The U.S. Must Re-Focus on Curbing Iran’s Nuclear Program | Understanding the Deterrence Gap in the Taiwan Strait | The U.S. Plans to ‘Lead the Way’ on Global AI Policy | How to Defeat a Mafia State, and more

But blowing up part of the country’s energy infrastructure, relied on by industries, factories and millions of civilians, marked an escalation in the covert war and appeared to open a new frontier, officials and analysts said.

The Head of UN’s Nuclear Watchdog Warns Iran Is ‘Not Entirely Transparent’ on Its Atomic Program  (Jon Gambrel, AP)
The head of the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog warned Tuesday that Iran is “not entirely transparent” regarding its atomic program, particularly after an official who once led Tehran’s program announced the Islamic Republic has all the pieces for a weapon “in our hands.” Speaking at the World Government Summit in Dubai, just across the Persian Gulf, Rafael Mariano Grossi, the director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, alluded to remarks made this weekend by Ali Akbar Salehi. Grossi noted “an accumulation of complexities” in the wider Middle East amid Israel’s war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Iran, after the collapse of its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, has pursued nuclear enrichment just below weapons-grade levels. Tehran has accumulated enough enriched uranium to build several weapons, if it so chose. However, U.S. intelligence agencies and others assess that Iran has yet to begin a weapons program. Israel long has been believed to have its own nuclear weapons program.

The ‘Biden Doctrine’ Will Make Things Worse  (Steven A. Cook, Foreign Policy)
Does the United States need a “Biden Doctrine for the Middle East”? I ask because Thomas Friedman laid it out in the New York Times last week. Apparently, the Biden administration is prepared to take “a strong and resolute stand on Iran,” advance Palestinian statehood, and offer Saudi Arabia a defense pact that would hinge on normalization of Riyadh’s relations with Israel.
If Friedman’s column accurately reflects the thinking within the White House—and there is no reason to believe it does not—then put me down for a “No.” U.S. President Joe Biden and his advisors, who have previously eschewed big projects aimed at transforming the Middle East, are about to bite off a lot more than they can chew, especially when it comes to building a Palestinian state, setting Washington up for yet another failure in the region.
Looking back across the post-World War II era, an interesting pattern emerges in U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East: When policymakers used U.S. power to prevent bad things from happening, they were successful; but when they sought to leverage Washington’s military, economic, and diplomatic resources to make good things happen, they failed.

U.S. Confronts Dangers from “Not Very Good” Iran-Backed Militants  (Phil Stewart and Idrees Ali, Reuters)
Current and former U.S. officials tell Reuters the militants’ periodic success in attacks may be unavoidable, given the sheer number of drones, rockets and missiles fired at U.S. troops and the fact that base defenses cannot realistically be completely effective 100% of the time.
Experts also caution against underestimating the Iran-backed militants, even if most of their attacks fail.
Charles Lister of the Washington-based Middle East Institute recalled former President Barack Obama’s description of Islamic State as a junior varsity team in 2014 even as the group was gathering strength.
“To suggest, Obama-style, that ‘well, they’re just a J.V. team’ and we can chuckle along and take the hits and know that nothing serious is happening is just profoundly naive,” Lister said. “These groups have conducted sophisticated transnational strikes, and they have a very deadly history against American troops.”

A Look at the Iraqi Government’s Relationship with Armed Groups That Are Clashing with U.S. Forces  (Abby Sewell, AP)
A U.S. strike in Baghdad that killed a commander of the powerful Kataib Hezbollah paramilitary group this week highlighted the ambiguous status of the country’s Iran-allied armed factions. Some operate simultaneously as a part of the official security forces and outside of state control.
That has put the government of Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani in an increasingly delicate position as it attempts to balance between its relations with the United States and with Iraqi armed groups that are sometimes in direct conflict with U.S. forces.

