• =?UTF-8?B?IkRvbuKAmXQgbWVudGlvbiDigJhBcnRpY2xlIDXigJki?=

    From =?UTF-8?Q?Pelle_Svansl=C3=B6s?=@pelle@svans.los to rec.sport.tennis on Fri Feb 6 13:51:24 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.sport.tennis

    Finland has urged U.S. officials not to describe future security pledges
    to a postwar Ukraine as rCLArticle 5-like,rCY implying that doing so could undercut the mutual defense clause at the heart of the NATO military
    alliance, according to a State Department cable obtained by POLITICO.

    The Jan. 20 cable hints at worries in some corners over the labels used
    during peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow. They show how sensitive some phrases can be in the national security realm, even when officials are
    merely trying to offer an analogy to various audiences.

    According to the cable, sent from the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki to
    Washington, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen discussed the issue
    on Jan. 19 with U.S. Reps. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.) and Sarah Elfreth
    (D-Md.), both of whom are members of the House Armed Services Committee. Valtonen underscored FinlandrCOs view that Russia is a rCLlong-term
    strategic threatrCY and cautioned against a rCLweakrCY peace deal for Ukraine that would hinder its ability to defend itself against future Russian aggression, the cable states.

    But Valtonen cautioned against any suggestions of rCLArticle 5-likerCY security guarantees in a postwar Ukraine, the cable adds. She warned
    that it risked conflating NATOrCOs Article 5 guarantees with whatever bilateral promises are made to Ukraine. It also quotes her as saying
    there should be a rCLfirewallrCY between NATO and future security guarantees to Ukraine. FinlandrCOs defense minister made similar points in a later meeting, according to the cable.

    The documentsrCO contents offer insight into concerns voiced by other
    Finnish leaders who have said that, while they want to help Ukraine
    protect itself, the concept of a security rCLguaranteerCY is a more serious matter theyrCOre not ready to agree to just yet.

    A Finnish official said ValtonenrCOs office wouldnrCOt comment on
    confidential discussions, though underscored HelsinkirCOs long-standing
    goal of eventually accepting Ukraine into the NATO alliance.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/04/dont-mention-article-5-finland-warns-us-on-ukraine-00766043

    Lol. Exceptional pussyfooting.

    Finnskies made a bigus dealus of the "Coalition of the Willing". The
    coalition of small cats willing to guarantee a fair and lasting peace
    for Ukraine.

    "The coalition of the willing (CoW) is a coalition of 34 countries (plus Ukraine)[14][15][16] that have pledged strengthened support for Ukraine against Russian aggression, going further than the support delivered by
    the Ukraine Defense Contact Group by pledging readiness to be part of a peacekeeping force deployed on Ukrainian territory, either by providing
    troops or contributing in other ways."

    As Wiki puts it.

    Finnskies clearly panicked when Trump took this CoW business at face
    value in one of the drafts for peace. A draft that mentioned Finland explicitly as one of the guarantors of peace. That's when a Finnskie
    froze and decided "nuff of this talk the talk shit. Mum's the word hereon".

    Now, the Finnish FM is telling people privately in Washington: "Yeah.
    You guessed it. We didn't mean what we said. But the 5th means 5th, right?"

    Interestingly enuff, this article is dated 4th of Feb. In the two days
    since, I haven't seen a word of this in the Finnish press. Yep, it's a
    bit embarrassing.
    --
    "And off they went, from here to there,
    The bear, the bear, and the maiden fair"
    -- Traditional

    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From TT@TT@dprk.kp to rec.sport.tennis on Fri Feb 6 20:09:27 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.sport.tennis

    Pelle Svansl||s kirjoitti 6.2.2026 klo 13.51:
    Finland has urged U.S. officials not to describe future security pledges
    to a postwar Ukraine as rCLArticle 5-like,rCY implying that doing so could undercut the mutual defense clause at the heart of the NATO military alliance, according to a State Department cable obtained by POLITICO.

    The Jan. 20 cable hints at worries in some corners over the labels used during peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow. They show how sensitive some phrases can be in the national security realm, even when officials are merely trying to offer an analogy to various audiences.

