Typo or Freudian slip?

Below is the text of an email that I've just sent to Helsingin Sanomat International Edition, noting an amusing typo they have in their story about the Finnish prime minister answering questions from the public. I'll link the story but they might have corrected the typo by the time you read it, so the joke was that they had written treat when they meant threat. The email was as follows:

In today’s article about Vanhanen answering internet chat questions you have the slightly amusing typo: “Vanhanen insisted that joining NATO is not currently topical, according to existing policy, because the EU is able to support its member states through all possible means, if there is a treat to security.”

I expect the EU could support Finland if someone wants to give us security treats, (air-to-surface guided munitions perhaps?) whilst on the other hand the EU is of absolutely no use if there is a security threat. The Prime Minister might wish it so, but this will not make it so. No one outside of Finland takes the idea seriously. Indeed neither do many officials inside Finland when they are not speaking on the record.

Best,

Toby.