The U.S. Must Re-Focus on Curbing Iran’s Nuclear Program  (Lawrence J. Haas, National Interest)
Iran’s latest nuclear and ballistic missile advances make Israel’s war with Hamas and America’s skirmishing with Iranian proxy forces look like regional sideshows of a far more ominous main event.
The current situation in the region gives Iran “a unique opportunity and amplified internal justification for building nuclear weapons while the United States and Israel’s resources to detect and deter Iran from succeeding are stretched thin…,” the Institute for Science and International Security wrote in a new report. “[F]or the first time in years, we are facing the real possibility that Iran may choose to weaponize its nuclear capabilities and build nuclear weapons.”
It wouldn’t take Tehran long to do so. With a large stockpile of uranium enriched to sixty percent purity, the institute estimated that the regime could further enrich enough uranium to weapons-grade purity, being able to produce a nuclear bomb in a week. Along with strengthening its nuclear infrastructure through building more reactors, enriching more uranium, and refusing to cooperate with international nuclear inspectors, Tehran also continues to advance its ballistic missile program, which could carry nuclear warheads to strike U.S. allies in the region and possibly even the United States itself. In January, the Islamic Republic launched a satellite 450 miles into space, using technologies with “significant overlap” with those of longer-range ballistic missiles.
The implications of Iran’s nuclear-related advances are enormous. Iran could launch an attack against the United States or Israel, its most hated adversaries. Furthermore, it could also transfer a bomb to a proxy (e.g., Hamas or Hezbollah) to use against Israel or another adversary.

CHINA WATCH

Experts Warn of Possible Terrorist Attack by North Korea  (Jung Min-ho, Korea Times)
Experts warned, Wednesday, of a possible terrorist attack by North Korea, saying that the risk of a “jihad-like” strike is now greater after the regime’s decision to formally abandon peaceful unification with South Korea as its policy goal. Speaking at a forum in Seoul, analysts from the Korea Institute for National Unification said the most likely form of attack would be something similar to its landmine attack in 2015 ― a provocation that South Korea faces challenges in immediately pinpointing responsibility. Because of the mines planted secretly by the North Korean military in the demilitarized zone, two South Korean soldiers were seriously injured.

Understanding the Deterrence Gap in the Taiwan Strait  (Jared M. McKinney and Peter Harris, War on the Rocks)
What is stopping China from invading Taiwan? In the past, it was overdetermined that Beijing would not use force to compel reunification. Not only did China lack the capabilities to execute a swift and decisive conquest of the island, but China’s leaders since 1979 used to believe that peaceful unification was both possible and vastly more preferable to military solutions. Today, however, the military balance of power has shifted decisively, enabling an amphibious invasion from a capabilities standpoint in the not-too-distant future, while prospects of peaceful unification have faded. As such, it is now something of a conventional wisdom that a Chinese invasion has become more likely than not.
We agree with these pessimistic assessments. Of course, no analyst can say with certainty when or why a war over Taiwan might be triggered. Those who project auras of inevitability are wrong to do so. But the changing geopolitical situation around Taiwan cannot be ignored. It is only because deterrence across the Taiwan Strait was strong that past crises over the island’s political status could unfold without causing an invasion. Now that deterrence has weakened, there are few if any guardrails to prevent current or future crises from escalating to become a full-blown war.

The Real Reason North Korea Is Threatening War  (Ri Jong Ho and David Maxwell, National Interest)
With Kim Jong-un’s recent statements that he considers the Republic of Korea (ROK) the “primary enemy” and no longer seeks peaceful unification, analysts in Korea and the United States are rightly concerned with the possibility that he may conduct an unprecedented provocation or even an attack on the ROK.

Mexico Is America’s Answer to China’s Belt and Road  (Howard W. French, Foreign Policy)
Every now and then, a narrowly framed news item offers up glimmers of pathways toward the possible resolution of much bigger problems. And so it was this week, with a New York Times story, briefly promoted with the red font label of “breaking news,” that heralded Mexico beating out China for the first time in two decades as the leading source of U.S. imports.
The long-term significance of this trade data may not be altogether obvious. And just how big a deal it could become will ultimately depend on concerted, long-term geopolitical strategy.
But Mexico’s fast-growing role as the chief U.S. trade partner could provide a treasure trove of solutions to some of the most difficult challenges facing the United States. These include successfully managing peaceful competition with China, defusing the political crisis surrounding immigration, and renewing America’s credentials as a positive-sum actor in the 21st century.