    According to the cable, sent from the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki to Washington, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen discussed the issue
    on Jan. 19 with U.S. Reps. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.) and Sarah Elfreth (D- Md.), both of whom are members of the House Armed Services Committee. Valtonen underscored FinlandrCOs view that Russia is a rCLlong-term strategic threatrCY and cautioned against a rCLweakrCY peace deal for Ukraine
    that would hinder its ability to defend itself against future Russian aggression, the cable states.

    But Valtonen cautioned against any suggestions of rCLArticle 5-likerCY security guarantees in a postwar Ukraine, the cable adds. She warned
    that it risked conflating NATOrCOs Article 5 guarantees with whatever bilateral promises are made to Ukraine. It also quotes her as saying
    there should be a rCLfirewallrCY between NATO and future security guarantees to Ukraine. FinlandrCOs defense minister made similar points in a later meeting, according to the cable.

    The documentsrCO contents offer insight into concerns voiced by other Finnish leaders who have said that, while they want to help Ukraine
    protect itself, the concept of a security rCLguaranteerCY is a more serious matter theyrCOre not ready to agree to just yet.

    A Finnish official said ValtonenrCOs office wouldnrCOt comment on confidential discussions, though underscored HelsinkirCOs long-standing
    goal of eventually accepting Ukraine into the NATO alliance.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/04/dont-mention-article-5-finland- warns-us-on-ukraine-00766043

    Lol. Exceptional pussyfooting.

    Finnskies made a bigus dealus of the "Coalition of the Willing". The coalition of small cats willing to guarantee a fair and lasting peace
    for Ukraine.

    "The coalition of the willing (CoW) is a coalition of 34 countries (plus Ukraine)[14][15][16] that have pledged strengthened support for Ukraine against Russian aggression, going further than the support delivered by
    the Ukraine Defense Contact Group by pledging readiness to be part of a peacekeeping force deployed on Ukrainian territory, either by providing troops or contributing in other ways."

    As Wiki puts it.

    Finnskies clearly panicked when Trump took this CoW business at face
    value in one of the drafts for peace. A draft that mentioned Finland explicitly as one of the guarantors of peace. That's when a Finnskie
    froze and decided "nuff of this talk the talk shit. Mum's the word hereon".

    Now, the Finnish FM is telling people privately in Washington: "Yeah.
    You guessed it. We didn't mean what we said. But the 5th means 5th, right?"

    Interestingly enuff, this article is dated 4th of Feb. In the two days since, I haven't seen a word of this in the Finnish press. Yep, it's a
    bit embarrassing.


    You just don't understand Finns. Seems that Politico does:
    rCLIrCOm guessing the Finns donrCOt want to overpromise and under-deliver,rCY Ellehuus said.

    ...I most of the time disagree with everything Valtonen the foreign
    minister says... but she has a point on not talking about "article 5"
    with Ukraine because the term is strictly NATO-specific, no?
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From TT@TT@dprk.kp to rec.sport.tennis on Sat Feb 7 20:04:22 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.sport.tennis

    Pelle Svansl||s kirjoitti 7.2.2026 klo 8.05:
    On 6.2.2026 20.09, TT wrote:
    Pelle Svansl||s kirjoitti 6.2.2026 klo 13.51:
    Finland has urged U.S. officials not to describe future security
    pledges to a postwar Ukraine as rCLArticle 5-like,rCY implying that doing >>> so could undercut the mutual defense clause at the heart of the NATO
    military alliance, according to a State Department cable obtained by
    POLITICO.

    The Jan. 20 cable hints at worries in some corners over the labels
    used during peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow. They show how
    sensitive some phrases can be in the national security realm, even
    when officials are merely trying to offer an analogy to various
    audiences.

    According to the cable, sent from the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki to
    Washington, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen discussed the
    issue on Jan. 19 with U.S. Reps. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.) and Sarah
    Elfreth (D- Md.), both of whom are members of the House Armed
    Services Committee.
    Valtonen underscored FinlandrCOs view that Russia is a rCLlong-term
    strategic threatrCY and cautioned against a rCLweakrCY peace deal for
    Ukraine that would hinder its ability to defend itself against future
    Russian aggression, the cable states.

