after drawing conclusions, the activity will be directed at identified weak points. One can only hope that none are found.
In the bigger picture, I am also somewhat concerned about what kind of negotiations will be held between the USA and the terrorist state in the future and what might be discussed there about “resolving the root causes of the war,” i.e., in practice, the status of Eastern Europe. We happen to live in precisely that area. I argue that if the Russians had walked into Kyiv in the three days they intended, we would already be much further along in that discussion. The “Kollaa holds” comparisons from the previous war can, in my opinion, be rightly rephrased today as “Kyiv holds.”
Paywall, but it shows that as many as 4 appeals were made to the administrative court regarding the TNT factory
The Satakunta district and Pori association of the Finnish Association for Nature Conservation, Poosjärviseura, the Safe Noormarkku association, and private individuals. The editorial office obtained the appeal documents through an information request from the Turku Administrative Court.
SK reviewed the appeals made regarding the Noormarkku TNT factory – The Administrative Court aims to resolve the matter expeditiously - Satakunnan Kansa SK perkasi Noormarkun TNT-tehtaasta tehdyt valitukset – Hallinto-oikeus pyrkii ratkaisemaan asian nopeutetusti - Satakunnan Kansa
Safe Noormarkku Association was founded according to the association register on 9.6.2025. It is, of course, important for ‘civil society’ that such an association can appeal about the project.