THE LONG VIEW

Joe Biden Must Resist Donald Trump’s Isolationism  (Dov S. Zakheim, National Interest)
Despite Russia’s years-long flouting of international norms, Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican candidate for president, and his supporters, both among members of Congress and the wider public, seem indifferent to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and to the objectives that Putin spelled out unequivocally in his Munich speech. Moreover, Trump has made it clear that America’s commitment to its allies in the face of Russian hostility should hinge solely on how much they spend on defense. As Trump sees it, should they fail to spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense, allies should fend for themselves. And if Putin invades one or more NATO states, that is their concern, not America’s.
Trump’s isolationism, which a growing number of his followers in Congress have come to share and which has the support of his MAGA constituency, is a throwback to the 1930s, when “America First” was the isolationist mantra, as it is once again today. Yet the conditions that permitted Americans of that era to believe they could remain aloof from the rest of the world no longer prevail today.
Two oceans will not protect the United States from an attack on its shores, as they did for over two centuries ever since the British burned the White House in 1814. In the 1930s, no state possessed ballistic missiles capable of flying thousands of miles to attack the United States. No state had developed nuclear weapons that could be mated to those missiles. No state operated satellites in space or developed an anti-satellite capability. No one had heard of the “cybersphere,” much less cyberattacks that could destroy America’s power grid and other infrastructure. The United States may have been invulnerable to foreign attack nine decades ago; it is no longer invulnerable today.

How to Defeat a Mafia State  (Quico Toro, The Atlantic)
Democracy could use a win. All around the world, states have been taken over by strongmen dead set on extracting as much wealth as they can from the societies they rule. In Russia and Venezuela, Myanmar and Angola, weak electoral systems have given way to hyper-corrupt autocracies. And democrats haven’t really figured out how to fight back. Successful methods to get rid of criminal regimes are desperately needed but vanishingly rare.
Which is why what’s happening in Guatemala right now demands attention. Over the past six months, Guatemalans have made an audacious gambit to take their government back. And against all odds, they’re winning.
Nobody expected this. Until quite recently, Guatemala was arguably an excellent example of what the Venezuelan writer Moisés Naím calls a “mafia state”—a country run by a criminal syndicate focused mostly on enriching itself. Guatemalans call it the pacto de corruptos, or the “pact of the corrupt.” A nested set of criminal enterprises thoroughly colonized the state, infiltrating not just the government, but the courts, the election authorities, and crucially, the powerful office of the public prosecutor. Who are these people, exactly? That they’re the same tiny white elite that’s controlled Guatemala since colonial times is tempting to imagine, but not quite right. Picture instead the army officer corps that the tiny white elite empowered, during the Cold War, to crush Guatemala’s leftist insurgencies.

Beating the Ossification Trap: Why Reform, Not Spending, Will Salvage American Power  (Michael . Mazarr, War on the Rocks)
Here’s a question: If you could add $200 billion to the defense budget — or wave a magic wand and pass every needed reform to defense procurement, personnel, business and budget processes, and other areas crying out for change — which would you do? For many defense professionals, the answer is obvious: Show me the money. With crises breaking out around the world, from Ukraine to Gaza to the South China Sea, some observers of U.S. defense strategy warn that the United States isn’t spending enough on its military. Threats are piling up, while spending — assessed against inflation — is at best holding flat. The time has come for a major defense buildup, some say, which the country can easily afford since current defense budgets remain well below post–World War II averages.
That impulse is understandable. It is also mistaken. There is a gap between the aspirations and capabilities of U.S. defense strategy — but the problem isn’t the amount of money America is spending or the size of the U.S. military. The ends-means gap emerges in part from excessive strategic ambitions and the demands they place on the U.S. military. But in terms of defense policy, the gap is a function of the deeply ingrained inefficiencies, bureaucratic and political egotism, vague conceptual foundations, self-defeating policies, and often pointless rules, regulations, and restrictions that keep the Defense Department from gaining the full value of the money it already spends. To be prepared for a more dangerous era, the United States should overhaul its defense institutions before it pours more resources into them.