    But Valtonen cautioned against any suggestions of rCLArticle 5-likerCY
    security guarantees in a postwar Ukraine, the cable adds. She warned
    that it risked conflating NATOrCOs Article 5 guarantees with whatever
    bilateral promises are made to Ukraine. It also quotes her as saying
    there should be a rCLfirewallrCY between NATO and future security
    guarantees to Ukraine. FinlandrCOs defense minister made similar points >>> in a later meeting, according to the cable.

    The documentsrCO contents offer insight into concerns voiced by other
    Finnish leaders who have said that, while they want to help Ukraine
    protect itself, the concept of a security rCLguaranteerCY is a more
    serious matter theyrCOre not ready to agree to just yet.

    A Finnish official said ValtonenrCOs office wouldnrCOt comment on
    confidential discussions, though underscored HelsinkirCOs long-standing >>> goal of eventually accepting Ukraine into the NATO alliance.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/04/dont-mention-article-5-
    finland- warns-us-on-ukraine-00766043

    Lol. Exceptional pussyfooting.

    Finnskies made a bigus dealus of the "Coalition of the Willing". The
    coalition of small cats willing to guarantee a fair and lasting peace
    for Ukraine.

    "The coalition of the willing (CoW) is a coalition of 34 countries
    (plus Ukraine)[14][15][16] that have pledged strengthened support for
    Ukraine against Russian aggression, going further than the support
    delivered by the Ukraine Defense Contact Group by pledging readiness
    to be part of a peacekeeping force deployed on Ukrainian territory,
    either by providing troops or contributing in other ways."

    As Wiki puts it.

    Finnskies clearly panicked when Trump took this CoW business at face
    value in one of the drafts for peace. A draft that mentioned Finland
    explicitly as one of the guarantors of peace. That's when a Finnskie
    froze and decided "nuff of this talk the talk shit. Mum's the word
    hereon".

    Now, the Finnish FM is telling people privately in Washington: "Yeah.
    You guessed it. We didn't mean what we said. But the 5th means 5th,
    right?"

    Interestingly enuff, this article is dated 4th of Feb. In the two
    days since, I haven't seen a word of this in the Finnish press. Yep,
    it's a bit embarrassing.


    You just don't understand Finns. Seems that Politico does:
    rCLIrCOm guessing the Finns donrCOt want to overpromise and under-deliver,rCY
    Ellehuus said.

    ...I most of the time disagree with everything Valtonen the foreign
    minister says... but she has a point on not talking about "article 5"
    with Ukraine because the term is strictly NATO-specific, no?

    Finland was brave and willing until they saw their name mentioned in a
    draft for a peace agreement and realised what to be "willing" meant.
    Then they suddenly became less "willing".

    Lol.


    I understand that they put Finland on the short list on giving security guarantees with France, UK, Germany and Poland (none of those countries having border with Russia) without even telling us.

    Damn sure it can't be article 5 type guarantees without first voting in Finnish parliament etc. Also, not very practical for Finland going to
    war against Russia in Ukraine... maybe we should just straight attack to Leningrad or Moscow through our border?

    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From TT@TT@dprk.kp to rec.sport.tennis on Wed Feb 11 17:07:10 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.sport.tennis