The U.S. Plans to ‘Lead the Way’ on Global AI Policy  (Alan Charles Raul and Alexandra Mushka, Lawfare)
Policymakers around the world took significant steps toward regulating artificial intelligence (AI) in 2023. Spurred by the launch of revolutionary large language models such as OpenAI’s GPT series of models, debates surrounding the benefits and risks of AI have been brought into the foreground of political thought. Indeed, over the past year, legislative forums, editorial pages, and social media platforms were dominated by AI discourse. And two global races have kicked into high gear: Who will develop and deploy the most cutting-edge, possibly risky AI models, and who will govern them? 
In the wake of this competition, it is worth examining whether the United States will yield policy primacy on AI to Europe, or others, as it largely has done in the field of data privacy—or whether it will instead assert leadership on digital governance commensurate with its lead in the digital technology itself. The plethora of federal initiatives adopted in response to the deployment of capable AI systems with significant computational power supports the latter thesis: The United States intends to run ahead of the field on AI governance, analogous to U.S. leadership on cybersecurity rules and governance—and unlike the policy void on privacy that the federal government has allowed the EU to fill. Various policy developments discussed below support this conclusion, chief among them the fact that the aggressive timeline of government action imposed by President Biden’s October 2023 AI executive order means the requirements, imperatives, and guidelines that order sets into motion will almost certainly be in force before the EU’s provisional AI Act is adopted and implemented. Indeed, the White House recently announced that every 90-day deadline set forth by the order has been met. Notably, “developers of the most powerful AI systems” are already required “to report vital information” to the Department of Commerce, including the results of safety testing. Nine agencies have submitted risk assessments to the Department of Homeland Security regarding the use of AI in critical infrastructure. The intense level of agency engagement called for by President Biden led the order to be viewed by some in Congress and industry as too powerful, triggering a “campaign to take [it] down,” or “defang the industry-facing sections.”
The United States’ commitment to AI governance is significant given that over the past two decades, global leadership in data-driven technology innovation has become increasingly uncoupled from efforts to regulate that technology. The world’s largest data-driven innovators, such as Microsoft, Google, and Meta, are based in the United States. But the world’s leading data regulators are based in the European Union—for instance, the apex privacy framework, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), was promulgated by the EU. By comparison, the United States has applied a relatively light hand to the regulation of social media and search. Unlike the European Parliament, Congress has passed no comprehensive law that directly touches these data-driven platforms. Indeed, in 1996, when Congress last stepped in, it was to enact a key liability shield (codified as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act) that allowed social media companies to grow. 

Nuclear Arms Control Is for Realists  (Tobias Fella, National Interest)
In 2023, Moscow suspended the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), withdrew from the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE), de-ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), linked the resumption of arms control with the United States to a change in U.S.-Russia policy, at least implicitly threatened the use of nuclear weapons and announced the transfer of non-strategic nuclear weapons to Belarus, putting the world on the brink of another Cold War. In addition, the U.S. Congressional Commission on Strategic Posture recommended additional nuclear capabilities to counter a projected increase in Chinese nuclear warheads from 410 today to over 1,500 by 2035. The preparatory meeting of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference in August 2023 also ended without a joint factual summary.
The reasons range from a changed geopolitical climate, the rapid expansion of China’s nuclear arsenal, and technological innovations, such as long-range conventional weapons, to domestic political polarization in the United States. Under these conditions, which include an increased interest in nuclear deterrence in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, the first goal of arms control must be to minimize the risk of unintended military escalation, especially between nuclear powers. It should build on positive developments, such as establishing a communication channel between the Russian and U.S. defense ministries in March 2022 and the resumption of U.S.-Chinese military communication in December 2023, preceded by discussions on the dangers of artificial intelligence in nuclear decision-making systems.
The following measures are therefore advisable: restraint in maneuvers, troop movements, and deployment in the NATO-Russia contact zone; steps to prevent an arms race with new INF missiles in Europe; the reaffirmation of the nuclear taboo at the highest political level; the preservation and use of civil society channels for dialogue to capture the drivers behind nuclear build-ups, nuclear rhetoric, and changes in nuclear doctrine; and backward learning from Cold War risk-reduction measures.

MORE PICKS

Nigeria Mulls State Policing to Combat Growing Insecurity  (Reuters)
Nigeria is considering the introduction of state police in its 36 states to bolster its national police force as it struggles to contain widespread violence and insecurity, the information minister said on Thursday. An Islamist insurgency in the northeast, kidnappings for ransom, deadly farmer-herder clashes in the central belt and separatist and gang violence in the southeast are some of the challenges faced by Nigeria’s police force. President Bola Tinubu met the country’s state governors to discuss insecurity, which is hurting farmers and contributing to high food prices and inflation. The federal government and the state governments agreed that a state police force was necessary, marking “a significant shift” in approach, Information Minister Mohammed Idris told reporters after the meeting. This is the first time that Nigeria’s federal and state governments have agreed on the need to set up state police to reinforce the more than 300,000-strong national police force in Africa’s most populous nation.

The Islamic State Group Poses Rising Threat in Africa Despite Progress, Un Experts Say  (Edith M. Lederer, AP)
The Islamic State extremist group poses a rising threat amid political instability in West Africa and the Sahel and remains intent on carrying out attacks abroad, the U.N. counter-terrorism chief said Thursday. Vladimir Voronkov reiterated U.N. findings that IS continues to pose a significant threat to international peace and security, especially in conflict zones, despite significant progress by U.N. member nations in countering the threat. The group has also increased operations in its former strongholds in Iraq and Syria as well as Southeast Asia, Voronkov said. Voronkov told the U.N. Security Council that in West Africa and the Sahel, a broad region cutting across the continent, the situation has deteriorated “and is becoming more complex,” as local ethnic and regional disputes cross with the agenda and operations of the extremist group, which is also known by its Arabic name Daesh, and its affiliates. “Daesh affiliates continued to operate with increasingly more autonomy from the Daesh core,” he said, warning that if this trend persists there is a risk “that a vast area of instability may emerge from Mali to the borders of Nigeria.

Donald Trump’s Misogyny Deters NATO from Female Leader  (Bruno Waterfield, The Times)
NATO has dropped plans to have a woman at the helm of the alliance because of fears that Donald Trump’s “misogyny” will cause more damage to transatlantic relations if he returns to the White House.
Mark Rutte, the caretaker Dutch prime minister, is the front-runner to take the post of NATO secretary-general this spring when Jens Stoltenberg, 64, who has had the job since 2014, steps down.
It is a setback for Kaja Kallas, 46, the prime minister of Estonia, who had hoped to be the first woman and east European ally to hold the top job.
During his time as president, Trump, 77, exhibited hostility to female European leaders including Theresa May and Angela Merkel, in line with his history of controversial behavior towards women, including allegations of sexual abuse.

Warning from House Intel Is About Russia’s Space Power  (Erin Banco, Alexander Ward, and Lee Hudson, Politico)
A vague warning by the chair of the House Intelligence Committee about a “serious national security threat” Wednesday is related to Russia and space, according to three people familiar with the matter.
The U.S. has been concerned about Russia’s advancement in space for years. While the people did not provide much in terms of details, one of them said the intelligence is related to Moscow’s weaponization of its orbital systems.
In his statement Wednesday morning, Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) said his committee had made available the information about the national security threat and called on the administration to declassify the intelligence so officials and lawmakers could discuss the matter with allies.

Milei’s Swing into Normality Might Not Last  (Jeremiah Johnson, Foreign Policy)
Argentine President Javier Milei is an unusual politician. The former television personality is perhaps the only world leader in generations who would describe himself as a libertarian. He’s certainly the first ever to identify as an “anarcho-capitalist.” He has a fiery disposition and is known for bluntly insulting his opponents. He frequently engages in stunts such as dressing as the superhero “General AnCap” or revving a chain saw in public to show his commitment to slashing the size of government. His proposed policies and statements as he ran for Argentina’s presidency matched his outlandish behavior. He proposed radical market-oriented reforms, the complete elimination of several huge government agencies, and a total break from politics as usual.
Milei is a weird guy, but Argentina is a country with peculiar problems. Since Milei won the election in November, the world has held its collective breath waiting to see what the outlandish, bizarre, extreme candidate would look like as a president. Surprisingly, Milei’s first two months in office have been mostly sensible and promising. But behind the encouraging policy changes, there’s still the potential for a troubling authoritarian turn.
No area sums up the cognitive dissonance that Milei inspires better than climate change. Milei campaigned as a full-blown climate change denier. He said that “politicians who blame the human race for climate change are fake” and called the very idea of climate change a “socialist hoax.” And yet as president, his top climate diplomat confirmed that Argentina will remain in the Paris climate agreement. He even included a new cap-and-trade plan to limit carbon emissions in his omnibus reform bill. Observers could be forgiven for having whiplash—even for Milei, the turnaround on climate has been dramatic. This is hardly the only issue where Milei’s rhetoric and his actions are surprisingly divergent. So how should we judge Milei—by his outlandish campaign statements, or by his restrained actions once in office?

Indonesia Has Grand Ambitions for Its Nickel Industry  (Christina Lu, Foreign Policy)
Long before the energy transition gained momentum around the world, nickel powerhouse Indonesia dreamed of harnessing its mineral riches to transform its economy and wield greater leverage in the international marketplace. 
The global shift away from fossil fuels and the growing demand for the critical minerals powering green technology have turbocharged Jakarta’s ambitions. Nickel is a key component in electric vehicle batteries, yet few countries can claim as big of a stake over the global nickel sector as Indonesia, which is home to some of the world’s biggest nickel reserves and mined half of the global supply in 2022. 
Now, with more than 100 million voters expected to head to the polls on Wednesday to elect Indonesia’s first new president in a decade, the future of Jakarta’s bid is set to come into sharper focus. Current President Joko Widodo, commonly referred to as Jokowi, is set to leave office in October after holding power for a decade—the maximum term length allowed—raising questions about how exactly his successor will continue to shape the country’s booming sector.