    *skriptis kirjoitti 7.2.2026 klo 20.17:
    TT <TT@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:r
    Pelle Svansl||s kirjoitti 7.2.2026 klo 8.05:> On 6.2.2026 20.09, TT wrote:>> Pelle Svansl||s kirjoitti 6.2.2026 klo 13.51:>>> Finland has urged U.S. officials not to describe future security >>> pledges to a postwar Ukraine as rCLArticle 5-like,rCY implying that doing >>> so could undercut the mutual defense clause at the heart of the NATO >>> military alliance, according to a State Department cable obtained by >>> POLITICO.>>>>>> The Jan. 20 cable hints at worries in some corners over the labels >>> used during peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow. They show how >>> sensitive some phrases can be in the national security realm, even >>> when officials are merely trying to offer an analogy to various >>> audiences.>>>>>> According to the cable, sent from the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki to >>> Washington, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen discussed the >>> issue on Jan. 19 with U.S. Reps. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.) and Sarah >>> Elfreth (D- Md.), both of whom are members of the House Armed >>> Services Committee.>>> Valtonen underscored FinlandrCOs view that Russia is a rCLlong-term >>> strategic threatrCY and cautioned against a rCLweakrCY peace deal for >>> Ukraine that would hinder its ability to defend itself against future >>> Russian aggression, the cable states.>>>>>> But Valtonen cautioned against any suggestions of rCLArticle 5-likerCY >>> security guarantees in a postwar Ukraine, the cable adds. She warned >>> that it risked conflating NATOrCOs Article 5 guarantees with whatever >>> bilateral promises are made to Ukraine. It also quotes her as saying >>> there should be a rCLfirewallrCY between NATO and future security >>> guarantees to Ukraine. FinlandrCOs defense minister made similar points >>> in a later meeting, according to the cable.>>>>>> The documentsrCO contents offer insight into concerns voiced by other >>> Finnish leaders who have said that, while they want to help Ukraine >>> protect itself, the concept of a security rCLguaranteerCY is a more >>> serious matter theyrCOre not ready to agree to just yet.>>>>>> A Finnish official said ValtonenrCOs office wouldnrCOt comment on >>> confidential discussions, though underscored HelsinkirCOs long-standing >>> goal of eventually accepting Ukraine into the NATO alliance.>>>>>> https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/04/dont-mention-article-5- >>> finland- warns-us-on-ukraine-00766043>>>>>> Lol. Exceptional pussyfooting.>>>>>> Finnskies made a bigus dealus of the "Coalition of the Willing". The >>> coalition of small cats willing to guarantee a fair and lasting peace >>> for Ukraine.>>>>>> "The coalition of the willing (CoW) is a coalition of 34 countries >>> (plus Ukraine)[14][15][16] that have pledged strengthened support for >>> Ukraine against Russian aggression, going further than the support >>> delivered by the Ukraine Defense Contact Group by pledging readiness >>> to be part of a peacekeeping force deployed on Ukrainian territory, >>> either by providing troops or contributing in other ways.">>>>>> As Wiki puts it.>>>>>> Finnskies clearly panicked when Trump took this CoW business at face >>> value in one of the drafts for peace. A draft that mentioned Finland >>> explicitly as one of the guarantors of peace. That's when a Finnskie >>> froze and decided "nuff of this talk the talk shit. Mum's the word >>> hereon".>>>>>> Now, the Finnish FM is telling people privately in Washington: "Yeah. >>> You guessed it. We didn't mean what we said. But the 5th means 5th, >>> right?">>>>>> Interestingly enuff, this article is dated 4th of Feb. In the two >>> days since, I haven't seen a word of this in the Finnish press. Yep, >>> it's a bit embarrassing.>>>>>>> You just don't understand Finns. Seems that Politico does:>> rCLIrCOm guessing the Finns donrCOt want to overpromise and under-deliver,rCY >> Ellehuus said.>>>> ...I most of the time disagree with everything Valtonen the foreign >> minister says... but she has a point on not talking about "article 5" >> with Ukraine because the term is strictly NATO-specific, no?> > Finland was brave and willing until they saw their name mentioned in a > draft for a peace agreement and realised what to be "willing" meant. > Then they suddenly became less "willing".> > Lol.> I understand that they put Finland on the short list on giving security guarantees with France, UK, Germany and Poland (none of those countries having border with Russia) without even telling us.Damn sure it can't be article 5 type guarantees without first voting in Finnish parliament etc. Also, not very practical for Finland going to war against Russia in Ukraine... maybe we should just straight attack to Leningrad or Moscow through our border?



    You're not fooling anyone.
    Now you want to pretend you're not aggressors.



    We're not. We're just selling leather belts. https://x.com/HistoryUnd/status/2021378494568202439?s=20
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2