Russian Memes Celebrate ‘Tucker Carlson Day’ After Putin Interview  (David Gilbert, Wired)
Russians have reacted ecstatically online to the two-hour interview between former Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson and Russian president Vladimir Putin, hailing it as a historic, internet-breaking moment that will change the world. Many are now even calling the former Fox News presenter a national hero: Some have called for February 9 to be renamed as “Tucker Carlson Day,” while others posted pictures of Carlson wearing a Russian ushanka hat and claimed Carlson wore a tie during the interview bearing colors that closely resemble the colors and pattern of Saint George’s ribbon, a Russian military symbol.
The much-hyped interview ran for more than two hours on Tucker Carlson’s new streaming platform and X, and saw Putin spending a huge amount of time laying out a revisionist history of Russia and the Ukraine in a bid to justify Russia’s invasion. Carlson spent most of the interview listening, and rarely interjected to question Putin’s narrative. He also failed to push the Russian leader on his country’s widely reported war crimes in Ukraine.
The interview marks Carlson’s further embrace of the far-right and conspiracy world since departing Fox News last year, and comes on the back of Russia ratcheting up its interference operations ahead of the 2024 elections. This week, WIRED reported on a coordinated Russian disinformation campaign where state media, influencers, bots, and others claimed the Texas border crisis was pushing the US toward civil war. By providing Putin with direct access to millions in the US and around the world, Carlson gave the Russian leader an unprecedented opportunity to spread propaganda virtually unchecked, marking a new, and possibly even more comprehensive, era of Russian disinformation.

Hungary and EU Face Off Over New Sovereign Defense Law  (Henry Ridgwell, VOA News)
Hungary has rejected criticism of its new sovereignty protection law after the European Union instigated legal action against Budapest on Wednesday over concerns the legislation breaches basic democratic rights.
Hungary passed the Defense of National Sovereignty Act in December 2023, creating a new investigative body with sweeping powers to gather information on any groups or individuals that receive foreign funding and influence public debate. Hungary’s intelligence services can assist in investigations with little or no judicial oversight.
The legislation says that “the use of foreign funds in the context of elections should be punishable under criminal law” with a penalty of up to three years in jail.
Critics say the law could potentially target a broad range of people in public life.
“We have very vague provisions about a potential threat to sovereignty coming from foreign funding which might affect the voters in Hungary. So, we’re using very broad definitions here,” Barbara Grabowska-Moroz, senior fellow at Central European University’s Democracy Institute, said in an interview with VOA.

On a Frozen Border, Finland Puzzles Over a ‘Russian Game’  (Erika Solomon, New York Times)
As Finns vote on Sunday for a new president, who will be responsible for foreign policy and act as commander in chief, Finland has become fixated on its 830-mile border, the longest with Russia of any NATO country. How Finns handle the challenges there is critical not only for them, but also for their new allies on both sides of the Atlantic.
The presidential election, now in its second and final round, is the first since Finland officially joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization last year after decades of nonalignment, looking to bolster its own security after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Russia warned Finland of “countermeasures” for its accession, which the Finns suspect they are now seeing in the form of infrastructure sabotage and cyberattacks. But it is the arrival of some 1,300 “human weapons,” as Finnish politicians have described them, in the past few months that has stirred the most public attention and anxiety.
European officials have repeatedly raised alarm over migrants being encouraged to cross into their borders by Russia and its allies, with many concerned that the aim is to destabilize European governments and stoke discord in a bloc sharply divided over how to handle immigration.

Norway Has Overtaken Russia as Europe’s Top Gas Supplier  (Reuters / VOA News)
Europe’s increased dependence on Norway’s oil and gas has made the country’s energy installations more at risk of attack, the head of one of the agencies charged with securing them told Reuters on Monday.
Norway in 2022 overtook Russia as Europe’s biggest supplier of natural gas as Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine upended decades-long energy ties and sent prices soaring.
“I am concerned about dependency, and there is no doubt that Europe has become more dependent on Norwegian gas,” Lars Christian Aamodt, head of the National Security Authority, said in an interview.
“As soon as the dependency increases, so will the threat and the risk,” he said, speaking after Norway’s three intelligence agencies presented their respective annual threat assessments.
Aamodt’s agency said European dependency on Norwegian oil and gas could rise further should conflicts in the Middle East disrupt the petroleum market.